Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30550484›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of gynecological pathology : official journal of the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists2019

Endometrial Carcinoma Diagnosis: Use of FIGO Grading and Genomic Subcategories in Clinical Practice: Recommendations of the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists.

Robert A Soslow, Carmen Tornos, Kay J Park, Anais Malpica, Xavier Matias-Guiu, Esther Oliva, Vinita Parkash, Joseph Carlson, W Glenn McCluggage, C Blake Gilks

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of gynecological pathology : official journal of the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 167 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
167citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
22.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

167 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 316 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Gender bias in shared decision-making among cancer care guidelines: A systematic review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Statins as Repurposed Drugs in Gynecological Cancer: A Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. ESGO/ESTRO/ESP Guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2021
    Guideline
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

107 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 1 institution in 5 countries.

Robert A SoslowDepartment of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York (R.A.S, K.J.P.) Department of Pathology, Stony Brook Hospital, SUNY, Stony Brook (C.T.), New York Department of Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas (A.M.) Pathology Department, University Hospital Arnau de Vilanova and University Hospital of Bellvitge, Biomedical Research Institute, and Bellvitge Biomedical Institute, University of Lleida, CIBERONC, Spain (X.M.-G.) Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts (E.O.) Department of Pathology, Yale School of Medicine and the Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut (V.P.) Department of Oncology-Pathology, Karolinska Institutet and Department of Pathology and Cytology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden (J.C.) Department of Pathology, Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast, UK (W.G.M.) Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Vancouver General Hospital and University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada (C.B.G.).
Carmen Tornos
Kay J Park
Anais Malpica
Xavier Matias-Guiu
Esther Oliva
Vinita Parkash
Joseph Carlson
W Glenn McCluggage
C Blake Gilks
Belfast Health and Social Care Trust · GB

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this review, we sought to address 2 important issues in the diagnosis of endometrial carcinoma: how to grade endometrial endometrioid carcinomas and how to incorporate the 4 genomic subcategories of endometrial carcinoma, as identified through The Cancer Genome Atlas, into clinical practice. The current International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics grading scheme provides prognostic information that can be used to guide the extent of surgery and use of adjuvant chemotherapy or radiation therapy. We recommend moving toward a binary scheme to grade endometrial endometrioid carcinomas by considering International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics defined grades 1 and 2 tumors as "low grade" and grade 3 tumors as "high grade." The current evidence base does not support the use of a 3-tiered grading system, although this is considered standard by International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the College of American Pathologists. As for the 4 genomic subtypes of endometrial carcinoma (copy number low/p53 wild-type, copy number high/p53 abnormal, polymerase E mutant, and mismatch repair deficient), which only recently have been identified, there is accumulating evidence showing these categories can be reproducibly diagnosed and accurately assessed based on biopsy/curettage specimens as well as hysterectomy specimens. Furthermore, this subclassification system can be adapted for current clinical practice and is of prognostic significance independent of conventional variables used for risk assessment in patients with endometrial carcinoma (eg, stage). It is too soon to recommend the routine use of genomic classification in this setting; however, with further evidence, this system may become the basis for the subclassification of all endometrial carcinomas, supplanting (partially or completely) histotype, and grade. These recommendations were developed from the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists Endometrial Carcinoma project.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, EndometrioidEndometrial NeoplasmsFemaleGenomicsGynecologyHumansNeoplasm GradingNeoplasm StagingPathologistsPractice Guidelines as TopicPrognosisSocieties, Medical

Identifiers

PMID30550484
PMCPMC6295928
OpenAlexW2908657103

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.