PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
June 4, 2026International Journal of Clinical Oncology0 citations

Resting heart rate as a prognostic indicator for patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

View Full Paper
NTNayuta TsushimaSKSatoshi KanoTSTakayoshi Suzuki

Key Result

Elevated resting heart rate (≥ 83 bpm) was associated with significantly worse overall survival (P=0.004) and disease-specific survival (P<0.001) in patients with head and neck cancer.

Key Points

  • Evaluate the prognostic impact of resting heart rate in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma and its association with second primary cancer incidence.
  • Retrospective analysis of 213 patients with oropharyngeal, hypopharyngeal, or laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma.
  • Measured pretreatment resting heart rate from electrocardiograms and analyzed survival outcomes using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression models.
  • Patients with a resting heart rate ≥ 83 bpm had worse overall survival (P = 0.004) and disease-specific survival (P < 0.001).
  • Elevated resting heart rate was an independent prognostic factor and linked to increased incidence of second primary cancers (P = 0.016), particularly esophageal cancer (P = 0.003).
  • The association with esophageal SPC persisted after adjusting for alcohol consumption and smoking status.

Study Design

Type

Cohort (n=213)

Structured PICO

Does elevated resting heart rate predict worse survival and increased incidence of second primary cancer in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma undergoing chemoradiotherapy?

P
Population
213 patients with oropharyngeal, hypopharyngeal, or laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma who underwent chemoradiotherapy.
E
Exposure
Elevated resting heart rate (RHR ≥ 83 bpm) measured from pretreatment electrocardiograms
C
Comparator
Lower resting heart rate (RHR < 83 bpm)
O
Outcome
Overall survival and disease-specific survivalhard clinical

Elevated resting heart rate (≥ 83 bpm) is an independent prognostic factor for worse survival and increased risk of second primary cancers in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

Main Result

p-value: p=0.004

Abstract

Background Elevated resting heart rate (RHR) has been associated with poor prognosis in various cancers, but its significance in head and neck cancer (HNC) remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic impact of RHR and its association with the incidence of second primary cancer (SPC). Methods We retrospectively analyzed 213 patients with oropharyngeal, hypopharyngeal, or laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma who underwent chemoradiotherapy. Pretreatment RHR was measured from electrocardiograms, and survival outcomes were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression models. Results Patients with an RHR ≥ 83 bpm had significantly worse overall survival (P = 0.004) and disease-specific survival (P < 0.001). Elevated RHR was an independent prognostic factor and was associated with an increased incidence of SPC (P = 0.016), particularly esophageal cancer (P = 0.003). In exploratory analyses, this association with esophageal SPC remained after adjustment for alcohol consumption category and smoking status. Conclusions RHR is a potential prognostic marker in HNC and, in exploratory analyses, was associated with an increased risk of SPCs, particularly esophageal cancer. These findings suggest that RHR may help stratify risk in patients with HNC, although further studies are needed to clarify its clinical implications.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Tsushima et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (n=213). Elevated resting heart rate (≥ 83 bpm) vs. Resting heart rate < 83 bpm was evaluated on Overall survival (p=0.004). Elevated resting heart rate (≥ 83 bpm) was associated with significantly worse overall survival (P=0.004) and disease-specific survival (P<0.001) in patients with head and neck cancer.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a211d4dd499ed480b170fdfhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-026-03048-5
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper