Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 281

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Simple versus Radical Hysterectomy in Women with Low-Risk Cervical Cancer

Open access
Plante, Marie, Kwon, Janice S., Ferguson, Sarah, Samouëlian, Vanessa, Ferron, Gwenael, Maulard, Amandine, de Kroon, Cor, Van Driel, Willemien, Tidy, John, Williamson, Karin, Mahner, Sven, Kommoss, Stefan, Goffin, Frederic, Tamussino, Karl, Eyjólfsdóttir, Brynhildur, Kim, Jae-Weon, Gleeson, Noreen, Brotto, Lori, Tu, Dongsheng, Shepherd, Lois E.·2024·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Retrospective data suggest that the incidence of parametrial infiltration is low in patients with early-stage low-risk cervical cancer, which raises questions regarding the need for radical hysterectomy in these patients. However, data from large, randomized trials comparing outcomes of radical and simple hysterectomy are lacking. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial comparing radical hysterectomy with simple hysterectomy including lymph-node assessment in patients with low-risk cervical cancer (lesions of ≤2 cm with limited stromal invasion). The primary outcome was cancer recurrence in the pelvic area (pelvic recurrence) at 3 years. The prespecified noninferiority margin for the between-group difference in pelvic recurrence at 3 years was 4 percentage points. RESULTS: according to the 2009 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) criteria (91.7%), that had squamous-cell histologic features (61.7%), and that were grade 1 or 2 (59.3%). With a median follow-up time of 4.5 years, the incidence of pelvic recurrence at 3 years was 2.17% in the radical hysterectomy group and 2.52% in the simple hysterectomy group (an absolute difference of 0.35 percentage points; 90% confidence interval, -1.62 to 2.32). Results were similar in a per-protocol analysis. The incidence of urinary incontinence was lower in the simple hysterectomy group than in the radical hysterectomy group within 4 weeks after surgery (2.4% vs. 5.5%; P = 0.048) and beyond 4 weeks (4.7% vs. 11.0%; P = 0.003). The incidence of urinary retention in the simple hysterectomy group was also lower than that in the radical hysterectomy group within 4 weeks after surgery (0.6% vs. 11.0%; P<0.001) and beyond 4 weeks (0.6% vs. 9.9%; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with low-risk cervical cancer, simple hysterectomy was not inferior to radical hysterectomy with respect to the 3-year incidence of pelvic recurrence and was associated with a lower risk of urinary incontinence or retention. (Funded by the Canadian Cancer Society and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01658930.).

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmoa2308900

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 281

Metadata

Authors
Plante, M., Kwon, J. S., Ferguson, S., Samouëlian, V., Ferron, G., Maulard, A., de Kroon, C., Van Driel, W., Tidy, J., Williamson, K., Mahner, S., Kommoss, S., Goffin, F., Tamussino, K., Eyjólfsdóttir, B., Kim, J.-W., Gleeson, N., Brotto, L., Tu, D., & Shepherd, L. E.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2024-02-29
Volume
390
Issue
9
Pages
819-829
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W4392229557
Cited by
281
References
6
FWCI
134.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Simple versus Radical Hysterectomy in Women with Low-Risk Cervical Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa2308900
The paper
Plante, M., Kwon, J. S., Ferguson, S., Samouëlian, V., Ferron, G., Maulard, A., de Kroon, C., Van Driel, W., Tidy, J., Williamson, K., Mahner, S., Kommoss, S., Goffin, F., Tamussino, K., Eyjólfsdóttir, B., Kim, J.-W., Gleeson, N., Brotto, L., Tu, D., & Shepherd, L. E. (2024). Simple versus Radical Hysterectomy in Women with Low-Risk Cervical Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa2308900

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.