Suppr超能文献

IIIC期宫颈癌不同治疗策略的生存结局:一项系统评价和Meta分析

Survival outcomes in IIIC cervical cancer by treatment strategies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

作者信息

Li Yi-Xiang, Cao Si-Yu, Fan Yu, Zhang Yu-Fei, Li Jin-Ke

机构信息

Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, West China Second Hospital, Sichuan University, No. 20, Sect. 3, Renminnan Road, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, People's Republic of China.

Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children, Sichuan University, Ministry of Education, Chengdu, People's Republic of China.

出版信息

BMC Cancer. 2025 Aug 20;25(1):1340. doi: 10.1186/s12885-025-14697-6.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare survival outcomes of patients with stage IIIC cervical cancer based on different treatment strategies.

METHOD

Studies reporting survival of cervical cancer patients in IIIC stage were identified through systematic searches of the PubMed, Web of Science, CNKI and Wanfang data, and the hazard ratios (HRs) of survival outcomes were calculated based on different treatment strategies: radical hysterectomy (RH) group versus radical chemoradiotherapy (RCRT) group. Heterogeneity in the pooled data was assessed using the I² statistic.

RESULTS

We meta-analyzed data from nine studies involving 6,793 patients, who were assigned to different treatment strategies: RH group, 3840 patients (56.5%) and RCRT group, 2,953 patients (43.5%). High heterogeneity was observed across studies. Compared to the RCRT group, the RH group showed similar overall survival (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.58-1.04, I² =83.4%), disease-free survival (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.23-2.04, I² =88.3%) and progression-free survival (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.10-4.36, I² =91.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests no statistically significant survival difference between RCRT and RH in IIIC cervical cancer. These findings don't contradict the NCCN recommendation, but the high heterogeneity and wide confidence intervals warrant cautious interpretation due to potential variations in patient populations or treatment protocols.

摘要

目的

比较采用不同治疗策略的IIIC期宫颈癌患者的生存结局。

方法

通过系统检索PubMed、Web of Science、中国知网和万方数据,找出报告IIIC期宫颈癌患者生存情况的研究,并根据不同治疗策略计算生存结局的风险比(HR):根治性子宫切除术(RH)组与根治性放化疗(RCRT)组。使用I²统计量评估汇总数据的异质性。

结果

我们对9项研究的数据进行了荟萃分析,这些研究涉及6793例患者,他们被分配到不同的治疗策略组:RH组3840例患者(56.5%),RCRT组2953例患者(43.5%)。各研究间观察到高度异质性。与RCRT组相比,RH组的总生存期(HR 0.77,95%CI 0.58 - 1.04,I² = 83.4%)、无病生存期(HR 0.68,95%CI 0.23 - 2.04,I² = 88.3%)和无进展生存期(HR 0.67,95%CI 0.10 - 4.36,I² = 91.4%)相似。

结论

目前的证据表明,IIIC期宫颈癌患者接受RCRT和RH治疗后的生存差异无统计学意义。这些发现与美国国立综合癌症网络(NCCN)的建议并不矛盾,但由于患者人群或治疗方案可能存在差异,高度异质性和较宽的置信区间需要谨慎解读。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验