ArticleCancer diagnosis & prognosis
Prognostic Factors of Cervical Adenocarcinoma With Positive Pelvic Lymph Node Metastases Without Preoperative Lymph Node Enlargement Treated With Radical Hysterectomy.
Article in Cancer diagnosis & prognosis. 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.
- The differences of pelvic lymph node metastasis between squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma in early-stage cervical cancer patients undergoing radical surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy: a large cohort study.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimPelvic lymph node (LN) metastases are found histopathologically after radical hysterectomy (RH) in some cases of cervical adenocarcinoma with no enlarged LNs on preoperatively. The aim was to clarify whether LN metastasis is a prognostic factor in these patients, and whether any postoperative therapy is advisable. PATIENTS AND
methodsSixty-one patients with stage I-II cervical adenocarcinoma [International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology (FIGO) 2008] with no enlarged pelvic LNs on preoperative imaging evaluation who underwent RH at our institution were retrospectively examined for clinicopathological, treatment, and prognosis-related factors.
resultsThe median age was 47 years. FIGO stages were IB1 in 44 patients, IB2 in 10, IIA in 4, and IIB in 3. Seventeen patients (27.9%) had positive pelvic LNs. The multivariate analysis for both overall (OS) and disease-free (DFS) survival showed only pelvic LN metastasis was an independent prognostic factor. In a multivariate analysis of LN-positive cases, multiple LN metastases was an independent prognostic factor for poorer DFS. OS rates were 100%, 83.3%, and 30.0%, and DFS rates were 85.5%, 83.3%, and 12.5% for patients with no LN metastasis, single metastasis, and multiple metastases, respectively, showing a significant difference. Eight recurrences were observed in 10 patients with multiple node-positive disease, and six (75%) had an intrapelvic recurrence.
conclusionAmong patients who underwent RH for cervical adenocarcinoma with no preoperative enlarged LN and positive pelvic LNs confirmed postoperatively, multiple positive pelvic LNs are an independent poor prognostic factor. Because pelvic recurrence is common, concurrent chemoradiotherapy, possibly using paclitaxel and cisplatin, should be considered as adjuvant therapy.
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.