ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2021
Application of CT and MRI combined with VEGF-C and EGFR in the identification of endometrial cancer stages.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Contrast-enhanced MRI and CT in evaluating treatment response for recurrent endometrial cancer: a retrospective case-control study.American journal of cancer research · 2025Article
- Mechanism of salidroside in the treatment of endometrial cancer based on network pharmacology and molecular docking.Scientific reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo explore the application of computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in combination with vascular endothelial growth factor-C (VEGF-C) and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) in the identification of endometrial cancer stages.
methodsClinical data of 84 patients with endometrial cancer who underwent surgery in our hospital were retrospectively analyzed. Before surgery, they were received inspection by CT and MRI and examination by VEGF-C and EGFR measurement. The pathological results after surgery were used as the gold standard, which was applied to compare the diagnostic accuracy of endometrial cancer stages by CT, MRI, and CT+MRI and to analyze how VEGF-C and EGFR expression and CT+MRI diagnosis correlated with relevant pathological parameters.
resultsUsing pathological results as the gold standard, the diagnostic accuracy of endometrial cancer stages via CT+MRI combined with VEGF-C+EGFR immunostaining was significantly higher (96.43%) compared with CT+MRI, CT, and MRI (91.67%, 70.24%, and 77.38%, respectively) (P<0.05). The positive rates of VEGF-C and EGFR expression in patients with different endometrial cancer stages identified by CT+MRI were significantly different (P<0.05). Spearman's rank correlation coefficient showed that the positive rates of VEGF-C and EGFR expression were both positively correlated with CT+MRI identified stages (r>0, P<0.05). The accuracy of CT+MRI diagnosed lymph node metastasis, myometrial infiltration, and interstitial infiltration was 90.48%, 92.86%, and 84.52%, respectively. The positive rates of VEGF-C and EGFR expression were significantly higher by lymph node metastasis compared with non-metastasis; the positive rates of VEGF-C and EGFR expression were significantly higher by deep myometrial infiltration compared with superficial infiltration; the positive rates of VEGF-C and EGFR expression were significantly higher by interstitial infiltration compared with no interstitial infiltration (P<0.05).
conclusionCT and MRI combined with VEGF-C and EGFR can effectively identify endometrial cancer stages.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34306477PMC8290686W3185189824What 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.