ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Advanced endometrial cancer in the gulf cooperation council: a modified-Delphi consensus on unmet needs, molecular testing, and treatment sequencing.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Advanced endometrial cancer (EC), including primary unresectable stage III-IV, metastatic, and recurrent disease, is an increasing clinical challenge in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). Rising cardiometabolic risk, heterogeneous referral pathways, variable access to molecular diagnostics, and inconsistent uptake of biomarker-driven therapy contribute to variation in care. This consensus aimed to identify GCC-specific unmet needs and develop regionally adapted recommendations for the diagnosis and management of advanced or recurrent EC. Methods: A structured, modified Delphi process was conducted with 12 experts from Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. Candidate statements were developed from a targeted PubMed literature review and evaluated through 2 rounds of anonymous voting using predefined consensus thresholds. A consensus was considered when voting reached a 75%-89% agreement, a strong consensus was defined as ≥90% agreement, and no consensus was defined as <75% agreement. Results: Consensus was achieved on 31 statements. The panel identified key regional gaps, including increasing EC burden, limited GCC-specific molecular and real-world data, inconsistent implementation of molecular testing, variable access to immunotherapy and targeted therapies, and delays in referral to specialized centers. GCC experts recommended routine molecular classification at diagnosis, standardized diagnostic work-up and staging aligned with FIGO 2023, multidisciplinary tumor board review before any clinical decision, carboplatin-paclitaxel plus immunotherapy as the preferred first-line standard for eligible patients, biomarker-informed treatment selection in the post-platinum setting, and early integration of supportive and palliative care. Additional priorities included clinician education, registry development, patient-reported outcomes, and implementation tools to improve real-world quality of care. Final recommendations were classified as international guideline-aligned, GCC-specific adaptation, or expert-opinion recommendation. Conclusion: This consensus provides a practical, GCC-adapted framework to support more consistent, biomarker-informed, and multidisciplinary management of advanced or recurrent EC across the region.
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.