ReviewFrontiers in oncology2024
Stage migration and survival outcomes in patients with cervical cancer at Stage IIIC according to the 2018 FIGO staging system: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review 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 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Survival outcomes in IIIC cervical cancer by treatment strategies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Post-CCRT pelvic lymph node size and pathological nodal involvement in cervical cancer.International journal of clinical oncology · 2026Article
- Associations of Social and Demographic Factors on the Outcomes of Ocular Melanoma and Other Adult Ocular Neoplasms in the United States: A Systematic Review.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2026Review
- Survival beyond treatment: patterns and determinants of disease-free survival in cervical cancer at a tertiary care center in India.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Pretreatment CRP-Albumin-Lymphocyte (CALLY) Index as a Prognostic Biomarker of Survival and Recurrence-Free Survival in Patients With Early-Stage Cervical Cancer After Radical Hysterectomy: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.Obstetrics and gynecology international · 2026Article
- The differences of pelvic lymph node metastasis between squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma in early-stage cervical cancer patients undergoing radical surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy: a large cohort study.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2026Article
- Efficacy of integrating surgical interventions with chemoradiotherapy in managing stage IIIC cervical cancer.American journal of translational research · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To summarize stage migration and survival outcomes in patients with cervical cancer at Stage IIIC according to the 2018 FIGO staging system, and to investigate prognostic factors influencing Stage IIIC1. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and Clinical Trials.gov were searched from inception to February 6, 2024. The analysis was conducted using STATA 16.0. Results: A total of 25 studies with 82954 cervical cancer patients were included in the analysis. The migration rates to FIGO 2018 Stage IIIC ranged from 18% to 37% for early-stage tumors (Stage IB to IIA) in FIGO 2009, and from 32% to 52% for advanced stage tumors (Stage IIB to IIIB). The overall survival (OS) for Stage IIIC1 is poorer compared to Stage IB1 (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.35-0.80, p=0.003) and Stage IB2 (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.43-0.85, p=0.004). It is comparable to Stage IB3, yet it shows better survival outcomes than Stages IIB (HR 2.91, 95% CI 1.01-8.39, p=0.047), IIIA (HR 1.96, 95% CI 1.78-2.17, p=0.000), and IIIB (HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.04-2.35, p=0.031). Tumors size ≥4cm (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.10-1.92, p=0.00), metastatic lymph node ≥ 3 (HR 2.21, 95% CI 1.56-3.15, p=0.000) and T stage are prognostic factors for OS of Stage IIIC1. Conclusions: The migration rates to FIGO 2018 Stage IIIC varied between 18% and 52% for patients initially classified under FIGO 2009 Stages IB1 to IIIB. The FIGO 2018 staging system underscores the pivotal role of lymph node metastasis in predicting prognosis and provides valuable insights into the distinct prognostic implications associated with different stages, particularly for early stages. For advanced stages, incorporation of tumor-related factors such as T stage might better elucidate survival differences and guide clinical treatment decisions. Protocol registration: CRD 42023451793.
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.