Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31186375›Full record

SynthesisThe oncologist2019

Diagnostic Accuracy of Clinical Biomarkers for Preoperative Prediction of Lymph Node Metastasis in Endometrial Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Casper Reijnen, Joanna IntHout, Leon F A G Massuger, Fleur Strobbe, Heidi V N Küsters-Vandevelde, Ingfrid S Haldorsen, Marc P L M Snijders, Johanna M A Pijnenborg

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The oncologist, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Casper ReijnenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands casper.reijnen@radboudumc.nl.ORCID 0000-0001-6873-7832
Joanna IntHoutDepartment for Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Leon F A G MassugerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Fleur StrobbeDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Heidi V N Küsters-VandeveldeDepartment of Pathology, Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Ingfrid S HaldorsenMohn Medical Imaging and Visualization Centre, Department of Radiology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Marc P L M SnijdersDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Johanna M A PijnenborgDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Radboud University Medical Center · NLCanisius-Wilhelmina Ziekenhuis · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NLUniversity of Bergen · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn endometrial carcinoma (EC), preoperative classification is based on histopathological criteria, with only moderate diagnostic performance for the risk of lymph node metastasis (LNM). So far, existing molecular classification systems have not been evaluated for prediction of LNM. Optimized use of clinical biomarkers as recommended by international guidelines might be a first step to improve tailored treatment, awaiting future molecular biomarkers.

aimTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of preoperative clinical biomarkers for the prediction of LNM in endometrial cancer.

methodsA systematic review was performed according to the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. Studies identified in MEDLINE and EMBASE were selected by two independent reviewers. Included biomarkers were based on recommended guidelines (cancer antigen 125 [Ca-125], lymphadenopathy on magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, and

resultsEighty-three studies, comprising 18,205 patients, were included. Elevated Ca-125 and thrombocytosis were associated with a

conclusionCa-125, thrombocytosis, and imaging had a IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Routine lymphadenectomy in clinical early-stage endometrial carcinoma does not improve outcome and is associated with 15%-20% surgery-related morbidity, underlining the need for improved preoperative risk stratification. New molecular classification systems are emerging but have not yet been evaluated for the prediction of lymph node metastasis. This article provides a robust overview of diagnostic performance of all clinical biomarkers recommended by international guidelines. Based on these, at least measurement of cancer antigen 125 serum level, assessment of thrombocytosis, and imaging focused on lymphadenopathy should complement current preoperative risk stratification in order to better stratify these patients by risk.

Indexed as

PrognosisBiomarkers, TumorCA-125 AntigenEndometrial NeoplasmsFemaleFluorodeoxyglucose F18HumansLymphatic MetastasisLymph NodesPositron-Emission TomographyPreoperative PeriodBiomarkers, TumorCA-125 AntigenFluorodeoxyglucose F18BiomarkersEndometrial carcinomaImagingLymph node metastasisMeta‐analysisRisk stratification

Identifiers

PMID31186375
PMCPMC6738307
OpenAlexW2950017860

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.