Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40186836›Full record

ReviewCurrent treatment options in oncology2025

Review of Bone Metastasis in Gynecologic Malignancies: Evaluation and Treatment.

Miller Singleton, Kevin Tam, Ashley Weiner, Leslie H Clark

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current treatment options in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Miller SingletonDivision of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Houpt Physicians Office Building, B103, Campus Box 7572, 170 Manning Drive, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA. miller.singleton@unchealth.unc.edu.
Kevin TamDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
Ashley WeinerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
Leslie H ClarkDivision of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Houpt Physicians Office Building, B103, Campus Box 7572, 170 Manning Drive, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

opinion statementMetastatic bone disease (MBD) is a significant source of morbidity and mortality in cancer patients with solid tumors, including those with gynecologic malignancies. Infiltration of tumor cells within the bone microenvironment disrupts bone homeostasis and leads to osteoblastic, osteolytic, or mixed bone lesions. Greater than two thirds of those with MBD experience cancer-induced bone pain (CIBP) and one to two-thirds will develop a skeletal-related event (SRE). Various pharmacologic, surgical, and radiation treatments exist for the palliation of bone metastases and the prevention of SREs. It is paramount to understand the diagnostic evaluation and evidence-based treatment paradigms of bone metastases to decrease healthcare utilization, alleviate financial burden, mitigate disability, and improve quality of life.

Indexed as

Bone NeoplasmsGenital Neoplasms, FemaleCombined Modality TherapyDisease ManagementFemaleHumansQuality of LifeTreatment OutcomeBisphosphonatesBone metastasisGynecologic cancerRadiationSkeletal-related events

Identifiers

PMID40186836

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.