MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract B033: A Comparative Study of Cervical Cancer Treatment Outcomes Between Reproductive-Aged and Post-Menopausal Women in a Tertiary Hospital in Bangladesh.

2025· article· en· W4417201952 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Farzana Sultana

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCervical cancerStage (stratigraphy)ChemotherapyCancerBreast cancerHysterectomyCancer treatment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Cervical cancer is the second most prevalent cancer among females, following breast cancer, accounting for 13.3% of cases, whereas breast cancer accounts for 18% (WHO, 2022, version 11). The mortality rate of cervical cancer is around 5%, with post-menopausal patients being the most frequently affected group. Older patients tend to present at more advanced stages of the disease, leading to poorer treatment outcomes compared to those in the reproductive age group. This study aims to compare the treatment outcomes between reproductive-aged women and post-menopausal women. Methodology: Data were collected from Chittagong Health Point Hospital Ltd in Bangladesh, spanning from September 2019 to May 2023, focusing on cervical cancer treatment outcomes, including hysterectomy followed by chemotherapy and radiotherapy, with follow-ups at 3- and 6-months post-treatment. Results: A total of 35 patient records were analyzed. Of these, 15 (42.85%) were under 45 years old (reproductive age group), and 20 (57.15%) were over 50 years old (post-menopausal group). Most younger patients (73.33%) were diagnosed at an early stage (1A-1B1), while 4 out of 15 (26.66%) were diagnosed at a locally advanced stage (1B2-4A). After treatment, 93.33% of the younger patients showed positive prognoses. At the 3-month follow-up, two patients (13.33%) were found to have stage 1 cancer and underwent further chemotherapy and radiotherapy, achieving remission by the 6-month follow-up. One patient (6.67%) passed away during treatment. Among post-menopausal women, 65% (13 out of 20) were diagnosed at a locally advanced stage, with only 7 patients (53.85%) fully recovering by the 6-month follow-up. Four patients (20%) presented with advanced stage (4B) cancer and showed poor outcomes. Only three patients (15%) were diagnosed at an early stage, with relatively better prognoses. Notably, 35% (7 out of 20) refused to continue treatment, and 3 patients (15%) died during their treatment. Conclusion: The data indicate that younger patients are more likely to be diagnosed early, resulting in significantly better prognoses compared to their older counterparts. Citation Format: Farzana Sultana. A Comparative Study of Cervical Cancer Treatment Outcomes Between Reproductive-Aged and Post-Menopausal Women in a Tertiary Hospital in Bangladesh. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference in Cancer Research: The Rise in Early-Onset Cancers—Knowledge Gaps and Research Opportunities; 2025 Dec 10-13; Montreal, QC, Canada. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2025;31(23_Suppl):Abstract nr B033.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.183
GPT teacher head0.543
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Cancer Research→Same topicCervical Cancer and HPV Research→French-language works237,207→