ArticleInternational journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society2019
Impact of tumor histology on detection of pelvic and para-aortic nodal metastasis with
Article in International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic accuracy of MRI, CT, and [Insights into imaging · 2024Article
- 18F-FDG PET/MRI and 18F-FDG PET/CT for the Management of Gynecological Malignancies: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature.Journal of imaging · 2023Review
- Prognostic value of pretreatment FDG PET/CT in uterine cervical cancer according to two major histologic types: squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma.Asia Oceania journal of nuclear medicine & biology · 2023Article
- microRNA Profile Associated with Positive Lymph Node Metastasis in Early-Stage Cervical Cancer.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Article
- Long-Term Outcomes of Cervical Cancer Patients Treated With Definitive Chemoradiation Following a Complete Metabolic Response.Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)) · 2021Article
- False negative rate atBMC cancer · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objective
methodsPatients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2009 stage IB1-2 cervical cancer who underwent pre-surgical FDG-PET between March 1999 and February 2018 were identified in a tertiary academic center database. All patients had radical hysterectomy with pelvic and para-aortic lymph node dissection. Detection of pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes by FDG-PET versus surgical dissection was compared. FDG-PET sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were determined and stratified by tumor histology.
resultsWe identified 212 patients with early stage cervical cancer (84% FIGO IB1, 16% IB2) who underwent pre-surgical FDG-PET; 137 (65%) patients had squamous carcinoma and 75 (35%) patients had adenocarcinoma. PET/computed tomography was performed in 189 (89%) patients and 23 (11%) had PET only. Surgical dissection revealed positive pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes in 25% and 3.3% of patients, respectively. For squamous carcinoma, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of FDG-PET for pelvic nodal metastasis were 44%, 99%, 95%, and 78%, respectively. For adenocarcinoma, the corresponding results for pelvic nodal metastasis were 25%, 99%, 67%, and 92%, respectively. The overall values for sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of FDG-PET for para-aortic nodal metastasis were 29%, 99%, 67%, and 98%, respectively. DISCUSSION: Pelvic nodal metastasis was less likely to be detected by FDG-PET in patients with early stage adenocarcinoma than with squamous carcinoma.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.