ArticleScience progress
Association of regional lymph node resection with survival in patients with locally advanced-stage cervical cancer: A retrospective SEER-based cohort study.
Article in Science progress. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
ObjectiveThis study aimed to validate the prognostic discriminatory power of the revised International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2018 staging system and to evaluate the association between regional lymph node resection (RLNR) and survival in cervical cancer (CC) patients who underwent RLNR followed by chemotherapy and radiotherapy.MethodsIn this retrospective cohort study utilizing the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (2000-2018), patients were categorized into early-stage (IA/IB1-IB2/IIA1) and locally advanced-stage (IB3/IIA2-IIB/III/IVA) groups. Survival outcomes were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier, univariate and multivariate Cox regression (including time-dependent), and year-of-diagnosis stratified analyses, applied to crude, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW)-weighted, and propensity score matching (PSM)-matched models.ResultsThe FIGO 2018 system revealed significant survival differences between IB1 vs IB2 and IIIC1 vs IIIA/IIIB (all p < 0.001). In early-stage patients, RLNR conferred no significant survival benefit. However, in locally advanced-stage patients, RLNR with primary surgery was associated with better survival than RLNR alone. In the cohort without primary surgery, RLNR alone was consistently identified as a prognostic factor versus non-surgery across all three analytical models (IPTW as primary, PSM as sensitivity; all p<0.001). The hazard ratios for RLNR alone versus non-surgery were all below 1.000, and year-of-diagnosis stratified analyses further supported this protective association, with consistently directional estimates.ConclusionThis study suggested the prognostic value of the FIGO 2018 staging system and hypothesized that RLNR is a prognostic factor for better survival compared with chemotherapy and radiotherapy alone in locally advanced-stage CC, although the limitations of a retrospective study must be acknowledged.
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.