ArticleInternational journal of gynecological pathology : official journal of the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists2020
Clinicopathologic Association and Prognostic Value of MELF Pattern in Invasive Endocervical Adenocarcinoma (ECA) as Classified by IECC.
Article in International journal of gynecological pathology : official journal of the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Article
- Clinicopathological and Molecular Differences Between Gastric-type Mucinous Carcinoma and Usual-type Endocervical Adenocarcinoma of the Uterine Cervix.Cancer genomics & proteomicsArticle
- Usual-Type Endocervical Adenocarcinoma with a Microcystic, Elongated, and Fragmented Pattern of Stromal Invasion: A Case Report with Emphasis on Ki-67 Immunostaining and Targeted Sequencing Results.Case reports in oncologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Microcystic, elongated, and fragmented (MELF) pattern of myometrial invasion is correlated with lymphovascular invasion (LVI) and lymph node metastases in uterine endometrioid carcinoma but has not been described in endocervical adenocarcinoma (ECA). A total of 457 ECAs were collected, and clinical/morphologic parameters correlated with follow-up data. Potential associations between MELF pattern and age, human papillomavirus status, tumor size/grade, LVI, lymph node metastases, Silva pattern were analyzed. Statistical analyses of overall survival (OS), disease-free survival, progression-free survival (PFS) were conducted using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and compared using the Log-rank test. Of 292 ECAs analyzed, 94 (32.19%) showed MELF invasion pattern (MELF-positive). Significant statistical correlation was found between MELF-positive and tumor size (P=0.0017), LVI (P=0.007), Silva pattern (P=0.0005); age, human papillomavirus status, tumor grade, lymph node metastases did not correlate. Fifty-five of 292 patients recurred (18.83%): 18/94 (19.14%) MELF-positive, 37/198 (18.68%) MELF-negative. PFS in MELF-positive: 77.2% and 64.5% at 5 and 10 yr, respectively; PFS in MELF-negative: 82% and 68.5% at 5 and 10 yr, respectively. On multivariate analysis for PFS and other prognostic parameters, only LVI was statistically significant (P=0.001). OS in MELF-positive was 86% and 74.1% at 5 and 10 yr, respectively; OS in MELF-negative, was 89.7% and 86% at 5 and 10 yr, respectively. Median survival was worse in MELF-positive (199.8 mo) versus MELF-negative (226.1 mo); this was not statistically significant. On multivariate analysis for OS and other prognostic parameters, only tumor stage was statistically significant (P=0.002). In ECAs, MELF is not independently associated with survival. Pathologic characteristics of MELF-positive (size, LVI, Silva pattern) versus MELF-negative tumors differ significantly.
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.