ArticleBMC ophthalmology2024
Pregnancy and survival-related outcomes of uveal melanoma treated with brachytherapy in women of reproductive age.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- When two lives intersect: melanoma in pregnancy: mechanisms, risks, and management strategies.Contemporary oncology (Poznan, Poland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo examine if pregnancy affects the prognosis of uveal melanoma (UM) patients undergoing plaque brachytherapy (PBT) and to assess if PBT has any subsequent impact on pregnancy outcomes.
methodsA retrospective, single-center study was carried out at Beijing Tongren Hospital, focusing on women of childbearing age diagnosed with UM and treated with iodine-125 plaque brachytherapy. Both the outcomes of pregnancies and the health status of the fetuses were monitored. Survival analyses were conducted using the Kaplan-Meier method, with endpoints being metastasis and death.
resultsA total of 13 patients who had full-term pregnancies and 96 non-pregnant women matched by age and tumor size were included. The mean follow-up time was 67.0 ± 27.7 months (median:66.0 months, range:21.0 to 116.0 months). In the pregnant group, two patients developed metastases, one of whom died shortly after delivery; local recurrence of UM occurred in 2 patients after or during delivery, and 2 other patients developed secondary glaucoma due to radiation retinopathy. None of the other pregnant patients reported any signs of disease progression. In the control group, 18 metastasis cases including 12 deaths were documented. Pregnant patients and matched control subjects showed no statistical difference in both Metastasis-free survival (hazard ratio (HR): 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.15-2.86; P = 0.576) and overall survival (HR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.06-3.66; P = 0.464). All pregnant patients carried the pregnancy to term and delivered healthy children with no report of placental or infant metastases to date.
conclusionPregnancy does not appear to negatively impact the prognosis of UM patients undergoing PBT. PBT showed no observable detriment to maternal fertility and exhibited no teratogenic effects on the fetus. However, the long-term implications of PBT on pregnancy remain uncertain, necessitating additional, prolonged follow-up studies.
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.