ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024
Effect of different treatment modalities on the prognosis of patients with stage IIIC cervical cancer.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
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
Objective: To compare the effects of different treatments on the prognosis of patients with stage IIIC cervical cancer and to identify the main influencing factors to predict the outcomes of patients. Methods: In this study, a total of 1763 patients with stage IIIC cervical cancer from 2010-2015 were retrospectively analyzed, and these patients were divided into the radical radiotherapy ± chemotherapy group (877 patients) and the radical surgery + radiotherapy ± chemotherapy group (886 patients) according to the treatment methods. The survival differences between the two groups were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method. Unifactorial and multifactorial COX analyses screened the clinical factors affecting the prognosis. The nomogram was constructed, and the accuracy of the line graph was verified using the C-index, calibration, and ROC (receiver operator characteristic curve, ROC). Results: Age, race, T-stage, pathologic type, mass size, whether or not they underwent surgery, and whether or not they received radiotherapy were independent factors affecting Overall Survival (OS). For all patients with TxN1M0 in cervical cancer stage IIIC, radical synchronized radiotherapy was better than the radical surgery group (p<0.0001). After comparing the tumor size breakdown, it could be found that in the T1N1M0, T2N1M0, and T3N1M0 groups, none of the OS in the surgical group achieved an improvement in OS compared with that in the non-surgical group (p>0.05). Conclusion: In patients with stage IIIC cervical cancer, OS did not improve in the radical surgery group compared with the radical simultaneous radiotherapy group. And surgery did not benefit patients' survival regardless of tumor size.
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.