ArticleGynecologic oncology2018
Less versus more radical surgery in stage IB1 cervical cancer: A population-based study of long-term survival.
Article in Gynecologic oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety analysis of non-radical surgery for early-stage cervical cancer (IA2 ~ IB1): a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- De-escalating radical surgery for select FIGO Stage I cervical cancer.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Review
- Long-Term Survival in Patients With Low-Risk Cervical Cancer After Simple, Modified, or Radical Hysterectomy.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- A Multicenter Study on the Relationship of Tumor Lesion Location with Bilateral Parametrial Involvement and Pelvic Lymph Node Metastasis in Cervical Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Article
- Fertility Preservation in Cervical Cancer-Treatment Strategies and Indications.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Review
- Survival associated with extent of radical hysterectomy in early-stage cervical cancer: a subanalysis of the Surveillance in Cervical CANcer (SCCAN) collaborative study.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2023Article
- Radical Hysterectomy in Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: Abandoning the One-Fits-All Concept.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Review
- Review
- Fertility-Sparing Surgery versus Radical Hysterectomy in Early Cervical Cancer: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis and Noninferiority Study.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Large Conization-Retrospective Monocentric Results for Fertility Preservation in Young Women with Early Stage Cervical Cancer.Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2022Article
- Manifestation of Urinary Tract Injury during Cervical Cancer Surgery Based on CT Urography Secretion Phase Images.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 2022Article
- Predictive value of hemoglobin, platelets, and D-dimer for the survival of patients with stage IA1 to IIA2 cervical cancer: a retrospective study.The Journal of international medical research · 2021Article
- Cervical Cancer and Fertility-Sparing Treatment.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- ConCerv: a prospective trial of conservative surgery for low-risk early-stage cervical cancer.International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2021Article
- Evidence-Based Treatment Paradigms for Management of Invasive Cervical Carcinoma.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2019Review
- Tailoring radicality in early cervical cancer: how far can we go?Journal of gynecologic oncology · 2019Review
- Trachelectomy for stage IB1 cervical cancer with tumor size >2 cm: trends and characteristics in the United States.Journal of gynecologic oncology · 2018Article
- Volume Index Measured Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Diagnosing Cervical Cancer Tumors <2 cm.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundStandard surgical treatment for women with stage IB1 cervical cancer consists of radical hysterectomy. This study assesses survival outcomes of those treated with less radical surgery (LRS; conization, trachelectomy, simple hysterectomy) compared to more radical surgery (MRS; modified radical, radical hysterectomy).
methodsUsing the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database, we identified women <45 years with FIGO stage IB1 cervical cancer diagnosed from 1/1998 to 12/2012. Only those who underwent lymph node (LN) assessment were analyzed. Disease-specific survivals (DSSs) of LRS were compared with those of MRS.
resultsOf 2571 patients, 807 underwent LRS and 1764 underwent MRS, all with LN assessment. For LRS vs. MRS, 28% vs. 23% were diagnosed with adenocarcinoma (p = 0.024), 31% vs. 39% had G3 disease (p < 0.001), 40% vs. 45% had tumor size >2 cm (p < 0.001), and 27% vs. 29% received adjuvant radiation therapy (p = 0.005). Median follow-up was 79 months (range, 0-179). Ten-year DSS for LRS vs. MRS was 93.5% vs. 92.3% (p = 0.511). There was no difference in 10-year DSS when stratified by tumor size ≤2 cm (LRS 95.1% vs. MRS 95.6%, p = 0.80) or > 2 cm (LRS 90.1% vs. MRS 88.2%, p = 0.48). Factors independently associated with increased risk of death included adenosquamous histology (HR 2.37), G3 disease (HR 2.86), tumors >2 cm (HR 1.82), and LN positivity (HR 2.42). Compared to MRS, LRS was not associated with a higher risk of death.
conclusionsIn a select group of young women with stage IB1 cervical cancer, LRS compared to MRS does not appear to compromise DSS.
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.