ArticleGynecologic oncology reports2022
Estrogen receptor-positive adenocarcinoma of the cervix presenting during pregnancy: Two case reports and review of the literature.
Article in Gynecologic oncology reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The incidence of adenocarcinoma of the cervix in pregnancy is exceptionally rare, and thus there is no consensus on its management. Here, we report two cases of adenocarcinoma of the cervix diagnosed in the context of pregnancy. In our first case, a patient referred to colposcopy for atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance was subsequently diagnosed with well differentiated endocervical adenocarcinoma on cone biopsy. Just prior to the cone biopsy, she was incidentally found to have a first trimester pregnancy loss. The patient subsequently underwent a radical hysterectomy and bilateral sentinel lymph node dissection. Final pathology revealed a stage 1B1 (FIGO 2009) well differentiated adenocarcinoma of the cervix. Interestingly, the tumour was positive for estrogen receptor, which is unusual for cervical adenocarcinoma. In our second case, a patient presented with a pedunculated, exophytic cervical neoplasm at 31 weeks GA with self-limiting antepartum hemorrhage. The primary lesion measured 52 mm in diameter on MRI and was amputated at the base during the patient's elective repeat cesarean section. Final pathology revealed a stage IB2 (FIGO 2009) mucinous adenocarcinoma of the cervix. The patient subsequently underwent a radical hysterectomy and bilateral pelvic lymph node dissection 17 weeks after initial presentation. The depth of invasion was 2.2 mm, restricted to the inner third of the cervical wall, and there was no lymphovascular space invasion in the surgical specimen. Surgical margins, parametria, and lymph nodes were all negative for adenocarcinoma. This tumour was also found to be estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor (ER/PR) positive, again unusual for cervical adenocarcinoma. P16 was strongly positive and HPV DNA studies were also positive for human papilloma virus 18. The patient received adjuvant external beam radiotherapy to the pelvis and currently remains in remission.
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.