Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21904591›Full record

ReviewDeutsches Arzteblatt international2010

The diagnosis and treatment of endometrial cancer: progress and controversies.

Dominik Denschlag, Uwe Ulrich, Günter Emons

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Prognostic molecular biomarkers in endometrial cancer: A review.Journal of cancer research & therapy · 2019
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. [High-risk endometrial cancer: In each case an adjuvant radiochemotherapy?]Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2018
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Dominik DenschlagGynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Hochtaunus-Kliniken Bad Homburg, D-61348 Bad Homburg, Germany. dominik.denschlag@hochtaunus-kliniken.de
Uwe Ulrich
Günter Emons
Martin-Luther-Krankenhaus · DEAccadis Hochschule Bad Homburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEndometrial carcinoma is the fourth most common type of cancer among women in Germany, with more than 11 000 newly diagnosed cases each year. The present lack of clarity about the optimal clinical management of these patients is due in part to inconsistencies in the scientific evidence and in part to recent modifications of the FIGO classification. In this article, the issues requiring clarification are presented and discussed.

methodsThis article is based on a selective review of the pertinent literature, including evidence-based guidelines and recommendations. RESULTS AND

conclusionCurrent scientific evidence does not support the screening of asymptomatic women. On the other hand, women with postmenopausal and acyclic bleeding should undergo histopathological evaluation, particularly if they have risk factors for endometrial cancer. The current FIGO classification divides endometrial cancer into stages depending on the findings at surgery. On the basis of risk stratification (e.g., by tumor stage and histological differentiation grade), women who are judged to be at high risk (FIGO Stage IB and above, Grade 3) should undergo not just hysterectomy and adnexectomy, but also systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy. Risk stratification also determines whether adjuvant radiotherapy should be given. The additional or alternative administration of chemotherapy is a particular consideration for women at high risk, although the pertinent clinical trials to date have yielded conflicting evidence on this point.

Indexed as

Evidence-Based MedicineAdenocarcinoma, Clear CellAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCarcinoma, EndometrioidChemoradiotherapy, AdjuvantCombined Modality TherapyCystadenoma, SerousEndometrial NeoplasmsFemaleHumansHysterectomyLymph Node ExcisionMiddle AgedNeoplasm Invasiveness

Identifiers

PMID21904591
PMCPMC3167060
OpenAlexW1536398321

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.