ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Impact of radiotherapy on the prognosis in uterine cervical adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis and retrospective cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The treatment of uterine cervical adenocarcinoma (UAC) has always been a clinical challenge. The study investigated the effect of radiotherapy (RT) on survival outcomes and tumor recurrence in patients with UAC and further explored potential candidates who may benefit from RT. Methods: We systematically searched the literature on the effects of RT on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) for UAC and performed a meta-analysis. The impact of RT on the cancer-specific survival (CSS) and DFS were retrospectively analyzed with the UAC cases from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database and at our center. A total of 4382 patients from the SEER database after propensity score matching and 315 cases at our center were retrieved, respectively. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis were employed to investigate the effect of RT on the prognosis. Subgroup analysis was conducted to identify populations that may benefit from RT. Results: The meta-analysis revealed that RT didn't improve DFS (OR: 0.72, 95% CI 0.34 - 1.52) and OS (OR: 0.44, 95% CI 0.18 - 1.07), in FIGO stage IB-IIA patients with UAC. The retrospective study found that RT improved CSS (HR: 0.87, 95% CI 0.78 - 0.9), but not DFS (HR: 2.62, 95% CI 0.96 - 6.8). Those with stage pT2-4, pN1, pM1, primary tumor size > 39 mm, grade III-IV, or unresected primary tumors had superior CSS when treated with RT than those without RT. In terms of DFS, the cases staged as pT1-2, pN0, pM0, with tumor > 19 mm, graded III-IV, resection of primary tumor, no parametrial involvement, and with or without lymph-vascular stromal invasion had worse outcomes after receiving RT. Conclusion: The UAC patients with more advanced, larger primary tumors, higher histological grade, and unresected primary tumors are likely to benefit from RT, which need to be substantiated by prospective studies.
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.