ArticleActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2023
Rationality of FIGO 2018 IIIC restaging of cervical cancer according to local tumor size: A cohort study.
Article in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Survival outcomes in IIIC cervical cancer by treatment strategies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- Article
- Nodal status in predicting the outcome of treatment with definitive chemoradiation in patients with cervical cancer in FIGO IIIC1 and IIIC2 stages.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2026Article
- Stage Migration and Validity of the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2018 Staging System for Cervical Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study From a Tertiary Cancer Center in Nepal.Clinical Medicine Insights. Oncology · 2026Article
- 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
- Article
- Re-evaluating prognostic factors for cervical cancer with lymph node metastasis: a Japanese multicenter cohort study based on FIGO 2018.International journal of clinical oncology · 2025Article
- Efficacy of integrating surgical interventions with chemoradiotherapy in managing stage IIIC cervical cancer.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Establishment of a Novel Risk Stratification System Integrating Clinical and Pathological Parameters for Prognostication and Clinical Decision-Making in Early-Stage Cervical Cancer.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Stage migration and survival outcomes in patients with cervical cancer at Stage IIIC according to the 2018 FIGO staging system: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
- Reviewing FIGO 2018 cervical cancer staging.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2023Article
- Rationality of FIGO 2018 IIIC restaging of cervical cancer according to local tumor size: A cohort study.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2023Article
- Clinical Outcomes and Prognostic Factors in Stage III C Cervical Cancer Patients Treated with Radical Radiotherapy or Radiochemotherapy.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionFIGO 2018 IIIC remains controversial for the heterogeneity of its prognoses. To ensure a better management of cervical cancer patients in Stage IIIC, a revision of the FIGO IIIC version classification is required according to local tumor size. MATERIAL AND
methodsWe retrospectively enrolled cervical cancer patients of FIGO 2018 Stages I-IIIC who had undergone radical surgery or chemoradiotherapy. Based on the tumor factors from the Tumor Node Metastasis staging system, IIIC cases were divided into IIIC-T1, IIIC-T2a, IIIC-T2b, and IIIC-(T3a+T3b). Oncologcial outcomes of all stages were compared.
resultsA total of 63 926 cervical cancer cases were identified, among which 9452 fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in this study. Kaplan-Meier pairwise analysis showed that: the oncology outcomes of I and IIA were significantly better than of IIB, IIIA+IIIB, and IIIC; the oncology outcome of IIIC-(T1-T2b) was significantly better than of IIIA+IIIB and IIIC-(T3a+T3b); no significant difference was noted between IIB and IIIC-(T1-T2b), or IIIC-(T3a+T3b) and IIIA+IIIB. Multivariate analysis indicated that, compared with IIIC-T1, Stages T2a, T2b, IIIA+IIIB and IIIC-(T3a+T3b) were associated with a higher risk of death and recurrence/death. There was no significant difference in the risk of death or recurrence/death between patients with IIIC-(T1-T2b) and IIB. Also, compared with IIB, IIIC-(T3a+T3b) was associated with a higher risk of death and recurrence/death. No significant differences in the risk of death and recurrence/death were noted between IIIC-(T3a+T3b) and IIIA+IIIB.
conclusionsIn terms of oncology outcomes of the study, FIGO 2018 Stage IIIC of cervical cancer is unreasonable. Stages IIIC-T1, T2a, and T2b may be integrated as IIC, and it might be unnecessary for T3a/T3b cases to be subdivided by lymph node status.
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.