ArticleGynecologic oncology reports2021
Impact of positive cytology in uterine serous carcinoma: A reassessment.
Article in Gynecologic oncology reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostic Value of Peritoneal Cytology in Stage I Serous and Clear Cell Carcinoma of the Endometrium.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- Controversy on Positive Peritoneal Cytology of Endometrial Carcinoma.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of peritoneal cytology status among other clinicopathological parameters in uterine serous carcinoma (USC).
methodsA retrospective study of 148 patients diagnosed with uterine serous carcinoma from 1997 to 2016 at two academic medical centers in the Detroit metropolitan area was done. A central gynecologic pathologist reviewed all available slides and confirmed the histologic diagnosis of each case of USC. We assessed the prognostic impact of various clinicopathological parameters on overall survival (OS) and endometrial cancer-specific survival (ECSS). Those parameters included race, body mass index (BMI), stage at diagnosis, tumor size, lymphovascular invasion (LVSI), peritoneal cytology status, receipt of adjuvant treatment, and comorbidity count using the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). We used Cox proportional hazards models and 95% confidence intervals for statistical analysis.
resultsPositive peritoneal cytology had a statistically significant effect on OS (HR: 2.09, 95% CI: [1.19, 3.68]) and on ECSS (HR: 2.02, 95% CI: [1.06 - 3.82]). LVSI had a statistically significant effect on both OS (HR: 2.27, 95% CI: [1.14, 4.53]) and ECSS (HR: 3.45, 95% CI: [1.49, 7.99]). Black or African American (AA) race was also found to have a significant effect on both OS (HR: 1.92, 95% CI: [1.07, 3.47]) and ECSS (HR: 2.01, 95% CI: [1.02, 3.98]). Other factors including BMI and tumor size > 1 cm did not show a statistically significant impact on OS or ECSS.
conclusionsPeritoneal washings with positive cytology and LVSI are important prognostic tools that may have a significant impact on overall survival in USC and can be used as independent negative prognosticators to help guide adjuvant treatment.
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.