SynthesisVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2013
Poor prognosis of uterine serous carcinoma compared with grade 3 endometrioid carcinoma in early stage patients.
Synthesis in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- ERRα Up-Regulates Invadopodia Formation by Targeting HMGCS1 to Promote Endometrial Cancer Invasion and Metastasis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- What Has Changed in the Management of Uterine Serous Carcinomas? Two Decades of Experience.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2021Article
- The Impact of Adjuvant Management Strategies on Outcomes in Women With Early Stage Uterine Serous Carcinoma.Cureus · 2021Article
- Role of Morphometry and Matrix Metalloproteinase-9 Expression in Differentiating between Atypical Endometrial Hyperplasia and Low Grade Endometrial AdenocarcinomaAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2018Article
- The expression pattern of 19 genes predicts the histology of endometrial carcinoma.Scientific reports · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Difference in prognosis between grade 3 endometrioid carcinoma (G3EC) of the endometrium and uterine serous carcinoma (USC) is controversial. In this study, we further evaluated the difference in prognosis, if any, between G3EC (n = 61) and USC (n = 47) on a total of 565 patients with endometrial cancer. In addition, meta-analysis was performed using data from seven previous publications (n = 8,637) and from the Asan Medical Center (n = 108). Regarding the cases from our institution, USC tended to occur in older patients (≥65 years) than G3EC (P = 0.011). Deep myometrial invasion (more than or equal to half) was more frequently identified in G3EC (36/61, 59.0 %) than in USC (17/47, 36.2 %) (P = 0.021). Between patients with early stage G3EC and USC (stages I and II), there were no significant differences in any clinicopathological parameter, but there was a significant difference in overall survival (P = 0.017) that was not found in advanced stage (P = 0.588). USC was an independent prognostic factor for poor overall survival (hazard ratio, 6.125; P = 0.030) in early stage patients. In the meta-analysis on 5-year survival in patients with early stage cancers, which also included our study results, a higher relative risk (1.92, 95 % CI 1.62-2.27) was demonstrated in USC than in G3EC (P < 0.001). In conclusion, our study reveals that USC is associated with a poorer prognosis compared with G3EC, only in patients with early stage carcinoma, suggesting that different treatment strategies should be considered according to the histologic type in order to improve treatment outcome.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.