Publications

Detailed Information

Identification of a patient group at low risk for parametrial invasion in early-stage cervical cancer

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorJung, Dae-Chul-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Mi-Kyung-
dc.contributor.authorKang, Sokbom-
dc.contributor.authorSeo, Sang-Soo-
dc.contributor.authorPark, Noh-Hyun-
dc.contributor.authorPark, Sang-Yoon-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Jae Weon-
dc.contributor.authorKang, Soon-Beom-
dc.contributor.authorSong, Yong-Sang-
dc.contributor.authorCho, Jeong Yeon-
dc.date.accessioned2012-06-04T06:42:08Z-
dc.date.available2012-06-04T06:42:08Z-
dc.date.issued2010-12-
dc.identifier.citationGYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY; Vol.119 3; 426-430ko_KR
dc.identifier.issn0090-8258-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10371/76797-
dc.description.abstractAim. Using parameters obtained from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), we constructed a prediction model for parametrial invasion (PMI) of cervical cancer and validated the model in different sets of patients. Patients and methods. Retrospectively, 251 patients with cervical cancer stages IA2-IIA, who had received a radical hysterectomy, were assigned to training and validation cohorts. After the development of the scoring index using logistic coefficient analysis, the performance of the prediction model was assessed using independent validation sets. Results. In the training cohort (n=167), multivariate analysis indicated that the patient`s stage, the cephalocaudal tumor diameter measured by MRI, and finding of PMI as obtained by MRI were independent predictors of PMI (P=0.010, <0.001, and 0.020, respectively). These predictors were internally validated by a rigorous bootstrapping method with statistical significance. The scoring index was created based on logistic coefficients, and the maximal score yielding a negative likelihood ratio less than 0.05 was selected as a cutoff. The cutoff was translated into the following criteria identifying a very low-risk group for PMI: (1) FIGO stage IA2-IBI, (2) no MRI finding suggesting PM!, and (3) cephalocaudal tumor diameter less than 1.0 cm by MRI. The negative predictive value (NPV) was 98.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]=91.7% to 100%). In the external validation cohort (n=84), the NPV was 100% (95% CI=90% to 100%). Conclusion. The current prediction model showed reliable performance for the identification of patients at low risk for PMI. It may be useful for stratification of patients and evaluation of results in future trials. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.ko_KR
dc.language.isoenko_KR
dc.publisherACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCEko_KR
dc.subjectCervical cancerko_KR
dc.subjectSurgeryko_KR
dc.subjectPrognostic factorko_KR
dc.subjectParametrial invasionko_KR
dc.subjectParametriumko_KR
dc.subjectMagnetic resonance imagingko_KR
dc.titleIdentification of a patient group at low risk for parametrial invasion in early-stage cervical cancerko_KR
dc.typeArticleko_KR
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor정대철-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor김미경-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor강석봄-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor서상수-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor조정연-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor박노현-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor송용상-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor박상윤-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor강순범-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor김재원-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ygyno.2010.08.005-
dc.citation.journaltitleGYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY-
dc.description.citedreferenceFrumovitz M, 2009, OBSTET GYNECOL, V114, P93-
dc.description.citedreferencePluta M, 2009, GYNECOL ONCOL, V113, P181, DOI 10.1016/j.ygyno.2009.02.005-
dc.description.citedreferenceHori M, 2009, RADIOLOGY, V251, P96, DOI 10.1148/radiol.2511081265-
dc.description.citedreferencevan Meurs H, 2009, INT J GYNECOL CANCER, V19, P21, DOI 10.1111/IGC.0b013e318197f3ef-
dc.description.citedreferenceRob L, 2008, GYNECOL ONCOL, V111, pS116, DOI 10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.07.021-
dc.description.citedreferenceStrnad P, 2008, GYNECOL ONCOL, V109, P280, DOI 10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.02.004-
dc.description.citedreferenceBIDUS MA, 2008, AM J OBSTET GYNECOL, V199, pNI412-
dc.description.citedreferenceLEE YK, 2008, J GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLO, V19, P108, DOI 10.3802/jgo.2008.19.2.108-
dc.description.citedreferenceCHOI SC, 2008, J GYNECOL ONCOL, V19, P205-
dc.description.citedreferenceWright JD, 2007, CANCER, V110, P1281, DOI 10.1002/cncr22899-
dc.description.citedreferenceKoyama T, 2007, EUR RADIOL, V17, P2009, DOI 10.1007/s00330-006-0555-0-
dc.description.citedreferenceSahdev A, 2007, INT J GYNECOL CANCER, V17, P629, DOI 10.1111/j.1525-1438.2007.00829.x-
dc.description.citedreferenceStegeman M, 2007, GYNECOL ONCOL, V105, P475, DOI 10.1016/j.ygyno.2007.01.016-
dc.description.citedreferenceChung HH, 2007, JPN J CLIN ONCOL, V37, P370, DOI 10.1093/jjco/hym036-
dc.description.citedreferenceRob L, 2007, INT J GYNECOL CANCER, V17, P304, DOI 10.1111/j.1525-1438.2007.00758.x-
dc.description.citedreferenceJena A, 2005, BRIT J RADIOL, V78, P1075, DOI 10.1259/bjr/36116150-
dc.description.citedreferenceNarayan K, 2005, INT J GYNECOL CANCER, V15, P573-
dc.description.citedreferenceSonoda Y, 2004, GYNECOL ONCOL, V95, P534, DOI 10.1016/j.ygyno.2004.07.060-
dc.description.citedreferenceGadducci A, 2003, EUR J GYNAECOL ONCOL, V24, P513-
dc.description.citedreferenceBIPAT G, 2003, GYNECOL ONCOL, V91, P59-
dc.description.citedreferenceKodama J, 2002, EUR J OBSTET GYN R B, V101, P192-
dc.description.citedreferenceCovens A, 2002, GYNECOL ONCOL, V84, P145, DOI 10.1006/gyno.2001.6493-
dc.description.citedreferenceNicolet V, 2000, RADIOGRAPHICS, V20, P1539-
dc.description.citedreferenceBenedetti-Panici P, 2000, CANCER, V88, P2267-
dc.description.citedreferenceKINNEY WK, 1995, GYNECOL ONCOL, V57, P3-
dc.description.citedreferenceDELGADO G, 1989, GYNECOL ONCOL, V35, P314-
dc.description.citedreferenceHRICAK H, 1988, RADIOLOGY, V166, P623-
dc.description.tc1-
Appears in Collections:
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

Altmetrics

Item View & Download Count

  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Share