Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34831000›Full record

ReviewCancers2021

Risk Stratification of Endometrial Cancer Patients: FIGO Stage, Biomarkers and Molecular Classification.

Jenneke C Kasius, Johanna M A Pijnenborg, Kristina Lindemann, David Forsse, Judith van Zwol, Gunnar B Kristensen, Camilla Krakstad, Henrica M J Werner, Frédéric Amant

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
11.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

49 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 95 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Frontiers in oncology · 2025
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Management of endometrial cancer in Latin America: raising the standard of care and optimizing outcomes.International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2024
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Jenneke C KasiusDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4226-7208
Johanna M A PijnenborgDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Radboudumc, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6138-1236
Kristina LindemannDepartment of Gynaecologic Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, 0188 Oslo, Norway.
David ForsseDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Haukeland University Hospital, 5021 Bergen, Norway.
Judith van ZwolDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Gunnar B KristensenInstitute for Cancer Genetics and Informatics, Department of Oncology, Division of Cancer Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, 0424 Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-6231-7247
Camilla KrakstadDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Haukeland University Hospital, 5021 Bergen, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-0174-8139
Henrica M J WernerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, GROW, Maastricht University School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, 6202 AZ Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5186-8369
Frédéric AmantDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5452-4905
Haukeland University Hospital · NOOslo University Hospital · NOMaastricht University · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NLThe Netherlands Cancer Institute · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common gynaecologic malignancy in developed countries. The main challenge in EC management is to correctly estimate the risk of metastases at diagnosis and the risk to develop recurrences in the future. Risk stratification determines the need for surgical staging and adjuvant treatment. Detection of occult, microscopic metastases upstages patients, provides important prognostic information and guides adjuvant treatment. The molecular classification subdivides EC into four prognostic subgroups: POLE ultramutated; mismatch repair deficient (MMRd); nonspecific molecular profile (NSMP); and

Indexed as

endometrial cancerFIGO stagemolecular classificationProMisEsurgical stagingTCGATRANSPORTECuterine neoplasm

Identifiers

PMID34831000
PMCPMC8616052
OpenAlexW3215335387

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.