The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Prognostic Features of Surgical Stage I Uterine Carcinosarcoma
Abstract
Uterine carcinosarcomas (CSs) are aggressive neoplasms, with 5-year overall survival (OS) rates of less than 35%. They are customarily separated into types harboring either heterologous or homologous mesenchymal elements, but the prognostic significance of this finding is controversial. Our goal was to study clinicopathologic features of possible prognostic relevance in surgical stage I uterine CS. A retrospective clinical and histopathologic review was performed for all women diagnosed with surgical stage I uterine CS. These tumors were compared with stage I high-grade endometrial (HGEm) carcinomas for clinical outcomes. There were 42 cases of surgical stage I uterine CS identified between January 1990 and January 2004. The disease-free survival and OS rates for patients with stage I CS were significantly worse compared with stage I HGEm (P=0.001; P=0.01). The median disease-free survival for patients with heterologous CS was 15 months and had not been reached for women with homologous CS (P=0.001). The 3-year OS rates were 45% versus 93% in women with heterologous compared with homologous stage I CS (P<0.001). The 3-year OS rates for homologous CS and HGEm were both >90%. Homologous stage I CSs have survival outcomes that are similar to HGEm. This further supports the concept that homologous stage I CSs are carcinomas with sarcomatoid features, not sarcomas. More importantly, the presence of heterologous sarcomatous elements is a powerful negative prognostic factor in surgical stage I uterine CS.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Integrated Molecular Characterization of Uterine Carcinosarcoma
Cherniack, A. D., Shen, H., Walter, V., Stewart, C., Murray, B. A., Bowlby, R., Hu, X., Ling, S., Soslow, R. A., Broaddus, R. R., et al. (2017) · Cancer Cell · doi:10.1016/j.ccell.2017.02.010 · Cited by 434
Self-citationMurali, R., Davidson, B., Fadare, O., Carlson, J. A., Crum, C. P., Gilks, C. B., Irving, J. A., Malpica, A., Matias-Guiu, X., McCluggage, W. G., et al. (2019) · International Journal of Gynecological Pathology · doi:10.1097/pgp.0000000000000491 · Cited by 278
Self-citationTafe, L. J., Garg, K., Chew, I., Tornos, C., & Soslow, R. A. (2010) · Modern Pathology · doi:10.1038/modpathol.2010.41 · Cited by 261
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Ferguson, S. E., Tornos, C., Hummer, A., Barakat, R. R., & Soslow, R. A.
- Venue
- American Journal of Surgical Pathology
- Published
- 2007-11
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1653-1661
- ISSN
- 0147-5185 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2000826244
- Cited by
- 174
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 6.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
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.