ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute2025
Trends in uterine cancer incidence and mortality: insights from a natural history model.
Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Redefining the Treatment Landscape of Advanced Endometrial Cancer in the Era of Immunotherapy and Precision Oncology.Cancers · 2026Review
- Cardiotoxicity associated with anticancer therapies for gynecological tumors.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- High BMI-attributable female-specific cancers: a comprehensive analysis of the global disease burden and trends from 1990 to 2021 and projections to 2040.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUterine cancer incidence and mortality are increasing, with concomitant disparities in outcomes between racial groups. Natural history modeling can evaluate risk factors, predict future trends, and simulate approaches to reducing mortality and disparities.
methodsWe designed a natural history model of uterine cancer using a multistage clonal expansion design. The model is informed by National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, National Health Examination Survey, age, time period, birth cohort, and birth certificate data on reproductive histories and body mass index (BMI). We fit and calibrated the model to Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data by race and ethnicity as well as histologic subgroup. We projected future incidence and estimated the degree of contribution of BMI, reproductive history, and competing hysterectomy to excess uterine cancer incidence.
resultsThe model accurately replicated Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results incidence for endometrioid, nonendometrioid, and sarcoma subgroups for non-Hispanic Black and non-Hispanic White patients. For endometrioid, nonendometrioid, and sarcomas, BMI-attributable risks are greater for non-Hispanic White than for non-Hispanic Black patients; reproductive history-attributable risks are greater for non-Hispanic Black patients. Between 2018 and 2050, endometrioid incidence is projected to rise by 64.9% in non-Hispanic Black individuals and17.5% in non-Hispanic White individuals; the projected rise for the nonendometrioid subgroup is 41.4% in non-Hispanic Black individuals and 22.5% in non-Hispanic White individuals; the sarcoma incidence projected increase is 36% in non-Hispanic Black individuals and 29.2% in non-Hispanic White individuals.
conclusionsUterine cancer risk is substantially explained by reproductive history and BMI, with differences observed between non-Hispanic Black and non-Hispanic White individuals and future projections indicating perpetuation of disparities. Lower rates of hysterectomy and rising obesity rates will likely contribute to continued increases in uterine cancer incidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.