ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2018
From IB2 to IIIB locally advanced cervical cancers: report of a ten-year experience.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- An exploratory assessment of early and delta PET radiomic features for outcome prediction in locally advanced cervical cancer.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025Article
- Integrated single-cell, spatial, and bulk transcriptomics reveal a chromatin regulator-TME prognostic framework guiding precision therapy in cervical cancer.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Monocentric Retrospective Study: Efficacy, Feasibility, and Prognostic Factors of Single-Insertion High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy With 4 Sessions for Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer.Advances in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Exclusion of non-Involved uterus from the target volume (EXIT-trial): An individualized treatment for locally advanced cervical cancer using modern radiotherapy and imaging techniques followed by completion surgery.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Comparing Methods to Determine Complete Response to Chemoradiation in Patients with Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer.Cancers · 2023Article
- MicroRNA‑130a‑3p inhibition suppresses cervical cancer cell progression.Oncology reports · 2023Article
- Variations and effects of bladder and rectal volume following uniform preparation procedure in cervical cancer: Five fractions of 6 Gy.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2023Article
- Prognostic factors for IB2-IIIB cervical cancer patients treated by radiation therapy with high-dose-rate brachytherapy in a single-institution study.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2022Article
- Global challenges of radiotherapy for the treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer.International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2022Review
- Operation for locally advanced cervical cancer after concurrent chemoradiotherapy.International journal of clinical oncology · 2020Article
- The role ofEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2020Article
- Correction to: From IB2 to IIIB locally advanced cervical cancers: report of a ten-year experience.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
16 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite screening campaigns, cervical cancers remain among the most prevalent malignancies and carry significant mortality, especially in developing countries. Most studies report outcomes of patients receiving the usual standard of care. It is possible that these selected patients may not correctly represent patients in a real-world setting, which may be a limitation in interpreting outcomes. This study was undertaken to identify prognostic factors, management strategies and outcomes of locally advanced cervical cancers (LACC) treated in daily clinical practice.
methodsMedical files of all consecutive patients treated with curative intent for LACC in a French Cancer Care Center between 2004 and 2014 were reviewed retrospectively.
resultsNinety-four patients were identified. Performance status was ≥ 2 in 10.6%. Median age at diagnosis was 63.0. Based on the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics classification, tumours were classified as follows: 10.6% IB2, 22.3% IIA, 51.0% IIB, 4.3% IIIA and 11.7% IIIB. Pelvic lymph nodes were involved in 34.0% of cases. Radiotherapy was delivered for all patients. Radiotherapy technique was intensity modulated radiation therapy or volumetric modulated arc therapy in 39.4% of cases. A concurrent cisplatin chemotherapy was delivered in 68.1% of patients. Brachytherapy was performed in 77.7% of cases. The recommended standard care (concurrent chemoradiotherapy with at least five chemotherapy cycles during radiotherapy, followed by brachytherapy) was delivered in 43.6%. The median overall treatment time was 56 days. Complete tumour sterilisation was achieved in 55.2% of cases. Mean follow-up was 54.3 months. Local recurrence rate was 18.1%. Five-year overall survival was 61.9% (95% Confident Interval (CI) = 52.3-73.2) and five-year disease-specific survival was 68.5% (95% CI = 59.2-79.2). Poor performance status, lymph nodes metastasis and absence of concurrent chemotherapy were identified as poor prognostic factors in multivariate analysis.
conclusionsLess than 50% of patients received the standard care. Because LACC patients and disease are heterogeneous, treatment tailoring appears to be common in current clinical practice. However, guidelines for tailoring management are not currently available. More data about real-world settings are required in order to to optimise clinical trials' aims and designs, and make them translatable in daily clinical practice.
trial registrationretrospectively registered.
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.