ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Invisible cervical cancers on MRI: Can the type of histology (SCC versus non-SCC) influence surgical planning?
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Invisible cervical cancers on MRI can indicate less invasive surgery. Cervical cancers consist of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and non-SCC, each with different long-term outcomes. It is still unclear if surgical planning should be changed according to the histologic type of cervical cancer when it is not visible on MRI. Purpose: The purpose of the study was to determine if surgical planning for cervical cancer that is not visible on MRI is influenced by the histologic type. Materials and methods: Between January 2007 and December 2016, 155 women had Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage 1B1 cervical cancer that was not visible on preoperative MRI. They underwent radical hysterectomies and pelvic lymph node dissections. Among them, 88 and 67 were histologically diagnosed with SCC and non-SCC, respectively. The size of the residual tumor, depth of stromal invasion, parametrial invasion, vaginal invasion, lymphovascular invasion, and lymph node metastasis were compared between these patients using the t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, Chi-squared test, or Fisher's exact test. The recurrence-free and overall 10-year survival rates were compared between the groups by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results: The mean sizes of residual tumors were 8.4 ± 10.4 mm in the SCC group and 12.5 ± 11.9 mm in the non-SCC group (p = 0.024). The mean depth of stromal invasion in the SCC group was 12.4 ± 21.2% (0%-100%), whereas that in the non-SCC group was 22.4 ± 24.4 (0%-93%) (p = 0.016). However, there was no difference in parametrial or vaginal invasion, lymphovascular invasion, or lymph node metastasis (p = 0.504-1.000). The recurrence-free and overall 10-year survival rates were 98.9% (87/88) and 95.5% (64/67) (p = 0.246), and 96.6% (85/88) and 95.5% (64/67) (p = 0.872), respectively. Conclusions: The non-SCC group tends to have larger residual tumors and a greater depth of stromal invasion than the SCC group, even though neither is visible on MRI. Therefore, meticulous care is necessary for performing parametrectomy in patients with non-SCC cervical cancer.
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.