Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2022 Aug 22;8(8):CD010260.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010260.pub3.

Hysterectomy with radiotherapy or chemotherapy or both for women with locally advanced cervical cancer

Fani Kokka  1 , Andrew Bryant  2 , Adeola Olaitan  3 , Elly Brockbank  4 , Melanie Powell  5 , David Oram  6
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Hysterectomy with radiotherapy or chemotherapy or both for women with locally advanced cervical cancer

Fani Kokka et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: This is an update of the Cochrane Review published in Issue 4, 2015. Cervical cancer is one of the most frequent cause of death from gynaecological cancers worldwide. Many new cervical cancer cases in low-income countries present at an advanced stage. Standard care in Europe and the US for locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) is chemoradiotherapy. In low-income countries, with limited access to radiotherapy, LACC may be treated with chemotherapy and hysterectomy. It is not certain if this improves survival. It is important to assess the value of hysterectomy with radiotherapy or chemotherapy, or both, as an alternative.

Objectives: To determine whether hysterectomy, in addition to standard treatment with radiotherapy or chemotherapy, or both, in women with LACC (Stage IB2 to III) is safe and effective compared with standard treatment alone.

Search methods: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase via Ovid, LILACS, trial registries and the grey literature up to 3 February 2022.

Selection criteria: We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared treatments involving hysterectomy versus radiotherapy or chemotherapy, or both, in women with LACC International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) Stages IB2 to III.

Data collection and analysis: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Where possible, we synthesised overall (OS) and progression-free (PFS) or disease-free (DFS) survival in a meta-analysis using a random-effects model. Adverse events (AEs) were incompletely reported and we described the results of single trials in narrative form. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence.

Main results: From the searches we identified 968 studies. After deduplication, title and abstract screening, and full-text assessment, we included 11 RCTs (2683 women) of varying methodological quality. This update identified four new RCTs and three ongoing RCTs. The included studies compared: hysterectomy (simple or radical) with radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) versus radiotherapy alone or chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) alone or CCRT and brachytherapy. There is also one ongoing study comparing three groups: hysterectomy with CCRT versus hysterectomy with NACT versus CCRT. There were two comparison groups for which we were able to do a meta-analysis. Hysterectomy (radical) with neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy alone Two RCTs with similar design characteristics (620 and 633 participants) found no difference in five-year OS between NACT with hysterectomy versus CCRT. Meta-analysis assessing 1253 participants found no evidence of a difference in risk of death (OS) between women who received NACT plus hysterectomy and those who received CCRT alone (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.16; moderate-certainty evidence). In both studies, the five-year DFS in the NACT plus surgery group was worse (57%) compared with the CCRT group (65.6%), mostly for Stage IIB. Results of single trials reported no apparent difference in long-term severe complications, grade 3 acute toxicity and severe late toxicity between groups (very low-quality evidence). Hysterectomy (simple or radical) with neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus radiotherapy alone Meta-analysis of three trials of NACT with hysterectomy versus radiotherapy alone, assessing 571 participants, found that women who received NACT plus hysterectomy had less risk of death (OS) than those who received radiotherapy alone (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.93; I2 = 0%; moderate-quality evidence). However, a significant number of participants who received NACT plus hysterectomy also had radiotherapy. There was no difference in the proportion of women with disease progression or recurrence (DFS and PFS) between NACT plus hysterectomy and radiotherapy groups (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.05; I2 = 20%; moderate-quality evidence). The certainty of the evidence was low or very-low for all other comparisons for all outcomes. None of the trials reported quality of life outcomes.

Authors' conclusions: From the available RCTs, we found insufficient evidence that hysterectomy with radiotherapy, with or without chemotherapy, improves the survival of women with LACC who are treated with radiotherapy or CCRT alone. The overall certainty of the evidence was variable across the different outcomes and was universally downgraded due to concerns about risk of bias. The certainty of the evidence for NACT and radical hysterectomy versus radiotherapy alone for survival outcomes was moderate. The same occurred for the comparison involving NACT and hysterectomy compared with CCRT alone. Evidence from other comparisons was generally sparse and of low or very low-certainty. This was mainly based on poor reporting and sparseness of data where results were based on single trials. More trials assessing medical management with and without hysterectomy may test the robustness of the findings of this review as further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

FK: none.

AB: none.

AO: none.

EB: none.

MP: none.

DO: none.

Figures

1
1
Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
2
2
Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
3
3
Study flow diagram.
1.1
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1: Hysterectomy (radical) with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) versus chemoradiotherapy alone, Outcome 1: Overall survival
2.1
2.1. Analysis
Comparison 2: Hysterectomy (simple or radical) with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) versus radiotherapy alone, Outcome 1: Overall survival
2.2
2.2. Analysis
Comparison 2: Hysterectomy (simple or radical) with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) versus radiotherapy alone, Outcome 2: Disease‐ or progression‐free survival
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Update of

References

References to studies included in this review

Benedetti‐Panici 2002 {published data only}
    1. Benedetti-Panici P, Greggi S, Colombo A, Amoroso M, Smaniotto D, Giannarelli D, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radical surgery versus exclusive radiotherapy in locally advanced squamous cell cervical cancer: results from the Italian multicenter randomized study. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2002;20(1):179-88. - PubMed
Cetina 2013 {published data only}
    1. Cetina L, González-Enciso A, Cantú D, Coronel J, Pérez-Montiel D, Hinojosa J, et al. Brachytherapy versus radical hysterectomy after external beam chemoradiation with gemcitabine plus cisplatin: a randomized, phase III study in IB2–IIB cervical cancer patients. Annals of Oncology 2013;24:2043-7. [DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdt142] - DOI - PubMed
Chang 2000 {published data only}
    1. Chang T-C, Lai C-H, Hong J-H, Hsueh S, Huang K-G, Chou H-H, et al. Randomized trial of neoadjuvant cisplatin, vincristine, bleomycin, and radical hysterectomy versus radiation therapy for bulky stage IB and IIA cervical cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2000;18(8):1840-7. - PubMed
EORTC 2019 {published data only}
    1. Kenter G, Greggi S, Vergote I, Katsaros D, Kobierski J, Massuger L, et al. Results from neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery compared to chemoradiation for stage IB2–IIB cervical cancer: EORTC55994. Journal of Gynecologic Cancer 2019;37(15 suppl):5503-5503.
Gupta 2018 {published data only}
    1. Gupta S, Maheswari A, Parab P, Mahantshetty U, Hawaldar R, Sastri S, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical surgery versus concomitant chemotherapy and radiotherapy in patients with Stage IB2, IIA, or IIB squamous cervical cancer: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2018;36:1548-55. - PubMed
Keys 2003 {published data only}
    1. Keys HM, Bundy BN, Stehman FB, Okagaki T, Gallup DG, Burnett AF, et al. Radiation therapy with and without extrafascial hysterectomy for bulky stage IB cervical carcinoma: a randomized trial of the Gynecologic Oncology Group. Gynecologic Oncology 2003;89(3):343-53. - PubMed
Khan 2014 {published data only}
    1. Khan N. Chemoradiation versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery in locally advanced squamous cell cervical cancer: a randomized study in a north east Nigerian center. 15th Biennial Meeting of the International Gynecologic Cancer Society; 2014 Nov 8-11; Melbourne, Australia 2014.
Morice 2012 {published data only}
    1. Morice P, Rouanet P, Rey A, Romestaing P, Houvenaeghel G, Boulanger JC, et al. Results of the GYNECO 02 study, an FNCLCC phase III trial comparing hysterectomy with no hysterectomy in patients with a (clinical and radiological) complete response after chemoradiation therapy for stage IB2 or II cervical cancer. Oncologist 2012;17(1):64-71. - PMC - PubMed
Noriyuki 2010 {published data only}
    1. Noriyuki Y, Hiroshi S, Kazuko F, Kimihiro N, Tsuyomu I. A randomized trial of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical surgery versus radiotherapy alone in stage IIIb carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Journal Of Gynecologic Surgery 2010;26(2):105-13.
Perez 1987 {published data only}
    1. Perez CA, Camel HM, Kao MS, Hederman MA. Randomized study of preoperative radiation and surgery or irradiation alone in the treatment of stage IB and IIA carcinoma of the uterine cervix: final report. Gynecologic Oncology 1987;27(2):129-40. - PubMed
Zheng 2017 {published data only}
    1. Zheng J, Huang B, Zhou Y, Huang S, Chen S, Liet L. Concomitant chemoradiation followed by radical surgery for locally advanced cervical cancer patients preliminary result from RCT. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine 2017;17(1):1-6.

References to studies excluded from this review

Katsumata 2013 {published data only}
    1. Katsumata N, Yoshikawa H, Kobayashi H, Saito T, Kuzuya K, Nakanishi T, et al. Phase III randomised controlled trial of neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus radical surgery vs radical surgery alone for stages IB2, IIA2, and IIB cervical cancer: a Japan Clinical Oncology Group trial (JCOG 0102). British Journal of Cancer 2013;108(10):1957-63. - PMC - PubMed
Keys 1999 {published data only}
    1. Keys HM, Bundy BN, Stehman FB, Muderspach LI, Chafe WE, Suggs CL, et al. Cisplatin, radiation, and adjuvant hysterectomy compared with radiation and adjuvant hysterectomy for bulky stage IB cervical carcinoma. New England Journal of Medicine 1999;340(15):1154-61. - PubMed
Sardi 1997 {published data only}
    1. Sardi JE, Giaroli A, Sananes C, Ferreira M, Soderini A, Bermudez A, et al. Long-term follow-up of the first randomized trial using neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage Ib squamous carcinoma of the cervix: the final results. Gynecologic Oncology 1997;67(1):61-9. - PubMed
Sun 2013 {published data only}
    1. Sun H, Xin J, Lu Z, Wang N, Liu N, Guo Q. Potential molecular mechanisms for improved prognosis and outcome with neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to laparoscopical radical hysterectomy for patients with cervical cancer. Cellular Physiology and Biochemistry 2013;32(5):1528-40. - PubMed
Sundfor 1996 {published data only}
    1. Sundfor K, Trope CG, Kjorstad KE. Radical radiotherapy versus brachytherapy plus surgery in carcinoma of the cervix 2A and 2B. Long-term results from a randomized study 1968-1980. Acta Oncologica 1996;35(Suppl 8):99-107. - PubMed
Yang 2016 {published data only}
    1. Yang Z, Chen D, Zhang J, Yao D, Kun G, Wang H, et al. The efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer: a randomized multicenter study. Gynecologic Oncology 2016;141(2):231-9. - PubMed

References to ongoing studies

CSEM 006 study {published data only}
    1. Tu H, Huang H, Quyang Y, Liu Q, Xian B, Song K, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical surgery versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with FIGO stage IIB cervical cancer: the CSEM 006 study. International Journal of Gynecological Cancer 2021;31:129-33. - PubMed
Reis Fihlo 2018 {published data only}
    1. Reis Fihlo PT, Andrade JM, Batista MP, Sousa CB, Oliveira TH, Arruda GV, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radical surgery versus chemoradiation for stage IB2, IIA2, IIB cervical cancer: a randomized controlled trial. Annals of Oncology 2018;29(Suppl 8):VIII357-8.
Shanmugam 2019 {published data only}
    1. Shanmugam S, Govindasamy G, Hussain S, Mani J. Comparison of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical hysterectomy and neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by radical hysterectomy with concurrent chemoradiation in locally advanced carcinoma cervix (FIGO Stage IB2, IIA2, IIB): interim results of a randomized control study. Journal of South Asian Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2019;11(1):35-43.

Additional references

Alvarez 1989
    1. Alvarez RD, Soong SJ, Kinney WK, Reid GC, Schray MF, Podratz KC, et al. Identification of prognostic factors and risk groups in patients found to have nodal metastasis at the time of radical hysterectomy for early-stage squamous carcinoma of the cervix. Gynecologic Oncology 1989;36:130-5. - PubMed
Azria 2005
    1. Azria E, Morice P, Haie-Meder C, Thoury A, Pautier P, Lhomme C, et al. Results of hysterectomy in patients with bulky residual disease at the end of chemoradiotherapy for stage IB2/II cervical carcinoma. Annals of Surgical Oncology 2005;12:332-7. - PubMed
Baojuan 2012
    1. Baojuan Y, Lin Z, Haiyan C, Qi L, Yunyan Z, Yashuang Z. Dosimetric comparison of intensity modulated radiotherapy and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy in patients with gynecologic malignancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiation Oncology 2012;7:197. - PMC - PubMed
Benedetti Panici 2007
    1. Benedetti Panici P, Bellati F, Manci N, Pernice M, Plotti F, Di Donato V, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical surgery in patients affected by FIGO stage IVA cervical cancer. Annals of Surgical Oncology 2007;14(9):2643-8. - PubMed
Bhatla 2018
    1. Bhatla N, Aoki D, Sharma DN, Sankaranarayanan R. Cancer of the cervix uteri. International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics 2018;143(Suppl 2):22-36. - PubMed
Bijen 2009
    1. Bijen CB, Vermeulen KM, Mourits MJ, Bock GH. Costs and effects of abdominal versus laparoscopic hysterectomy: systematic review of controlled trials. PLoS One 2009;4(10):e7340. - PMC - PubMed
Burghardt 1978
    1. Burghardt E, Pickel H. Local spread and lymph node involvement in cervical cancer. Obstetrics and Gynecology 1978;52:138-45. - PubMed
CCCMAC 2010
    1. Chemoradiotherapy for Cervical Cancer Meta-analysis Collaboration (CCCMAC). Reducing uncertainties about the effects of chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer: individual patient data meta-analysis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 1. Art. No: CD008285. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008285] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Chung 1980
    1. Chung CK, Nahhas WA, Stryker JA, Curry SL, Abt AB, Mortel R. Analysis of factors contributing to treatment failures in stage IB and IIA carcinoma of the cervix. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1980;138:550-6. - PubMed
Classe 2006
    1. Classe JM, Rauch P, Rodier JF, Morice P, Stoeckle E, Lasry S, et al. Surgery after concurrent chemoradiotherapy and brachytherapy for the treatment of advanced cervical cancer: morbidity and outcome: results of a multicenter study of the GCCLCC (Groupe des Chirurgiens de Centre de Lutte Contre le Cancer). Gynecologic Oncology 2006;102:523-9. - PubMed
Colombo 2009
    1. Colombo PE, Bertrand MM, Gutowski M, Mourregot A, Fabbro M, Saint-Aubert B, et al. Total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for locally advanced cervical carcinoma (stages IIB, IIA and bulky stages IB) after concurrent chemoradiation therapy: surgical morbidity and oncological results. Gynecologic Oncology 2009;114(3):404-9. - PubMed
Deeks 2001
    1. Deeks JJ, Altman DG, Bradburn MJ. Statistical methods for examining heterogeneity and combining results from several studies in meta-analysis. In: Egger M, Davey Smith G, Altman DG, editors(s). Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-Analysis in Context. 2nd edition. London (UK): BMJ Publication Group, 2001.
Delgado 1990
    1. Delgado E, Bundy B, Zaino R, Sevin BU, Creasman WT, Major F. Prospective surgical-pathological study of disease-free interval in patients with stage IB squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecologic Oncology 1990;38:352-7. - PubMed
DerSimonian 1986
    1. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Controlled Clinical Trials 1986;7(3):177-88. - PubMed
Eifel 1993
    1. Eifel PJ. Radiotherapy versus radical surgery for gynecologic neoplasms: carcinomas of the cervix and vulva. Frontiers of Radiation Therapy and Oncology 1993;27:130-42. - PubMed
Ferrandina 2014
    1. Ferrandina G, Ercoli A, Fagotti A, Fanfani F, Gallotta V, Margariti AP, et al. Completion surgery after concomitant chemoradiation in locally advanced cervical cancer: a comprehensive analysis of pattern of postoperative complications. Annals of Surgical Oncology 2014;21(5):1692-9. - PubMed
Gadducci 2013
    1. Gadducci A, Sartori E, Maggino T, Zola P, Cosio S, Zizioli V, et al. Pathological response on surgical samples is an independent prognostic variable for patients with Stage IB2–IIB cervical cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radical hysterectomy: an Italian multicenter retrospective study (CTF Study). Gynecologic Oncology 2013;131(3):640-4. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.09.029] - DOI - PubMed
Global Cancer Statistics 2020
    1. Hyuna S, Jacques F, Rebecca LS, Mathieu L, Isabelle S, Ahmedin J, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of Incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA: a Cancer Journal for Clinicians 2021;71(3):209-49. [PMID: ] - PubMed
GRADEpro GDT [Computer program]
    1. GRADEpro GDT. Version accessed 1 February 2022. Hamilton (ON): McMaster University (developed by Evidence Prime). Available at gradepro.org.
GRADE Working Group 2004
    1. GRADE Working Group. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2004;328:1490-4. - PMC - PubMed
Green 2001
    1. Green JA, Kirwan JM, Tierney JF, Symonds P, Fresco L, Collingwood M, et al. Survival and recurrence after concomitant chemotherapy and radiotherapy for cancer of the uterine cervix: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2001;358(9284):781-6. - PubMed
Hequet 2013
    1. Hequet D, Marchand E, Place V, Fourchotte V, De La Rochefordière A, Dridi S, et al. Evaluation and impact of residual disease in locally advanced cervical cancer after concurrent chemoradiation therapy: results of a multicenter study. European Journal of Surgical Oncology 2013;39(12):1428-34. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2013.10.006] - DOI - PubMed
Higgins 2003
    1. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 2003;327(7414):557-60. - PMC - PubMed
Higgins 2011
    1. Higgins JP, Green S, editor(s). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from training.cochrane.org/handbook/archive/v5.1/.
Higgins 2020
    1. Higgins JP, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, et al, editor(s). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 6.1 (updated September 2020). Cochrane, 2020. Available from training.cochrane.org/handbook/archive/v6.1.
Houvenaeghel 1998
    1. Houvenaeghel G, Martino M, Bladou F, Moutardier V, Ternier F, Delpero JR, et al. Value of surgery in the treatment of advanced cervical cancers. Annales de Chirurgie 1998;52:425-33. - PubMed
Houvenaeghel 2007
    1. Houvenaeghel G, Lelievre L, Buttarelli M, Jacquemier J, Carcopino X, Viens P, et al. Contribution of surgery in patients with bulky residual disease after chemoradiation for advanced cervical carcinoma. European Journal of Surgical Oncology 2007;33:498-503. - PubMed
Kesic 2006
    1. Kesic V. Management of cervical cancer. European Journal of Surgical Oncology 2006;32:832-7. - PubMed
Khuhaprema 2010
    1. Khuhaprema T, Srivatanakul P, Sriplung H, Wiangnon S, Sumitsawan Y, Attasara P. Cancer in Thailand 2001–2003. Bangkok: National Cancer Institute 2010;V:3-76.
Kornovski 2007
    1. Kornovski Y, Gorchev G. Histopathological findings in postoperative specimens in cervical cancer patients with stages IB2–IVA after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and preoperative plus postoperative radiotherapy. Journal of the Balkan Union of Oncology 2007;12:57-63. - PubMed
Kundargi 2013
    1. Kundargi RS, Guruprasad B, Hanumantappa N, Rathod PS, Devi UK, Bafna UD. The role of surgery in locally advanced carcinoma of cervix after sub-optimal chemoradiation: Indian scenario. South Asian Journal of Cancer 2013;2(3):137-9. - PMC - PubMed
Landoni 1997
    1. Landoni F, Maneo A, Colombo A, Placa F, Milani R, Perego P, et al. Randomised study of radical surgery versus radiotherapy for stage Ib-IIa cervical cancer. Lancet 1997;350(9077):535-40. - PubMed
Landoni 2014
    1. Landoni F, Sartori E, Maggino T, Zola P, Zanagnolo V, Cosio S, et al. Is there a role for postoperative treatment in patients with stage IB2-IIB cervical cancer treated with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and radical surgery? An Italian multicenter retrospective study. Gynecologic Oncology 2014;132(3):611-7. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.12.010] - DOI - PubMed
Langendam 2013
    1. Langendam MW, Akl EA, Dahm P, Glasziou P, Guyatt G, Schünemann HJ. Assessing and presenting summaries of evidence in Cochrane Reviews. Systematic Reviews 2013;23(2):81. - PMC - PubMed
Leino 1994
    1. Leino R, Grenman S, Rantanen V, Kiilholma P, Salmi T. Operative treatment of advanced cervical cancer after full pelvic irradiation. Annales Chirurgiae et Gynaecologiae 1994;208(Suppl):50-3. - PubMed
Lin 2019
    1. Lin AJ, Kidd E, Dehbashtu F, Siegel B, Mutic S, Thaker PH, et al. Intensity modulated radiation therapy and image guided adapted brachytherapy for cervix cancer. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics 2019;103(5):1088-97. - PMC - PubMed
Mabuchi 2017
    1. Mabuchi S, Kozasa K, Kimura T. Radical hysterectomy after radiotherapy for recurrent or persistent cervical cancer. International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics 2017;139(2):185-91. - PubMed
Marjanovic 2019
    1. Marjanovic D, Karapandzic VP, Rundic SS, Tomasevic A, Saric M, Miskovic I, et al. Implementation of intensity-modulated radiotherapy and comparison with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy in the postoperative treatment of cervical cancer. Journal of B.U.ON. 2019;24(5):2028-34. - PubMed
Mathers 2008
    1. Mathers C, Boerma T, Fat DM. The global burden of disease: 2004 update. www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241563710 (accessed 29 April 2020).
Meader 2014
    1. Meader N, King K, Llewellyn A, Norman G, Brown J, Rodgers M, et al. A checklist designed to aid consistency and reproducibility of GRADE assessments: development and pilot validation. Systematic Reviews 2014;3:82. - PMC - PubMed
Morris 1999
    1. Morris M, Eifel PJ, Lu J, Grigsby PW, Levenback C, Stevens RE, et al. Pelvic radiation with concurrent chemotherapy compared with pelvic and para-aortic radiation for high-risk cervical cancer. New England Journal of Medicine 1999;340(15):1137-43. - PubMed
Naga 2018
    1. Naga Ch P, Gurram L, Chopra S, Mahantshetty U. The management of locally advanced cervical cancer. Current Opinions in Oncology 2018;30(5):323-9. [PMID: ] - PubMed
NCI 1999
    1. National Cancer Institute. NCI clinical announcement. United States Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health February 1999; Bethesda (MD).
NCI 2014
    1. National Cancer Institute. Stage IVB cervical cancer treatment. www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/treatment/cervical/HealthProfessional/page9 (accessed prior to 29 April 2022).
NCIN 2010
    1. National Cancer Intelligence Network. Cervical cancer incidence and screening coverage. www.ncin.org.uk/publications/data_briefings/cervical_incidence_and_scree... (accessed prior to 29 April 2022).
Noterman 2006
    1. Noterman D, Philippson C, Hertens D, Veys I, Schobbens JC, Nogaret JM. Neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy and surgery of locally advanced cervical carcinoma: review of 22 patients treated at the Bordet Institute. Journal de Gynecologie Obstetrique et Biologie de la Reproduction 2006;35:23-7. - PubMed
Ota 2008
    1. Ota T, Takeshima N, Tabata T, Hasumi K, Takizawa K. Adjuvant hysterectomy for treatment of residual disease in patients with cervical cancer treated with radiation therapy. British Journal of Cancer 2008;99(8):1216-20. - PMC - PubMed
Park 2013
    1. Park JY, Kim DY, Kim JH, Kim YM, Kim YT, Nam JH. Laparoscopic versus open radical hysterectomy in patients with stage IB2 and IIA2 cervical cancer. Journal of Surgical Oncology 2013;108(1):63-9. - PubMed
Parmar 1998
    1. Parmar MK, Torri V, Stewart L. Extracting summary statistics to perform meta-analyses of the published literature for survival endpoints. Statistics in Medicine 1998;17:2815-34. - PubMed
Percorelli 2009
    1. Pecorelli S, Zigliani L, Odicino F. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the cervix. International Journal Gynecology and Obstetrics 2009;205(2):107-8. - PubMed
Peters 2000
    1. Peters WA 3rd, Liu PY, Barrett RJ 2nd, Stock RJ, Monk BJ, Berek JS, et al. Concurrent chemotherapy and pelvic radiation therapy compared with pelvic radiation therapy alone as adjuvant therapy after radical surgery in high-risk early-stage cancer of the cervix. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2000;18(8):1606-13. - PubMed
Piver 1975
    1. Piver MS, Chung WS. Prognostic significance of cervical lesion size and pelvic node metastases in cervical carcinoma. Obstetrics and Gynecology 1975;46(5):507-10. - PubMed
Potish 1990
    1. Potish RA, Twiggs LB, Prem KA, Carson LF, Adcock LL. Surgical intervention following multimodality therapy for advanced cervical cancer. Gynecologic Oncology 1990;38:175-80. - PubMed
Review Manager 2014 [Computer program]
    1. Review Manager (RevMan). Version 5.3. Copenhagen: Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014.
Rose 1999
    1. Rose PG, Bundy BN, Watkins EB, Thigpen JT, Deppe G, Maiman MA, et al. Concurrent cisplatin-based radiotherapy and chemotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer. New England Journal of Medicine 1999;340(15):1144-53. - PubMed
Rydzewska 2012
    1. Rydzewska L, Tierney J, Vale CL, Symonds PR. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery versus surgery for cervical cancer. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 12. Art. No: CD007406. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007406.pub3] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Sardi 1990
    1. Sardi J, Sananes C, Giaroli A, Maya G, di Paola G. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced carcinoma of the cervix uteri. Gynecologic Oncology 1990;38(3):486-93. - PubMed
Schünemann 2020
    1. Schünemann HJ, Higgins JP, Vist GE, Glasziou P, Akl EA, Skoetz N, et al. Chapter 14: Completing 'Summary of findings' tables and grading the certainty of the evidence. In: Higgins JP, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, et al, editor(s). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 6.1 (updated September 2020). Cochrane, 2020. Available from training.cochrane.org/handbook/archive/v6.1.
Shepherd 2012
    1. Shepherd JH. Cervical cancer. Best Practice & Research. Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology 2012;26(3):293-309. - PubMed
Singh 2019
    1. Singh N, Rous B, Ganesan R. 2018 FIGO staging system for cervical cancer: summary and comparison with 2009 FIGO staging system. www.bgcs.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/BAGP-2018-FIGO-Cervix-Ca-stag... (accessed prior to 4 January 2021).
Sun 2014
    1. Sun L, Sheng X, Jiang J, Li X, Liu N, Liu Y, et al. Surgical morbidity and oncologic results after concurrent chemoradiation therapy for advanced cervical cancer. International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics 2014;125(2):111-5. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2013.07.041] - DOI - PubMed
Tsuda 2001
    1. Tsuda H, Tanaka M, Manabe T, Nakata S, Ishiko O, Yamamoto K. Phase I–II study of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by radical surgery in locally advanced cervical cancer. Anticancer Drugs 2001;12:853-8. - PubMed
Wang 2002
    1. Wang Y, Cao P, Zhang X, Zeng Q. Combined treatment for locally advanced carcinoma of uterine cervix. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi 2002;24:508-10. - PubMed
Whitney 1999
    1. Whitney CW, Sause W, Bundy BN, Malfetano JH, Hannigan EV, Fowler WC Jr, et al. Randomized comparison of fluorouracil plus cisplatin versus hydroxyurea as an adjunct to radiation therapy in stage IIB-IVA carcinoma of the cervix with negative para-aortic lymph nodes: a Gynecologic Oncology Group and Southwest Oncology Group study. Journal of Clinical Oncology 1999;17(5):1339-48. - PubMed

References to other published versions of this review

Kokka 2013
    1. Kokka F, Bryant A, Oram D, Powell M. Hysterectomy for patients with locally advanced cervical cancer after primary radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 1. Art. No: CD010260. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010260] - DOI
Kokka 2015
    1. Kokka F, Bryant A, Brockbank E, Powell M, Oram D. Hysterectomy with radiotherapy or chemotherapy or both for women with locally advanced cervical cancer. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2015, Issue 4. Art. No: CD010260. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010260.pub2] - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms