ArticleGynecologic oncology reports2023
A novel predictor for the use of concurrent chemotherapy in early-stage cervical cancer with intermediate-risk factors.
Article in Gynecologic oncology reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
- Article
- Efficacy and safety of chemotherapy as monotherapy in patients with recurrent intermediate/high-risk factors following radical hysterectomy for stage IB-IIA cervical cancer: a single-center retrospective analysis.BMC women's health · 2024Article
- Efficacy and safety of consolidation chemotherapy after adjuvant therapy in stage IB-IIA cervical cancer patients with risk factors: a retrospective single-center study.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
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
Objective: For early-stage cervical cancer patients experiencing radical surgery, postoperative radiotherapy was recommended for patients with a combination of intermediate-risk factors. However, there was no consensus on whether to administer concurrent chemotherapy. The aim of the study was to confirm the clinical value of the controlling nutritional status (CONUT) score in guiding the use of concurrent chemotherapy during postoperative radiotherapy. Methods: A total of 969 patients with FIGO stage IB-IIA cervical cancer were retrospectively analyzed. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed to compare disease-free survival (DFS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) rates between different group. A Cox proportional hazards regression test was used to conduct multivariate analyses. Results: For the patients in the high CONUT group (≥3), the addition of concurrent chemotherapy had better 5-year DFS (91.2 % vs. 72.8 %, P = 0.005) and CSS (93.8 % vs. 77.4 %, P = 0.013) than those without it. Meanwhile, the patients with concurrent chemotherapy had less rate of locoregional recurrence (8.5 % vs 16.7 %, P = 0.034) and distant metastases (11.7 % vs 30.4 %, P = 0.015). The multivariate analysis showed that concurrent chemotherapy was detected to be a factor significantly associated with DFS (P = 0.011), local control (P = 0.041), distant metastasis (P = 0.005) and CSS (P = 0.023). For the patients in low CONUT group (<3), there was no difference in prognosis between patients. Conclusion: Pretreatment CONUT score may be a predictive factor for the use of concurrent chemotherapy in early-stage cervical cancer with intermediate-risk factors during postoperative radiotherapy, and it can be helpful to determine the adjuvant treatment scheme.
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.