ArticleClinical & experimental metastasis2026
Brachytherapy-based local radiotherapy improves survival in newly diagnosed metastatic cervical cancer.
Article in Clinical & experimental metastasis, 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
Abstract
To explore if adding local radiotherapy to systemic treatment could enhance the survival of newly-diagnosed stage IVB cervical cancer (CC) patients and compare the impact of different radiotherapy strategies on survival. We included patients diagnosed from 2004 to 2022. Local radiotherapy strategies included external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and/or brachytherapy (BT). Multivariable Cox regression models were used to assess the link between treatment modality and survival. A total of 4257 patients were involved, all receiving chemotherapy. There were 1280 (30.1%), 2,089 (49.1%), 759 (17.8%), and 129 (3.0%) patients who received chemotherapy alone, chemotherapy plus EBRT, chemotherapy plus EBRT and BT, and chemotherapy plus BT. Using the chemotherapy plus EBRT and BT group as a reference, those on chemotherapy alone had a higher risk of death (cancer-specific survival [CSS]: hazard ratio [HR] 2.037, P < 0.001; overall survival [OS]: HR of 1.992, P < 0.001). Similarly, chemotherapy plus EBRT patients also had an increased risk (CSS: HR 1.576, P < 0.001; OS: HR 1.582, P < 0.001). However, there were no significant differences in CSS (HR 1.082, P = 0.504) and OS (HR 1.083, P = 0.476) between the chemotherapy plus BT group and the reference group. Sensitivity analyses indicated that chemotherapy plus BT and chemotherapy plus EBRT and BT improved survival across subgroups. Our study reveals that adding any form of radiotherapy to chemotherapy for stage IVB CC patients improves survival. BT, alone or combined with EBRT, offers the best outcomes, while EBRT alone has a limited advantage over chemotherapy alone. BT-based local treatment may serve as an effective local treatment option for stage IVB CC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42891728What 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.