ArticleCurrent medical science2023
Primary Treatment for Clinically Early Cervical Cancer with Lymph Node Metastasis: Radical Surgery or Radiation?
Article in Current medical science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Survival outcomes in IIIC cervical cancer by treatment strategies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical Outcomes Between Completion and Abandonment of Radical Hysterectomy in Early-Stage Cervical Cancer Patients with Lymph Nodal Involvement Identified During Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Should all cervical cancer patients with positive lymph node receive definitive radiotherapy: a population-based comparative study.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2025Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare survival outcomes between primary radical surgery and primary radiation in early cervical cancer.
methodsPatient information was extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and Results database. Patients diagnosed with early cervical cancer of stage T1a, T1b, and T2a (American Joint Committee on Cancer, 7th edition) from 1998 to 2015 were included in this study after propensity score matching. Overall survival (OS) was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method.
resultsAmong the 4964 patients included in the study, 1080 patients were identified as having positive lymph nodes (N1), and 3884 patients were identified as having negative lymph nodes (N0). Patients with primary surgery had significantly longer 5-year OS than those with primary radiotherapy in both the N1 group (P<0.001) and N0 group (P<0.001). In the subgroup analysis, similar results were found in patients with positive lymph nodes of stage T1a (100.0% vs. 61.1%), T1b (84.1% vs. 64.3%), and T2a (74.4% vs. 63.8%). In patients with T1b1 and T2a1, primary surgery resulted in longer OS than primary radiation, but not in patients with T1b2 and T2a2. In multivariate analysis, the primary treatment was identified as an independent prognostic factor in both N1 and N0 patients (HR
conclusionIn early cervical cancer stage T1a, T1b1, and T2a1, primary surgery may result in longer OS than primary radiation for patients with and without lymph node metastasis.
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.