Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34435227›Full record

ReviewAbdominal radiology (New York)2021

Gynecologic tumor board: a radiologist's guide to vulvar and vaginal malignancies.

Lucy Chow, Brian Q Tsui, Simin Bahrami, Rinat Masamed, Sanaz Memarzadeh, Steven S Raman, Maitraya K Patel

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06007625 (Vulvar Cancer Individualized Scoring System), which is not on this map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06007625 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Vulvar Cancer Individualized Scoring System

TypeobservationalSponsorAssiut UniversityRan2024 to 2024Enrolled1,000ConditionsVulvar CancerArmsMachine learning-based prediction model
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Prognostic significance of Standard Uptake Value (SUVAbdominal radiology (New York) · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lucy ChowDepartment of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, 757 Westwood Plaza, Suite 1638, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA. lchow@mednet.ucla.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4084-442X
Brian Q TsuiDepartment of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, 757 Westwood Plaza, Suite 1638, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA.
Simin BahramiDepartment of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, 757 Westwood Plaza, Suite 1638, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA.
Rinat MasamedDepartment of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, 757 Westwood Plaza, Suite 1638, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA.
Sanaz MemarzadehDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA.
Steven S RamanDepartment of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, 757 Westwood Plaza, Suite 1638, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA.
Maitraya K PatelDepartment of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, 757 Westwood Plaza, Suite 1638, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA.
University of California, Los Angeles · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Primary vulvar and vaginal cancers are rare female genital tract malignancies which are staged using the 2009 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging. These cancers account for approximately 2,700 deaths annually in the USA. The most common histologic subtype of both vulvar and vaginal cancers is squamous cell carcinoma, with an increasing role of the human papillomavirus (HPV) in a significant number of these tumors. Lymph node involvement is the hallmark of FIGO stage 3 vulvar cancer while pelvic sidewall involvement is the hallmark of FIGO stage 3 vaginal cancer. Imaging techniques include computed tomography (CT), positron emission tomography (PET)-CT, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and PET-MRI. MRI is the imaging modality of choice for preoperative clinical staging of nodal and metastatic involvement while PET-CT is helpful with assessing response to neoadjuvant treatment and for guiding patient management. Determining the pretreatment extent of disease has become more important due to modern tailored operative approaches and use of neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy to reduce surgical morbidity. Moreover, imaging is used to determine the full extent of disease for radiation planning and for evaluating treatment response. Understanding the relevant anatomy of the vulva and vaginal regions and the associated lymphatic pathways is helpful to recognize the potential routes of spread and to correctly identify the appropriate FIGO stage. The purpose of this article is to review the clinical features, pathology, and current treatment strategies for vulvar and vaginal malignancies and to identify multimodality diagnostic imaging features of these gynecologic cancers, in conjunction with its respective 2009 FIGO staging system guidelines.

Indexed as

Genital Neoplasms, FemaleVaginal NeoplasmsFemaleHumansNeoplasm StagingPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyPregnancyRadiologistsVulvaFIGO staging systemPelvic imagingVaginal cancerVulvar cancer

Identifiers

PMID34435227
PMCPMC8590682
OpenAlexW3193443169

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.