Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31188324›Full record

GuidelineObstetrics and gynecology2019

Prognostic Performance of the 2018 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Cervical Cancer Staging Guidelines.

Jason D Wright, Koji Matsuo, Yongmei Huang, Ana I Tergas, June Y Hou, Fady Khoury-Collado, Caryn M St Clair, Cande V Ananth, Alfred I Neugut, Dawn L Hershman

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readPractice Guideline
In one paragraph

Guideline in Obstetrics and gynecology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 162 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
162citing papers in PubMed, 5 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.

NCT05437692 phase2unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

A Prospective, Single Arm, Phase II Clinical Study on the Treatment of Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer (Ⅱ B to Ⅳ a) With Zimberelimab Combined With Concurrent Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy

TypeinterventionalSponsorShanghai Zhongshan HospitalRan2022 to 2025Enrolled19ConditionsLocally Advanced Cervical CancerArmszimberelimab combined With concurrent radiotherapy and chemotherapy
NCT05496517 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Ovarian Cancer Individualized Scoring System (OCISS) for Prediction of Ovarian Cancer Prognosis

TypeobservationalSponsorAssiut UniversityRan2022 to 2023Enrolled1,000ConditionsOvarian Cancer
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

162 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

102 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.

Jason D WrightColumbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, the Joseph L. Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, and the Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York; the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California; and Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, and the Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute (EOHSI), Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Piscataway, New Jersey.
Koji Matsuo
Yongmei Huang
Ana I Tergas
June Y Hou
Fady Khoury-Collado
Caryn M St Clair
Cande V Ananth
Alfred I Neugut
Dawn L Hershman

Funding

USC/NORRIS COMPREHENSIVE CANCER CENTER (CORE) SUPPORTP30CA014089 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI Fumito Ito · 1985 to 2026
$181.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA014089
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo examine the prognostic performance of the revised 2018 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) cervical cancer staging schema.

methodsWe used the National Cancer Database to identify women with cervical cancer diagnosed from 2004 to 2015. Using clinical and pathologic data, each patient's stage was classified using three staging schemas: American Joint Committee on Cancer 7th edition, FIGO 2009 and FIGO 2018. The FIGO 2018 revised staging classifies stage IB tumors into three substages based on tumor size (IB1-IB3) and classifies patients with positive lymph nodes (pathologically or clinically detected) as stage IIIC1 (positive pelvic nodes) or IIIC2 (positive para-aortic nodes). Five-year survival rates were estimated for each stage grouping. We sought to determine whether the 2018 FIGO staging system was able to offer improved 5-year survival rate differentiation compared with older staging schemas.

resultsA total of 62,212 women were identified. The classification of stage IB tumors into three substages improved discriminatory ability. Five-year survival in the FIGO 2018 schema was 91.6% (95% CI 90.4-92.6%) for stage IB1 tumors, 83.3% (95% CI 81.8-84.8%) for stage IB2 neoplasms, and 76.1% (95% CI 74.3-77.8%) for IB3 lesions. In contrast, for women with stage III tumors, higher FIGO staging was not consistently associated with worse 5-year survival rates: stage IIIA (40.7%, 95 CI 37.1-44.3%), stage IIIB (41.4%; 95% CI 39.9-42.9%), stage IIIC1 (positive pelvic nodes) was 60.8% (95% CI 58.7-62.8%) and stage IIIC2 37.5% (95% CI 33.3-41.7%).

conclusionThe FIGO 2018 staging schema provides improved discriminatory ability for women with stage IB tumors; however, classification of all women with positive lymph nodes into a single stage results in a very heterogeneous group of patients with highly variable survival rates.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCarcinoma, Squamous CellDatabases, FactualFemaleGynecologyHumansMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingObstetricsPrognosisSocieties, MedicalUnited StatesUterine Cervical Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID31188324
PMCPMC7641496

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.