Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24753865›Full record

ArticleFacts, views & vision in ObGyn2011

Clinicopathologic study in uterine cancer.

I Vandenput

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Facts, views & vision in ObGyn, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

I VandenputLeuven Cancer Institute (LKI), Gynecologic Oncology, UZ Gasthuisberg, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
KU Leuven · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patients with primary advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer are relatively uncommon and deserve better treatment options. Current treatment options are surgery, radiotherapy, and systemic therapy. Since the outcome is still poor, there is a need to improve our knowledge on molecular markers in order to personalize treatment. In addition, we need to continue the search for new treatment strategies with a better balance between efficacy and toxicity. In this doctoral thesis, we documented that among molecular and histological markers, blood vessel space involvement and chemotherapy induced regressive changes are new prognostic markers in endometrial cancer. We demonstrated that the tumour biology changes during tumour evolution. The optimal moment to decide on tumour biology is therefore the recurrent setting. A biopsy of the recurrent tumour is the best guarantee to characterize the tumour correctly. Furthermore, this study showed that neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval debulking is a valuable treatment option for endometrial cancer with transperitoneal spread since optimal cytoreduction was achieved in 78% with a low morbidity. Future studies should look into new biomarkers that predict antitumoral activity and should search for mutations in endometrial cancer and analyse which mutation is sensitive for therapy.

Indexed as

Endometrial cancernew treatment strategiesprognostic markerstumour biology

Identifiers

PMID24753865
PMCPMC3991451
OpenAlexW2362940327

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.