MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317518152 · doi:10.3390/medicina59020192

Assessment of Salvage Surgery in Persistent Cervical Cancer after Definitive Radiochemotherapy: A Systematic Review

2023· review· en· W4317518152 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Carmine Conte, Luigi Della Corte, Silvia Pelligra, Giuseppe Bifulco, Biagio Abate, Gaetano Riemma, Marco Palumbo, Stefano Cianci, Alfredo Ercoli

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicina · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurgerySystematic reviewSalvage therapyMEDLINECervical cancerRadiological weaponHysterectomyObservational studyCancerInternal medicineChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Objectives: The standard treatment approach in locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) is exclusive concurrent chemoradiation therapy (RTCT). The risk of local residual disease after six months from RTCT is about 20–30%. It is directly related to relapse risk and poor survival, such as in patients with recurrent cervical cancer. This systematic review aims to describe studies investigating salvage surgery’s role in persistent/recurrent disease in LACC patients who underwent definitive RTCT. Materials and Methods: Studies were eligible for inclusion when patients had LACC with radiologically suspected or histologically confirmed residual disease after definitive RTCT, diagnosed with post-treatment radiological workup or biopsy. Information on complications after salvage surgery and survival outcomes had to be reported. The methodological quality of the articles was independently assessed by two researchers with the Newcastle–Ottawa scale. Following the recommendations in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, we systematically searched the PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, Medline, and Medscape databases in May 2022. We applied no language or geographical restrictions but considered only English studies. We included studies containing data about postoperative complications and survival outcomes. Results: Eleven studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and all were retrospective observational studies. A total of 601 patients were analyzed concerning the salvage surgery in LACC patients for persistent/recurrent disease after RTCT treatment. Overall, 369 (61.4%) and 232 (38.6%) patients underwent a salvage hysterectomy (extrafascial or radical) and pelvic exenteration (anterior, posterior, or total), respectively. Four hundred and thirty-nine (73%) patients had histologically confirmed the residual disease in the salvage surgical specimen, and 109 patients had positive margins (overall range 0–43% of the patients). The risk of severe (grade ≥ 3) postoperative complications after salvage surgery is 29.8% (range 5–57.5%). After a median follow-up of 38 months, the overall RR was about 32% with an overall death rate of 40% after hysterectomy or pelvic exenteration with or without lymphadenectomy. Conclusions: There is heterogeneity between the studies both in their design and results, therefore the effect of salvage surgery on survival and recurrence cannot be adequately estimated. Future homogeneous studies with an appropriately selected population are needed to analyze the safety and efficacy of salvage hysterectomy or pelvic exenteration in patients with residual tumors after definitive RTCT.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.103
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicinaSame topicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207