ArticleAging2020
Relationship between the expression of oestrogen receptor and progesterone receptor and
Article in Aging, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProgestogens have been widely used for the treatment of inoperable endometrial cancer or younger patients with endometrial cancer. Identifying markers that are predictive of a response to progestogens is critical for successful therapy. Molecular imaging with
resultsEndometrial cancers in the ER-positive group had lower SUVmax than those in the ER-negative group (12.3 ± 6.2 vs. 19.9 ± 6.6, respectively; P = 0.003). Endometrial cancers in the PR-positive group also had lower SUVmax than those in the PR-negative group (12.4 ± 6.2 vs. 20.0 ± 6.9, respectively; P = 0.005). Multivariate analysis indicated that SUVmax and tumour differentiation grade were significantly associated with both ER and PR status (P = 0.027 and P = 0.044, respectively). ER expression was predicted with an accuracy of 74.2% when a SUVmax value of 15.3 was used as a cutoff point for analysis. Similarly, PR expression was predicted with an accuracy of 74.2%, when a SUVmax value of 15.95 was used as the threshold for analysis.
conclusionHigher
methodsWe carried out a retrospective analysis on 62 endometrial cancer patients who underwent
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.