ArticlePloS one2022
Uterine carcinosarcoma: A 10-year single institution experience.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advanced Uterine Carcinosarcoma With Fatal Suspected Pulmonary Embolism in a Resource-Limited Setting: A Rare Case Report.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
- Paraneoplastic Pulmonary Embolism Revealing Metastatic Uterine Carcinosarcoma.Case reports in oncological medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Overall survival after progression in patients with uterine carcinosarcoma: a single-center retrospective cohort study.Obstetrics & gynecology science · 2025Article
- The discovery of uterine carcinosarcoma through a sister mary joseph's nodule: A case report.Radiology case reports · 2025Article
- Surgical staging identifies occult metastases in over 50% of uterine-confined carcinosarcoma.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Comparative analysis of imaging and pathological features in diagnosis of endometrial carcinosarcoma based on multimodal MRI.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2025Article
- Uterine Carcinosarcoma (UCS): A Literature Review and Survival Analysis from a Retrospective Cohort Study.Cancers · 2024Article
- Strategic multidisciplinary management of pelvic carcinosarcoma: Emphasizing advanced diagnostic imaging and staged surgical interventions.Radiology case reports · 2024Article
- Malignant mixed mullerian tumors: a SEER database review of rurality and treatment modalities on disease outcome.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Uterine carcinosarcoma with intestinal involvement: A case report and literature review.Medicine internationalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to determine 5-year progression-free and overall survival in patients with uterine carcinosarcoma, to determine clinical and surgical-pathologic features, to recognize patterns of recurrence and to identify prognostic factors influencing progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).
designThis was a single institution, retrospective 10-year review of patients treated at Tygerberg Hospital in South Africa with pathologically confirmed uterine carcinosarcoma.
methodsA total of 61 patients were studied. Demographic, clinicopathological, treatment and outcome information were obtained. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine the effects of variables on PFS and OS.
resultsEighteen patients (29%) presented as FIGO stage I disease, 5 patients (8%) as stage II, 16 patients (26%) as stage III and 22 patients (36%) as stage IV disease. Fifty of the 61 patients (82%) had surgery. Five-year PFS and 5-year OS were 17.3% (CI 8.9%-27.9%) and 19.7% (CI 10.6%-30.8%), respectively. Seventeen patients presented with recurrence of which 5 (29.4%) were local and 12 (70.6%) were outside the pelvis. In the univariate analysis, tumour diameter ≥ 100mm (HR 4.57; 95% CI 1.59-13.19; p-value 0.005) was associated with 5-year PFS and in univariate analysis of OS, a positive family history (HR 0.42; 95% CI 0.18-0.99; p-value 0.047), receiving a full staging operation (HR 0.37; 95% CI 0.18-0.78; p-value 0.008) and receiving any other modality of treatment, with or without surgery, (HR 0.48; 95% CI 0.27-0.85; p-value 0.012) were associated with better survival. An abnormal cervical smear (HR 2.4; 95% CI 1.03-5.6; p-value 0.041), late-stage disease (HR 3.48; 95% CI 1.79-6.77; p-value < 0.001), presence of residual tumour (HR 3.66; 95% CI 1.90-7.02; p-value < 0.001), myometrial invasion more than 50% (HR 2.29; 95% CI 1.15-4.57; p-value 0.019), cervical involvement (HR 3.38; 95% CI 1.64-6.97; p-value 0.001) and adnexal involvement (HR 3.21; 95% CI 1.56-6.63; p-value 0.002) were associated with a higher risk of death. In the multivariate analysis, full staging operation was associated with a risk of progression of disease (HR 3.49; 95% CI 1.17-10.41; p-value 0.025). Advanced stage (HR 4.2; 95% CI 2.09-8.44; p-value < 0.001) was associated with a higher risk of death. Any other modality of treatment (HR 0.28; 95% CI 0.15-0.53; p-value < 0.001) and full staging laparotomy (HR 0.27; 95% CI 0.12-0.59; p-value 0.001) was a protective factor for death.
conclusionsCarcinosarcoma is an aggressive cancer with poorer survival in this specific cohort than has been described in other contemporary cohorts. Biological or genetic factors are a possible explanation for lower overall survival in this population. Although it is also possible that later diagnosis and poor access to health care contribute to poorer survival. Most recurrences occur outside of the pelvis. Full staging surgery (including pelvic lymphadenectomy) and additional use of other modalities (either for radical or palliative intent) improve survival.
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.