ArticleOncoTargets and therapy2016
Conservative treatment of coexisting microinvasive squamous and adenocarcinoma of the cervix: report of two cases and literature review.
Article in OncoTargets and therapy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Coexistence of microinvasive squamous cell carcinoma (MISCC) and microinvasive adenocarcinoma (MIAC) of the cervix is a rare phenomenon with very few clinically significant cases described in the literature. While a conservative approach has been studied, and may be effective in MISCC, a lower number of studies that recommend conservative treatment are available for MIAC. We report two cases of synchronous cervix lesions in two separate foci, MISCC and MIAC, who underwent fertility-sparing treatment with long-term follow-up. We describe clinical, histological, and immunohistochemical features of the two cases. The first case is a 41-year-old female with a diagnosis of MIAC of endocervical type, grade 1 differentiation, with a stromal invasion, associated with a separate area of squamous cell carcinoma (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics/TNM stage: pT1a1G1). The second case is a 45-year-old female with a diagnosis of plurifocal MISCC, associated with an MIAC of endocervical type with a stromal invasion (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics/TNM stage: pT1a1G1). After multidisciplinary counseling, both patients accepted conization as definitive treatment. Eleven years after the conization, all tests (Papanicolaou smear, colposcopy, cervical curettage, and hybrid capture 2-human papillomavirus test) planned quarterly in the first year and every 6 months in the subsequent years were negative in both patients. In women affected by stage IA1 squamous cervical cancer coexisting with stage IA1 adenocarcinoma endocervical type, with clear margins, and without lymphovascular space invasion, cervical conization may be considered a fertility-preserving, safe, and definitive therapeutic option.
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.