ReviewInternational journal of clinical oncology2026
Advances in endometrial cancer screening: a comprehensive review of current methods and emerging technologies.
Review in International journal of clinical oncology, 2026. 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.
- Cultural, Societal, and Behavioral Contributors to Delays in Seeking Care for Postmenopausal Bleeding Among Disaggregated Populations of Black Women.International journal of environmental research and public 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endometrial cancer represents a major global health concern, with rising incidence particularly in developed countries despite declining mortality rates. This comprehensive review examines the evolution of endometrial cancer screening techniques, encompassing traditional methods, emerging technologies, and integrated approaches. Traditional screening methods including transvaginal ultrasound and hysteroscopy demonstrate varying diagnostic capabilities. Hysteroscopy combined with endometrial biopsy exhibits superior diagnostic accuracy with sensitivity ranging from 62.5 to 100% and specificity from 67.8 to 98.9%. Recent advances in molecular diagnostics show promising potential for non-invasive screening, with DNA methylation analysis achieving sensitivity of 91.8% and specificity of 95.5% when utilizing specific gene panels. Cell-based screening methods including liquid-based cytology and immunocytochemistry provide additional diagnostic pathways, demonstrating sensitivity of 84% and specificity of 98%. Digital image analysis integrated with deep learning technologies enables molecular subtype prediction from histopathological images without requiring expensive sequencing. Combination screening approaches, particularly integrating molecular diagnostics with traditional imaging, demonstrate enhanced diagnostic performance while potentially reducing costs through decreased unnecessary procedures. Molecular testing carries broader implications beyond individual patients, as detection of germline mutations such as Lynch syndrome enables cascade genetic screening benefiting family members through early detection and surveillance programs. While universal screening remains cost-prohibitive for asymptomatic populations, evidence strongly supports personalized screening strategies based on individual risk factors including obesity, diabetes, and hereditary cancer syndromes. Future developments will likely emphasize integrated approaches combining molecular diagnostics with traditional methods to optimize diagnostic accuracy, accessibility, and cost-effectiveness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41385140What 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.