ArticleBMC cancer2024
Treatment for locally resectable stage IIIC1r cervical cancer: surgery or chemoradiotherapy?
Article in BMC cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 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
- Reliability study of MRI in detecting lymph node metastasis of cervical cancer: a multi-center retrospective study result analysis.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence-assisted noninvasive preoperative prediction of lymph nodes metastasis in cervical cancer through a clinical-imaging feature combined strategy.Frontiers in oncology · 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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to compare the therapeutic value and treatment-related complications of radical hysterectomy with those of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) for locally resectable (T1a2-T2a1) stage IIIC1r cervical cancer.
methodsA total of 213 patients with locally resectable stage IIIC1r cervical cancer who had been treated at Jiangxi Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital between January 2013 and December 2021 were included in the study and classified into two groups: surgery (148 patients) and CCRT (65 patients). The disease-free survival (DFS) rate, overall survival (OS) rate, side effects, and economic costs associated with the two groups were compared.
results43.9% (65/148) patients in the surgical group had no pelvic lymph node metastasis, and 21of them did not require supplementary treatment after surgery due to a low risk of postoperative pathology. The median follow-up time was 46 months (range: 7-108 months). The five-year DFS and OS rates of the surgery group were slightly higher than those of the CCRT group (80.7% vs. 75.1% and 81.6% vs. 80.6%, respectively; p > 0.05). The incidences of grade III-IV gastrointestinal reactions in the surgery and CCRT groups were 5.5% and 9.2%, respectively (p = 0.332). Grade III-IV myelosuppression was identified in 27.6% of the surgery group and 26.2% of the CCRT group (p = 0.836). The per capita treatment cost was higher for the surgery group than for the CCRT group (RMB 123, 918.6 0 vs. RMB 101, 880.90, p = 0.001).
conclusionThe therapeutic effects and treatment-related complications of hysterectomy and CCRT are equivalent in patients with locally resectable stage IIIC1r cervical cancer, but surgery can provide accurate lymph node information and benefit patients with unnecessary radiation.
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.