ArticleAmerican journal of cancer research2026
Impact of laparoscopic versus open surgery on 5-year survival in patients with stage IA2-IB1 cervical cancer: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in American journal of cancer research, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Utilizing inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), this retrospective, multicenter study examined the association between laparoscopic versus open radical hysterectomy and 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with FIGO stage IA2-IB1 cervical cancer. A total of 840 patients who underwent surgery between January 2016 and January 2021 were recruited (laparoscopic group, N=512; open group, N=328). These patients were randomly assigned to a training cohort (N=529) and a validation cohort (N=311). In the training cohort, a propensity score model including 27 covariates was constructed, and IPTW achieved good covariate balance (all standardized mean difference <0.1). IPTW-weighted Cox regression analysis showed that, in comparison to open surgery, laparoscopic surgery was associated with worse DFS in both the training cohort (HR: 1.73, 95% CI: 1.25-2.40) and the validation cohort (HR: 3.80, 95% CI: 2.25-6.41). The findings were consistent in multivariable Cox analysis. For OS, Kaplan-Meier analysis suggested that laparoscopic surgery was associated with lower survival probability; however, after multivariable adjustment, this association was not statistically significant in the training cohort, while a similar unfavorable association was noted in the validation cohort. Subgroup analysis suggested a potential interaction between lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI) and surgical approach, with laparoscopic surgery showing worse outcomes in patients without LVSI. Alternative sensitivity analyses yielded consistent trends. Other independent prognostic factors for both DFS and OS included deep stromal invasion of at least 50%, positive LVSI, non-R0 margins, and lymph node metastasis. In summary, after adjustment, laparoscopic radical hysterectomy was associated with poorer DFS compared with open surgery, and the association with OS was less consistent. These findings should be interpreted with caution due to the observational design and lack of detailed characteristics regarding surgical techniques.
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.