Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36557063›Full record

Observational studyMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)2022

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Diagnosis and Management of Gynecological Cancer: A Single-Center Analysis.

Dora Antunes, Lisandra Mendonça, Ângela Melo, Sónia Gonçalves, Francisco Nogueira Martins, Nuno Nogueira Martins

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. COVID-19 mortality risk among women with ovarian cancer: a matched case-control study.Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologicas · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Dora AntunesDepartment of Gynecology, Centro Hospitalar e Universitário de Coimbra, Praceta Prof. Mota Pinto, 3004-561 Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-9536-8243
Lisandra MendonçaDepartment of Gynecology, Centro Hospitalar Tondela-Viseu, Avenida Rei Dom Duarte, 3504-509 Viseu, Portugal.
Ângela MeloDepartment of Gynecology, Centro Hospitalar Tondela-Viseu, Avenida Rei Dom Duarte, 3504-509 Viseu, Portugal.
Sónia GonçalvesDepartment of Gynecology, Centro Hospitalar Tondela-Viseu, Avenida Rei Dom Duarte, 3504-509 Viseu, Portugal.
Francisco Nogueira MartinsDepartment of Gynecology, Centro Hospitalar Tondela-Viseu, Avenida Rei Dom Duarte, 3504-509 Viseu, Portugal.
Nuno Nogueira MartinsDepartment of Gynecology, Centro Hospitalar Tondela-Viseu, Avenida Rei Dom Duarte, 3504-509 Viseu, Portugal.
Centro Hospitalar Tondela-Viseu · PTHospitais da Universidade de Coimbra · PT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic impacted health systems worldwide, particularly cancer care. Because the actual implications of these changes on gynecological oncology healthcare are still unclear, we aim to evaluate the impact of this pandemic on the diagnosis and management of gynecological cancer. Materials and Methods: This is a single-center retrospective observational study, including patients diagnosed with gynecological malignancies between January 2019 and December 2021. Patients were included into three groups based on the timing of cancer diagnosis: pre-pandemic (2019), pandemic with high restrictions (2020) and pandemic recovery (2021). Results: Overall, 234 patients were diagnosed with gynecological cancer during the period of study. A decrease in the number of newly diagnosed cervical cancers and other rare tumors (leiomyosarcoma, invasive hydatidiform mole) was apparent in 2020. Some aggressive histological types of endometrial and ovarian cancer were more commonly diagnosed in the pandemic recovery group (p < 0.05), although no differences were demonstrated concerning tumor staging in all gynecological cancers. The median time between the first multidisciplinary team meeting and the treatment initiation was higher after the COVID-19 pandemic in endometrial cancer (23.0 vs. 34.0 vs. 36.0 days, p < 0.05). Patients with ovarian cancer were more frequently proposed for neoadjuvant therapy in 2020 compared to the other periods (33.3% vs. 55.0% vs. 10.0% p < 0.05). A significant reduction in the laparoscopic approach was observed during 2020 in endometrial cancer (32.1% vs. 14.3% vs. 36.4%, p < 0.05). No significant differences were registered regarding median hospitalization days or intra- and post-operative complications between these periods. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on the diagnosis and management of most gynecological malignancies, namely, on time to first treatment, chosen oncological therapies and surgical approaches. These results suggest important clinical and healthcare implications that should be addressed in future prospective studies.

Indexed as

COVID-19Endometrial NeoplasmsGenital Neoplasms, FemaleOvarian NeoplasmsFemaleHumansPandemicsPregnancySARS-CoV-2cancer stagingchemotherapyCOVID-19 pandemicdiagnosisgynecologic neoplasmsgynecologic surgeryradiotherapytreatment

Identifiers

PMID36557063
PMCPMC9787860
OpenAlexW4312210324

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.