ReviewIn vivo (Athens, Greece)
Identification of Predictive Factors for Post-operative Recurrence and Clinical Outcomes of Primary Vulvar Extramammary Paget Disease.
Review in In vivo (Athens, Greece). 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.
- Review
- Ovarian Metastasis from Human Papillomavirus-associated Usual-type Endocervical Adenocarcinoma: Clinicopathological Characteristics for Distinguishing from Primary Ovarian Mucinous or Endometrioid Tumor.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
- Clinicopathological Significance of Claudin-6 Immunoreactivity in Low-grade, Early-stage Endometrioid Endometrial Carcinoma.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimData regarding the clinicopathological factors predicting recurrence and prognosis in patients with vulvar extramammary Paget disease (VPD) are limited. Therefore, we aimed to identify predictive factors for recurrence and outcomes in patients with VPD. PATIENTS AND
methodsForty-five patients with VPD were included in this study. We reviewed electronic medical records and pathology slides to collect clinicopathological information.
resultsEighteen cases (40.0%) had resection margin (RM) involvement. Twelve patients (26.7%) received adjuvant radiation therapy (RT). Ten patients (22.2%) experienced recurrence. The recurrence rate was higher in patients who underwent wide local excision or simple vulvectomy than in those who underwent radical vulvectomy. Positive RM involvement was a significant and independent predictive factor for worse recurrence-free survival (RFS). The overall survival rate of patients who received adjuvant RT was significantly higher than that of those who underwent surgery alone.
conclusionA positive RM involvement independently predicted worse RFS. The recurrence rate was significantly associated with the type of surgical procedure performed. Additionally, adjuvant RT can improve the prognosis of patients with VPD.
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.