ArticleInternational journal of clinical oncology2021
Survival impact of adjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy after radical hysterectomy in FIGO stage IIIC1 cervical adenocarcinoma.
Article in International journal of clinical oncology, 2021. 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.
- Article
- Impact of radiotherapy on the prognosis in uterine cervical adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis and retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Whole-tumor histogram analysis of multiple non-Gaussian diffusion models at high b values for assessing cervical cancer.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2024Article
- Enhancing prognostic accuracy: a SEER-based analysis for overall and cancer-specific survival prediction in cervical adenocarcinoma patients.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Article
- Clinical Effect of Laparoscopic Radical Surgery Combined with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Treating Cervical Cancer and Its Influence on Postoperative Complications and Adverse Reaction Rates.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2022Article
- Prognostic analysis of pT1-T2aN0M0 cervical adenocarcinoma based on random survival forest analysis and the generation of a predictive nomogram.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe evaluated the survival effect of adjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy after radical hysterectomy in patients with clinical pelvic node-positive cervical adenocarcinoma.
methodsPatients with pelvic node-positive cervical adenocarcinoma diagnosed between 2000 and 2016 at our institution were identified. Survival was compared between patients who underwent radical hysterectomy alone and those who received concurrent chemoradiotherapy as an adjuvant treatment. Survival analysis using log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards model was performed.
resultsWe identified 80 patients who underwent radical hysterectomy for clinical pelvic node-positive cervical adenocarcinoma; of these, four with pathological pelvic node-negative adenocarcinoma were excluded. Of the 76 patients, 27 underwent radical hysterectomy alone and 49 received radical hysterectomy followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy. With a median follow-up of 53 months, the 5-year overall survival rate was 51.0% in patients who underwent radical hysterectomy alone versus 53.0% in patients who received additional concurrent chemoradiotherapy (log-rank p = 0.455).
conclusionThe addition of concurrent chemoradiotherapy after radical hysterectomy did not significantly improve survival among patients with pelvic node-positive cervical adenocarcinoma. More appropriate treatment strategies are needed to improve the survival outcomes of these patients.
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.