ArticleCureus2024
Patterns of Care, Prognostic Factors, and Survival Outcomes for Patients of Cervical Carcinoma: A Study From North India.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Survival beyond treatment: patterns and determinants of disease-free survival in cervical cancer at a tertiary care center in India.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
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
objectivesCervical cancer is the second most common malignancy among Indian women after breast cancer. This study was undertaken to determine the pattern of care, long-term survival outcomes, and prognostic factors for cervical cancer patients treated at a tertiary care cancer centre in North India.
methodsTen-year data was retrieved for 435 stage I-IVA carcinoma cervix patients treated between 2009 and 2019. A sociodemographic profile of the patients, treatment methods, and conditions at follow-up were obtained. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Data was analyzed using Stata 15.1 (StataCorp LLC, College Station, Texas, United States). Qualitative variables were shown as frequencies/percentages, and quantitative as means/standard deviations. Key endpoints were overall, disease-free, and locoregional survival. Kaplan-Meier curves represented survival. Cox regression models assessed parameter influence. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05, with hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals reported.
resultsFourteen (3.2%) patients underwent surgery; of the patients who underwent surgery, except two patients who underwent surgery alone, all patients received external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) followed by EBRT (26.4%) or brachytherapy boost (72.4%). Seventy-one per cent of patients received more than four cycles of concurrent chemotherapy. The median overall survival (OS) was 42.04 (0.25-171) months, and the median disease-free survival (DFS) was 32.85 months (1-171) months. The median overall survival was 58.76%, and the two-year and five-year overall survival percentages were 81.34% and 64.52%, respectively. The median time to locoregional relapse and distant metastasis was 35 (1-171) and 37.6 (1-171) months, respectively. Bilateral parametrial involvement was a predictor of poor OS (p = 0.039), DFS (p = 0.039), and locoregional failure-free survival (LFFS) (p = 0.020). Age less than 50 years was a predictor of worse DFS (p = 0.034) and LFFS (p = 0.005), while paraaortic nodal involvement was a predictor of worse DFS (p = 0.045). Grade III tumours neared numerical significance (p = 0.051) for worse distant metastases-free survival.
conclusionBilateral parametrial involvement was the most significant factor for OS, DFS, and LFFS. Paraaortic nodal involvement predicted poor DFS and young age was associated with poor DFS and LFFS.
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.