ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2025
Clinicopathological characterization and prognostic risk modeling in patients with synchronous ovarian and endometrial cancer: a population-based study.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 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.
- Patient Selection Metrics and Efficacy of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
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: Ovarian cancer (OC) and endometrial cancer (EC) represent two prevalent tumors within the female reproductive system, characterized by high incidence rates. Nonetheless, the clinicopathological features of synchronous endometrial and ovarian cancer (SEOC) have received limited research attention. The present study endeavors to identify prognostic factors for SEOC through a comparative analysis of survival outcomes between SEOC and single-primary OC patients. Method: Clinical data (2010-2015) were retrieved from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Patients were diagnosed with OC as their first primary tumor and EC as their second primary tumor. Survival outcomes were estimated utilizing Kaplan-Meier survival curves and subsequently compared via the log-rank test. Using Cox proportional hazards models to identify independent prognostic factors. The prognostic model predicted malignancy-specific mortality, evaluated by c-index, calibration, receiver operating characteristic (ROC), and area under the ROC curve (AUC). Results: A total of 447 SEOC patients and 20 769 single-primary OC patients were enrolled in this study. The dual-primary group exhibited more survival benefits compared to the single-primary group. This study identified key independent prognostic factors for SEOC, including age, marital status, histological type, tumor size, SEER stage, and AJCC (American Joint Committee on Cancer) stage. The predictive model demonstrated strong discriminatory capability, with AUC values of 0.880, 0.872, and 0.872 for predicting 1-, 2-, and 3-year specific mortality. Calibration curves confirmed a high level of concordance between observed and predicted outcomes, underscoring the model's reliability. Conclusion: These findings provide critical insights into improving prognosis evaluation and formulating individualized treatment strategies for SEOC patients.
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.