ArticleJAMA network open2025
Survival by Treatment Recommendation and Receipt Among Older Patients With Early-Stage Cervical Cancer.
Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Importance: Cervical cancer remains a substantial public health concern among older women, particularly those who are beyond the age of routine screening. Understanding the survival benefits of treating early-stage cervical cancer in this population is essential for optimizing care and improving outcomes. Objective: To analyze the survival outcomes based on the receipt of treatment and treatment recommendations among patients with early-stage cervical cancer aged 65 years and older. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study of patients aged 65 years and older with a first diagnosis of localized, microscopically confirmed invasive cervical cancer used data from 17 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cancer registries in the US from 2000 to 2020. Data were analyzed from May 2023 to January 2024. Exposure: Receipt of recommended treatment, specifically surgery and/or radiotherapy, as recorded in the SEER database. Treatment modalities were categorized based on recommendation status and actual receipt. Main Outcomes and Measures: Survival outcomes based on treatment recommendation and receipt status by treatment type expressed as (1) 5-year relative survival rates, (2) cervical cancer-specific mortality, estimated using competing risks models, and (3) adjusted hazard ratios (AHRs) calculated using Fine-Gray competing risk regression. Results: Among 2236 females included in the study, 66.3% (1482) were aged 65 to 74 years, 25.3% (565) were 75 to 84 years, and 8.4% (189) were aged 85 years or older. In the group aged 65 to 74 years, those who received surgery had significantly higher 5-year survival rates (91.2%, 95% CI, 88.4%-93.4%) compared with those not recommended for surgery (69.6%, 95% CI, 62.8%-75.4%) or those who were recommended but did not receive surgery (52.3%, 95% CI, 24.2%-74.3%). Similar patterns were observed in the group aged 75 to 84 years, in which receiving surgery was associated with higher survival rates (88.6%, 95% CI, 79.8%-93.7%). In multivariable analyses, receiving surgery (AHR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.16-0.50) and radiotherapy (AHR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.26-0.87) were significantly associated with lower cervical cancer-specific mortality compared with not receiving the recommended treatment. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, receipt of recommended treatment was associated with higher survival rates among older patients with early-stage cervical cancer. Addressing barriers to treatment adherence and improving early detection and preventive measures in this older population may enhance population health and reduce cervical cancer mortality in the aging population.
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.