ArticleGynecologic oncology reports2026
Prognostic and therapeutic implications of clinical-radiologic discrepancy in parametrial invasion prior to primary radical hysterectomy in cervical cancer.
Article in Gynecologic oncology reports, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: This study evaluates the prognostic and therapeutic implications of clinical-radiologic discrepancy in parametrial invasion of cervical cancer prior to radical hysterectomy. We compared patients with radiological presence but clinical absence of parametrial invasion (discrepancy group) to those without radiologic and clinical suspicion of parametrial invasion (consensus group). Methods: Women with International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (2009) stage IA-IIA cervical cancer, diagnosed between 2009 and 2017, who underwent magnetic resonance imaging prior to radical hysterectomy were retrospectively selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox proportional hazards were used for survival and logistic regression for risk of adjuvant therapy and toxicity. Results: Of 886 patients included, 87 (10%) had clinical-radiologic parametrial invasion discrepancy. Patients with discrepancy were more likely to have poor prognostic factors (i.e., a larger tumor, increased depth of invasion, lymphovascular space invasion, nodal metastases and positive resection margins) than those without. The 5-year disease-free and overall survival rates were lower in the discrepancy (74% and 82%) than in the consensus group (86% and 92%). However, after confounder adjustments, disease-free and overall survival were not affected by clinical-radiologic discrepancy. Patients with discrepancy in parametrial invasion were more likely to receive adjuvant therapy (54% vs 23%) and experience therapy-related toxicity (44% vs 29%). Conclusion: Clinical-radiologic discrepancy of parametrial invasion occurs in approximately 10% of patients and is associated with poor prognostic factors and increased likelihood of adjuvant therapy and toxicity. This highlights the importance of addressing these factors in treatment counselling for either primary chemoradiotherapy or surgery.
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.