ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Minimally invasive versus open surgery in uterine serous carcinoma: impact on recurrence and survival in a multicenter cohort.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Background: Uterine serous carcinoma (USC) is a highly aggressive subtype of endometrial cancer, characterized by high recurrence rates and poor prognosis. While minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is commonly used in endometrial cancer treatment, its oncologic safety in high-risk USC remains unclear. This study aimed to compare survival outcomes between MIS and open surgery in patients with USC. Methods: In this multicenter retrospective cohort study, 176 patients with USC who underwent primary surgical treatment were included (MIS: 53 [30.1%], open: 123 [69.9%]). Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), while Cox regression identified independent prognostic factors. Results: The median follow-up was 78 months (95% CI: 68.3-87.7). Patients in the MIS group experienced a higher recurrence rate (49.1% vs. 31.7%) and lower 5-year PFS (49.7% vs. 68.3%, P = 0.017), although 5-year OS was comparable between groups (69.7% vs. 77.4%, P = 0.219). Multivariate analysis confirmed that MIS as an independent predictor of poorer PFS (HR = 2.29, 95% CI: 1.31-4.01, P = 0.004). In contrast, adjuvant therapy significantly improved PFS (HR = 0.28, 95% CI: 0.13-0.60, P = 0.001). Hypertension was also associated with decreased OS (HR = 2.06, 95% CI: 1.11-3.81, P = 0.022). Conclusions: MIS may be associated with an increased risk of recurrence and reduced PFS in USC patients, while adjuvant therapy remains critical for improving survival outcomes.
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.