Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30707273›Full record

ReviewDer Pathologe2019

[TNM classification of gynecologic malignancies : What remains to be done beyond 2017?]

L-C Horn, C E Brambs, S Opitz, J Einenkel, D Mayr

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Pathologe, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
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

5 authors.

L-C HornInstitut für Pathologie, Abteilung Mamma‑, Gynäko- & Perinatalpathologie, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig AöR, Liebigstraße 26, 04103, Leipzig, Deutschland. hornl@medizin.uni-leipzig.de.
C E BrambsFrauenklinik des Klinikums rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, München, Deutschland.
S OpitzInstitut für Pathologie, Abteilung Mamma‑, Gynäko- & Perinatalpathologie, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig AöR, Liebigstraße 26, 04103, Leipzig, Deutschland.
J EinenkelUniversitätsfrauenklinik Leipzig (Triersches Institut) im Zentrum für Frauen- und Kindermedizin, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig AöR, Leipzig, Deutschland.
D MayrPathologisches Institut, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, München, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For some gynecologic malignancies, there are disagreements between the most recent WHO and TNM classifications and the recommendations of the International Collaboration of Cancer Reporting. These discrepancies are addressed and discussed in this paper. The WHO definition for primary vaginal cancer does not match the TNM definition. The paper also discusses and provides TNM classifications for rare gynecologic tumors like primary malignant vulvar melanomas, sarcomas of the vulva, perivascular epithelioid cell tumor (PECom) of the uterus, undifferentiated uterine sarcomas, and extra-intestinal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST), and provides some recommendations for the reporting and categorization of regional lymph nodes in nonuterine serous pelvic cancer.

Indexed as

Genital Neoplasms, FemaleFemaleHumansLymph NodesNeoplasm StagingVaginal NeoplasmsVulvar NeoplasmsFemale genital neoplasmsLymph nodesNeoplasm stagingPerivascular epithelioid cell neoplasmsWorld Health Organization

Identifiers

PMID30707273

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.