ArticleScientific reports2025
Impact of treatment modality on survival in FIGO stage IIB cervical cancer: a population-based propensity-score matched analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To investigate the impact of treatment modality on survival of International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IIB cervical cancer. Patients with FIGO stage IIB cervical cancer registered in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database between 1988 and 2015 were identified and grouped according to their treatment modalities. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to adjust the baseline characteristics. A total of 4718 stage IIB patients with eligible data were identified. Of them, 902 underwent surgery and 3816 received chemoradiotherapy alone. After PSM, 1208 patients were paired without baseline difference. Patients undergoing surgery (n = 604) had significantly improved overall survival (OS, 5-year rate: 68.0%, P = 0.007) and cancer-specific survival (CSS, 5-year rate: 70.4%, P = 0.007) compared with those receiving chemoradiotherapy alone (5-year rates: 59.9% for OS, 62.9% for CSS, n = 604). On multivariate analysis, treatment modality was an independent factor for both OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.334, P = 0.002) and CSS (HR = 1.369, P = 0.002). In subgroup analyses, surgery provided significantly better survival than chemoradiotherapy in subgroups with ≤ 4 cm squamous-cell carcinoma (P = 0.046 for OS, P = 0.020 for CSS, n = 143) and > 4 cm non-squamous-cell carcinoma (P = 0.010 for OS, P = 0.004 for CSS, n = 240). However, these differences were not observed in subgroups with > 4 cm squamous-cell carcinoma (P = 0.665 for OS, P = 0.816 for CSS, n = 523) or ≤ 4 cm non-squamous-cell carcinoma (P = 0.173 for OS, P = 0.293 for CSS, n = 30). In this population-based analysis, a surgery-based strategy was associated with improved survival compared to chemoradiation in patients with FIGO stage IIB cervical cancer. Exploratory subgroup analyses suggested that this benefit may vary by histology and tumor size.
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.