ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2019
Analysis of prognostic factors and clinical outcomes in uterine cervical carcinoma with isolated para-aortic lymph node recurrence.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2019. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- A retrospective study using the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database to predict risk and prognostic factors for lung metastasis in cervical carcinoma: nomogram development and validation.Translational cancer research · 2025Article
- The impact of different clinicopathologic factors and salvage therapies on cervical cancer patients with isolated para-aortic lymph node recurrence.Discover oncology · 2024Article
- Comparative Analysis of Oncologic Outcomes in Patients with Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Uterine Cervix with High-Risk Features for Para-Aortic Recurrence: Prophylactic Extended-Field versus Pelvic Chemoradiotherapy.Cancer management and research · 2024Article
- Circulating Tie2-Expressing Monocytes: A Potential Biomarker for Cervical Cancer.OncoTargets and therapy · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To evaluate clinical outcomes and to identify prognostic factors in isolated para-aortic lymph node (PALN) recurrence, we retrospectively reviewed 65 patients who developed PALN recurrence as the first site of tumor progression from a total of 1521 patients who were treated with curative pelvic radiation therapy (RT) for uterine cervical carcinoma between May 1993 and January 2017. Forty-five of the 65 patients received salvage therapy. The median salvage PALN radiation dose was 54 Gy (range: 18 to 62 Gy). Prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) and distant metastases (DMs) were analyzed with univariate and multivariate Cox regression. The median follow-up period for surviving patients was 61 months (4-202 months). The median OS was 27.7 months (0.3-202 months). The highest level of PALN metastases at or above the L1 spinal level (hazard ratio [HR] 9.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.44-28.38, P<0.001) and the presence of leg edema and/or back pain at recurrence (HR 3.25, 95% CI 1.57-6.75, P=0.002) were significantly associated with worse OS. A significantly higher incidence of DMs (HR 5.97, 95% CI 2.05-17.35, P=0.001) was found in the patients with a high level (≥L1) of PALN metastases. Salvage RT (HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.17-0.71, P=0.004) and restaging with positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) (HR 0.2, 95% CI 0.04-0.93, P=0.039) were independent predictors of a better OS. In conclusion, a high level (≥L1) of PALN metastases predicts poor survival and a high rate of DMs. Periodic surveillance for early detection and restaging by PET/CT imaging to identify the optimal treatment at recurrence is recommended.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31934296PMC6943452W3013253333What 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.