Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31600211›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2019

Squamous differentiation portends poor prognosis in low and intermediate-risk endometrioid endometrial cancer.

Diocesio Alves Pinto de Andrade, Vinicius Duval da Silva, Graziela de Macedo Matsushita, Marcos Alves de Lima, Marcelo de Andrade Vieira, Carlos Eduardo Mattos Cunha Andrade, Ronaldo Luís Schmidt, Rui Manuel Reis, Ricardo Dos Reis

Abstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Multifaceted role ofiScience · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

9 authors.

Diocesio Alves Pinto de AndradeDepartament of Oncology, InORP ONCOCLÍNICAS Group (Oncology Institute of Ribeirão Preto), Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-2715-2197
Vinicius Duval da SilvaDepartament of Pathology, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, São Paulo, Brazil.
Graziela de Macedo MatsushitaDepartament of Pathology, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, São Paulo, Brazil.
Marcos Alves de LimaEpidemiology and Biostatistics Nucleus, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, São Paulo, Brazil.
Marcelo de Andrade VieiraDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, São Paulo, Brazil.
Carlos Eduardo Mattos Cunha AndradeDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, São Paulo, Brazil.
Ronaldo Luís SchmidtDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, São Paulo, Brazil.
Rui Manuel ReisMolecular Oncology Research Center, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, São Paulo, Brazil.
Ricardo Dos ReisDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, São Paulo, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEndometrial cancer presents well-defined risk factors: myometrial invasion, histological subtype, tumor grade, lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI). Some low and intermediate-risk endometrioid endometrial cancer patients exhibited unexpected outcomes. This study aimed to investigate other clinical-pathological factors that might influence the recurrence rates of patients diagnosed with low and intermediate-risk endometrioid endometrial cancer.

methodsA case-control study from a cohort retrospective of 196 patients diagnosed with low and intermediate-risk endometrioid endometrial cancer at a single institution from 2009 to 2014 was conducted. Medical records were reviewed to compare clinical (race, smoking, menopause age, body mass index) and pathological (endometrioid vs endometrioid with squamous differentiation, tumor differentiation grade, tumor location, endocervical invasion, LVSI) features of patients with recurrence (case) and without recurrence (control) of disease. Three controls for each case were matched for age and staging.

resultsTwenty-one patients with recurrence were found (10.7%), of which 14 were stage IA, and 7 were stage IB. In accordance, 63 patients without recurrence were selected as controls. There were no significant differences in any clinical characteristics between cases and controls. Among pathological variables, presence of squamous differentiation (28.6% vs. 4.8%, p = 0.007), tumor differentiation grade 2 or 3 (57.1% vs. 30.2%, p = 0.037) and presence of endocervical invasion (28.6% vs. 12.7%, p = 0.103) were associated with disease recurrence on a univariate analysis. On multivariable analysis, only squamous differentiation was a significant risk factor for recurrence (p = 0.031).

conclusionOur data suggest that squamous differentiation may be an adverse prognostic factor in patients with low and intermediate-risk endometrioid endometrial cancer, that showed a 5.6-fold increased risk for recurrence.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, EndometrioidEndometrial NeoplasmsAgedCarcinoma, Squamous CellFemaleHumansMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasm StagingRetrospective StudiesRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID31600211
PMCPMC6786591

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.