ReviewDer Pathologe2016
[Grading of gynecological tumors : Current aspects].
Review in Der Pathologe, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Histopathologic basis of a deep learning pelvic computed tomography model for prognostic prediction among patients with advanced high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Neuroendocrine Tumor of the Fallopian Tube and Serous Adenocarcinoma of the Ovary: Multicentric Primary Tumors.Turk patoloji dergisi · 2023Article
- [Revised German guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of carcinoma of the uterine cervix-what's new for pathologists in 2021?]Pathologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2022Review
- [TNM classification of gynecologic malignancies : What remains to be done beyond 2017?]Der Pathologe · 2019Review
- [S3 guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of carcinoma of the endometrium : Requirements for pathology].Der Pathologe · 2019Review
- The Prognostic Impact of Grading in FIGO IB and IIB Squamous Cell Cervical Carcinomas.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Histopathological assessment of the tumor grade and cell type is central to the management and prognosis of various gynecological malignancies. Conventional grading systems for squamous carcinomas and adenocarcinomas of the vulva, vagina and cervix are poorly defined. For endometrioid tumors of the female genital tract as well as for mucinous endometrial, ovarian and seromucinous ovarian carcinomas, the 3‑tiered FIGO grading system is recommended. For uterine neuroendocrine tumors the grading system of the gastrointestinal counterparts has been adopted. Uterine leiomyosarcomas are not graded. Endometrial stromal sarcomas are divided into low and high grades, based on cellular morphology, immunohistochemical and molecular findings. A chemotherapy response score was established for chemotherapeutically treated high-grade serous pelvic cancer. For non-epithelial ovarian malignancies, only Sertoli-Leydig cell tumors and immature teratomas are graded. At this time molecular profiling has no impact on the grading of tumors of the female genital tract.
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.