Surgery versus definitive radiotherapy in the management of stage I-II small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the cervix: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the cervix (SCNECC) is a rare malignancy with poor prognosis. Optimal management of stage I-II disease remains uncertain, with guidelines variably recommending primary surgery or definitive radiotherapy. This study aimed to compare overall survival (OS) in patients with stage I-II SCNECC treated with primary surgery versus definitive radiotherapy through a systematic review and meta-analysis of the current literature. Methods Medline and Embase were searched for English-language studies reporting OS for stage I-II SCNECC treated with either primary surgery or definitive radiotherapy. Studies with ≥5 patients per treatment group were included. Hazard ratios (HR) for OS were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was assessed with I 2 . The impact of including stage IIB patients was evaluated using a Likelihood Ratio Test comparing Cox proportional hazards models. Results Of 621 unique records, five studies met the inclusion criteria, encompassing 650 patients treated for stage I-II SCNECC between 1987 and 2012 in 38 hospitals across three countries. Among these patients, 474 underwent primary surgery and 176 received definitive radiotherapy. Of all patients, 84 % received chemotherapy. Median follow-up ranged from 31 to 83 months, and median OS ranged from 21 to 111 months. The pooled HR for OS favoured primary surgery compared to definitive radiotherapy (HR 0.53; 95 % CI 0.31–0.91; p = 0.021). Inter-study heterogeneity was substantial (I 2 = 64 %, p = 0.024). Inclusion of stage IIB patients did not significantly affect the overall HR ( p = 0.914). Conclusions In stage I-II SCNECC, primary surgery is associated with longer OS compared to definitive radiotherapy. While findings are limited by the retrospective nature of included studies and potential selection bias, these results support consideration of surgical consultation for eligible patients as part of a multidisciplinary decision-making process. Prospective studies and inter-institutional collaboration are urgently needed to define optimal treatment strategies in this rare malignancy.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.019 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".