Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38733417›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2024

FIGO 2023 endometrial staging: a leap of faith into the new "prognostic based' rather than "anatomical based" staging-too fast too furious??

Karthik Chandra Bassetty, Dimpy Begum, Debabrata Barmon, Upasana Baruah, Sakshi Gupta, Mahendra Kumar, Jyotiman Nath, Duncan Khanikar, Mouchumee Bhattacharyya, P S Roy

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06672341 (A Prospective, Open, Observational Clinical Study on Endometrial Cytology and Cervical Methylation Testing for Screening and Evaluating Fertility-Sparing Treatment in Endometrial Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06672341 not yet recruitingnot on this map

A Prospective, Open, Observational Clinical Study on Endometrial Cytology and Cervical Methylation Testing for Screening and Evaluating Fertility-Sparing Treatment in Endometrial Cancer

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorYulan RenRan2024 to 2026Enrolled200ConditionsEndometrial Cancer, Methylation, Cytology, Fertility PreservationArmsEndometrial Cytology Testing, Cervical Methylation Testing
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Karthik Chandra BassettyDr. Bhubaneswar Borooah Cancer Institute, Guwahati, Assam, India.
Dimpy BegumDr. Bhubaneswar Borooah Cancer Institute, Guwahati, Assam, India. drdimpyb@gmail.com.
Debabrata BarmonDr. Bhubaneswar Borooah Cancer Institute, Guwahati, Assam, India.
Upasana BaruahDr. Bhubaneswar Borooah Cancer Institute, Guwahati, Assam, India.
Sakshi GuptaDr. Bhubaneswar Borooah Cancer Institute, Guwahati, Assam, India.
Mahendra KumarDr. Bhubaneswar Borooah Cancer Institute, Guwahati, Assam, India.
Jyotiman NathDr. Bhubaneswar Borooah Cancer Institute, Guwahati, Assam, India.
Duncan KhanikarDr. Bhubaneswar Borooah Cancer Institute, Guwahati, Assam, India.
Mouchumee BhattacharyyaDr. Bhubaneswar Borooah Cancer Institute, Guwahati, Assam, India.
P S RoyDr. Bhubaneswar Borooah Cancer Institute, Guwahati, Assam, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2023 FIGO revised the endometrial cancer staging system after 13 years. There is a lacuna of data regarding the performance and practicality of the revised 2023 FIGO staging schema for endometrial cancer from Low Middle-Income Countries (LMIC).

objectiveTo estimate the shift of stage and adjuvant management of endometrial cancer based on the FIGO 2023 system compared to the FIGO 2009 system and assess the predictive potential of the FIGO 2023 system. MATERIAL AND

methodsA retrospective study was conducted from 1st January 2017 to 31st December 2022. All patients with endometrial cancer were staged according to the FIGO 2023 and FIGO 2009 staging system. Follow-up of patients was done to determine recurrence.

resultsA total of 152 patients were included. Aggressive histology was seen in 66 (45%) patients. Eighteen (11%) had subserosal involvement. Substantial LVSI was noted in 23 (15%) of patients. Twenty-four (47%) patients of FIGO 2009 Stage IA and 26 patients (63%) of FIGO 2009 Stage IB were upstaged. Eleven (50%) patients of FIGO 2009 Stage IIIA were down staged to IA3. Overall 23 patients (15%) had a shift of stage. Fifteen out of 152 patients (15%) would have had a possible risk stratification change which would imply 23 patients (15%) would have needed a more radical treatment. Molecular classification was done in 32 patients; however, only 2 patients could afford POLE testing. Kaplan-Meier curves showed significant PFS differences in FIGO 2009 Stage IB and Stage IIIA when restaged according to the FIGO 2023 system.

conclusionThe FIGO 2023 endometrial staging is a more robust prognosticator; however, the practicality of molecular classification in LMICs is still a distant dream.

Indexed as

Endometrial NeoplasmsNeoplasm StagingAdultAgedFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPrognosisRetrospective StudiesEndometrial cancerFIGO 2023LMICPrognosisStage shift

Identifiers

PMID38733417
PMCPMC11088549

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.