Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30550486›Full record

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

Pathologic Prognostic Factors in Endometrial Carcinoma (Other Than Tumor Type and Grade).

Naveena Singh, Lynn Hirschowitz, Richard Zaino, Isabel Alvarado-Cabrero, Maire A Duggan, Rouba Ali-Fehmi, Elizabeth Euscher, Jonathan L Hecht, Lars-Christian Horn, Olga Ioffe and 12 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 77 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
77citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

77 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. ESGO/ESTRO/ESP Guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2021
    Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Fertility-Sparing Treatment of Endometrial Cancer: Survey of Australian Practice.The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. The Demographics and Outcomes of Women With Stage II Endometrial Cancer Diagnosed in Australia 2005-2007.The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2025
    Article
  16. Cancer of the corpus uteri: A 2025 update.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Review
  17. New histopathological and molecular findings in gynecological cancers.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

17 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

22 authors.

Naveena SinghDepartment of Cellular Pathology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London (N.S.) Department of Cellular Pathology, Birmingham Women's NHS Trust, Birmingham (L.H.) Department of Pathology, Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast (W.G.M.), UK Division of Anatomic Pathology, Hershey Medical Center, Pennsylvania State University, Hershey, Pennsylvania (R.Z.) Department of Pathology, Mexico City Hospital of Oncology, Mexico City, Mexico (I.A.-C.) Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada (M.A.D.) Department of Pathology, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan (R.A.-F.) Department of Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas (E.E., A.M.) Department of Pathology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School (J.L.H.) Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School (M.N.) Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School (E.O.), Boston, Massachusetts Division of Gynecologic, Breast & Perinatal Pathology, University Hospital Leipzig, Leipzig (L.-C.H.) Institute of Pathology, University Hospital of Tübingen, Tübingen (A.S.), Germany Department of Anatomical Pathology, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland (O.I.) Pathological Oncology Group and Pathology Department, University Hospital of Arnau de Vilanova, Lleida (X.M.-G.) Department of Pathology, Hospital Clinic of Barcelona, ISGlobal, Barcelona Center for International Health Research, University of Barcelona, Barcelona (J.O.), Spain Department of Diagnostic Pathology, Kumamoto University Hospital, Kumamoto, Japan (Y.M.) Department of Pathology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut (V.P.) Department of Pathology, Women and Infants Hospital/Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island (M.R.Q.) Department of Pathology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, Arkansas (C.M.Q.) Department of Pathology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California (C.Z.).
Lynn Hirschowitz
Richard Zaino
Isabel Alvarado-Cabrero
Maire A Duggan
Rouba Ali-Fehmi
Elizabeth Euscher
Jonathan L Hecht
Lars-Christian Horn
Olga Ioffe
Xavier Matias-Guiu
W Glenn McCluggage
Yoshiki Mikami
Jaume Ordi
Vinita Parkash
M Ruhul Quddus
Charles M Quick
Annette Staebler
Charles Zaloudek
Marisa Nucci
Anais Malpica
Esther Oliva

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although endometrial carcinoma (EC) is generally considered to have a good prognosis, over 20% of women with EC die of their disease, with a projected increase in both incidence and mortality over the next few decades. The aim of accurate prognostication is to ensure that patients receive optimal treatment and are neither overtreated nor undertreated, thereby improving patient outcomes overall. Patients with EC can be categorized into prognostic risk groups based on clinicopathologic findings. Other than tumor type and grade, groupings and recommended management algorithms may take into account age, body mass index, stage, and presence of lymphovascular space invasion. The molecular classification of EC that has emerged from the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) study provides additional, potentially superior, prognostic information to traditional histologic typing and grading. This classifier does not, however, replace clinicopathologic risk assessment based on parameters other than histotype and grade. It is envisaged that molecular and clinicopathologic prognostic grouping systems will work better together than either alone. Thus, while tumor typing and grading may be superseded by a classification based on underlying genomic abnormalities, accurate assessment of other pathologic parameters will continue to be key to patient management. These include those factors related to staging, such as depth of myometrial invasion, cervical, vaginal, serosal surface, adnexal and parametrial invasion, and those independent of stage such as lymphovascular space invasion. Other prognostic parameters will also be discussed. These recommendations were developed from the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists Endometrial Carcinoma project.

Indexed as

Endometrial NeoplasmsFemaleHumansNeoplasm GradingNeoplasm InvasivenessNeoplasm StagingPractice Guidelines as TopicPrognosisSocieties, Medical

Identifiers

PMID30550486
PMCPMC6296841

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.