ArticleLa Radiologia medica2025
Ladies project: large database in endometrial cancers for a personalized treatment.
Article in La Radiologia medica, 2025. 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.
- Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
30 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare Italian use with current international guidelines and to evaluate oncological outcomes and toxicity patterns of adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) for endometrial cancer (EC) in Italian women. MATERIALS AND
methodsTo conduct a retrospective multicentre Italian study a large database was set up. Inclusion criteria were: accrual between 2010 and 2020, treatment with surgery, post-operative external beam RT (EBRT) and/or interventional radiotherapy (IRT) associated or not with adjuvant chemotherapy. Oncological outcomes, acute and late toxicities were analysed according to RT schedule and risk group.
resultsA total of 1848 patients, from 16 Italian RT centres were enrolled (median age 65 years, range 27-88). All patients received post-operative RT associated with chemotherapy in 31%. Patients were stratified on the basis of standard risk factors (Bosse et al. in Eur J Cancer 51:1742-50, 2015). After merging intermediate and high-intermediate risk classes into one intermediate group and including advanced and oligometastatic disease in the high-risk group, the low-risk group encompassed 124 patients, the intermediate-risk 1140, and the high risk 576. No low-risk patient developed local relapse (LR). Multivariate analysis showed that intermediate risk patients had a 2.5-fold increased risk of LR if treated with IRT alone vs EBRT-IRT boost. RT schedule did not impact significantly on LR in high risk patients. All acute toxicity parameters were highest in patients who received EBRT with simultaneous integrated boost (EBRT-SIB) and lowest in patients who received only IRT (p < 0.0001). Late toxicity was highest patients who received EBRT-SIB and lowest in those who were given EBRT with sequential boost (p < 0.0001).
conclusionsThis retrospective study showed that Italian administration of adjuvant RT for EC is in accordance with current international guidelines. IRT alone for low-risk patients and EBRT associated with vaginal IRT remain standard adjuvant approaches for EC.
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.