ArticleBMC women's health2025
The primary surgery improved the survival of FIGO stage IIIC1 cervical cancer with T1b-T2a tumors.
Article in BMC women's health, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionConcurrent chemoradiation is the preferred treatment recommendation for stage IIIC1 cervical cancer. Radical surgery is the alternative treatment for this population without parametrial invasion. Approximately 85% of newly diagnosed cases occur in developing countries where brachytherapy facilities and expertise are lacking. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of different primary treatment modality (surgery vs. radiation) in this population.
methodsThis is a retrospective cohort study that included patients registered in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2022. Patients who were diagnosed with stage IIIC1 cervical cancer without parametrial invasion were identified and further stratified into two groups based on the primary treatment modality (surgery or radiation). One-to-one propensity score matching was performed to balance the bias of baseline characteristics between the two groups. The primary outcomes are overall survival (OS) and cause-specific survival (CSS).
resultsOf 2176 patients included, 1690 patients underwent primary surgery (group A) and 486 patients underwent primary radiation (group B). Compared to group B, patients who received surgery as primary treatment had a lower ratio of squamous carcinoma and larger tumor size. After one-to-one matching, no differences were found between the two groups on baseline variables. Compared to group B, patients who received surgery as primary treatment were associated with an increased 5-year OS (73.97% vs. 67.55%, HR 0.749[95% CI: 0.594-0.945], p = 0.0147) and CSS (79.20% vs. 69.96%, HR 0.668[95% CI: 0.516-0.866], p = 0.0023).
conclusionPrimary surgery may be a more favorable selection for patients with stage IIIC1 cervical cancer without parametrial invasion for improved survival benefits.
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.