ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024
Mass resection as a candidate treatment for uterine PEComas of uncertain malignant potential: a case report and literature review.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pancreatic Perivascular Epithelioid Cell Tumor: A Case Report and Literature Review.Surgical case reports · 2026Article
- Fertility-sparing management of perivascular epithelioid cell tumors: A case report and literature review.Case reports in women's health · 2025Article
- Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Perivascular epithelioid cell tumours (PEComas) occurring in the uterus are rare, with surgery being the most recommended primary treatment for malignant cases. This study aims to provide clinical guidance on the clinicopathological features and appropriate treatment options for patients with uterine PEComas of uncertain malignant potential. Cases: This case series summarises the clinical courses of 13 patients diagnosed with uterine PEComas of uncertain malignant potential, including clinical and pathological data as well as their outcomes. We identified one case at our hospital, and data for the other 12 cases were extracted from the PubMed database. The 13 patients were aged 9-75 years, with tumour sizes ranging from 1 to 21 cm, and follow-up times ranging from 2 to 71 months. The most common signs and symptoms included abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) and abdominal pain. Most of the patients (11/13) were managed surgically without any chemotherapy or radiation therapy. Except for the patients who were lost to follow-up, 11 patients were free of any recurrence or metastasis at their last follow-up. Patients with group A tumours (abundant HMB45 expression) had a longer disease-free survival than those with group B tumours. Conclusions: Surgery alone may be appropriate for uterine PEComas of uncertain malignant potential. Surgical treatment plans should consider the patient's age, fertility requirements, and personal preferences. Mass resection is a viable treatment option for fertility preservation in reproductive-age patients.
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.