SynthesisWomen's health (London, England)
Predictive models for lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer: A systematic review and bibliometric analysis.
Synthesis in Women's health (London, England). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A novel nomogram incorporating preoperative systemic inflammatory response index and clinicopathological parameters for predicting lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Implementation of a Personalized Risk Model for Lymph Node Metastasis in Endometrial Carcinoma: Healthcare Providers' Perspectives on Use, Barriers, and Facilitators.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Targeted Metabolomic Serum Analysis of Patients with High and Low Risk of Endometrial Cancer Recurrence and Positive and Negative Lymph Node Status.Metabolites · 2025Article
- Predictive modeling for metastasis in oncology: current methods and future directions.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Review
- Tumor Volume Index as a Predictor of Pelvic Lymph Node Metastasis in Low-Risk Endometrial Cancer.Cureus · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLymph node metastasis is associated with a poorer prognosis in endometrial cancer.
objectiveThe objective was to synthesize and critically appraise existing predictive models for lymph node metastasis risk stratification in endometrial cancer.
designThis study is a systematic review. DATA SOURCES AND
methodsWe searched the Web of Science for articles reporting models predicting lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer, with a systematic review and bibliometric analysis conducted based upon which. Risk of bias was assessed by the Prediction model Risk Of BiAS assessment Tool (PROBAST).
resultsA total of 64 articles were included in the systematic review, published between 2010 and 2023. The most common articles were "development only." Traditional clinicopathological parameters remained the mainstream in models, for example, serum tumor marker, myometrial invasion and tumor grade. Also, models based upon gene-signatures, radiomics and digital histopathological images exhibited an acceptable self-reported performance. The most frequently validated models were the Mayo criteria, which reached a negative predictive value of 97.1%-98.2%. Substantial variability and inconsistency were observed through PROBAST, indicating significant between-study heterogeneity. A further bibliometric analysis revealed a relatively weak link between authors and organizations on models predicting lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer.
conclusionA number of predictive models for lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer have been developed. Although some exhibited promising performance as they demonstrated adequate to good discrimination, few models can currently be recommended for clinical practice due to lack of independent validation, high risk of bias and low consistency in measured predictors. Collaborations between authors, organizations and countries were weak. Model updating, external validation and collaborative research are urgently needed. REGISTRATION: None.
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.