ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2015
Adjuvant treatment decisions for patients with endometrial cancer in Germany: results of the nationwide AGO pattern of care studies from the years 2013, 2009 and 2006.
Article in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors influencing treatment decision and guideline conformity in high-grade endometrial cancer patients: a population-based study.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2022Article
- Survey on gynecological cancer treatment by Piedmont, Liguria, and Valle d'Aosta group of AIRO (Italian Association of Radiation Oncology).Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2016Article
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 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn 2013, 2009 and 2006, the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie evaluated the therapeutic approaches for endometrial carcinoma and the adherence to their guideline in Germany. Here, the adjuvant treatment decisions were presented.
methodsA questionnaire was developed and sent to all 682 German gynecological departments in 2013 (775 in 2009 and 500 in 2006, respectively). The results of the questionnaires were compared with the recommendations of the guideline and with each other using Fisher's exact test.
resultsResponses were available in 40.0 % in 2013, 33.3 % in 2009 and 35.8 % in 2006. Participants recommended external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in 13 out of 16 requested stages and vaginal brachytherapy (VBT) in only 10 out of 16 requested stages as suggested by the guideline. Comparing the results of 2013 with 2009, less participants used EBRT and VBT in 7 out of 16 and in 6 out of 16 requested stages, respectively. Conversely, more participants offered adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) in 2013 (90.4 %) compared to 61.9 % in 2009 (p < 0.001) and 48.8 % in 2006 (p < 0.001), respectively. However, the stage-adjusted recommendations of CT were not in line with the guideline in 11 out of 15 requested stages. In total, 77.3 % of the participants use a multiple drug schedule with a platinum and a taxane compound.
conclusionsThe results suggest non-adherence to the guideline concerning the stage-adjusted use of VBT and CT in endometrial carcinoma. These findings emphasize great uncertainties and the need of more clarifying trials. Furthermore, a shift from radiotherapy toward CT is observable.
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.