↓ Skip to main content

Effect of changes in treatment practice on survival for cervical cancer: results from a population-based study in Manitoba, Canada

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effect of changes in treatment practice on survival for cervical cancer: results from a population-based study in Manitoba, Canada
Published in
BMC Cancer, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12885-015-1624-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yoon-Jung Kang, Dianne L. O’Connell, Robert Lotocki, Erich V. Kliewer, David E. Goldsbury, Alain A. Demers, Karen Canfell

Abstract

Results from clinical trials in the 1990s led to changes in the recommended treatment for the standard therapy for stage IIB-IVA cervical cancer from radiotherapy alone to chemo-radiotherapy. We conducted the first population-based study in Canada to investigate temporal treatment patterns for cervical cancer and long-term survival in relation to these changes in the treatment guidelines. Detailed information on stage and treatment for 1085 patients diagnosed with cervical cancer in 1984-2008 and identified from the population-based Manitoba Cancer Registry (MCR) in Canada was obtained from clinical chart review and the MCR. Factors associated with receiving guideline treatment were identified using logistic regression. All cause and cervical cancer specific survival were compared in patients who were and were not treated as recommended in the guidelines, using Cox proportional hazards models. The median follow-up time was 6.4 years (range: 0.05-26.5 years). The proportion of women who received guideline treatment was 79 % (95 % confidence interval [CI]: 76-81 %). However, the likelihood of being treated according to the guidelines over time was modified by age (p < 0.0001) and tumour stage at diagnosis (p = 0.002). Women who were treated according to the guidelines after the change in recommended clinical practice (1999-2008) had a significantly lower risk of death from all causes and from cervical cancer. This was driven by lower mortality rates in cases with stage IIB-IVA tumours (all causes of death: hazard ratio [HR] = 0.60, 95 % CI: 0.43-0.82, p = 0.002; cervical cancer related death: HR = 0.64, 95 % CI: 0.44-0.93, p = 0.02). The management of cervical cancer patients in Manitoba, Canada was in good agreement with treatment guidelines although reasons for departure from the guideline recommendations could not be examined further due to lack of data. Treatment of stage IIB-IVA cervical cancers with recommended concurrent chemo-radiotherapy, which is now standard practice, was associated with substantially increased survival, although the effect of changes in clinical practice including maintenance of haemoglobin levels on improved survival cannot be ruled out as a contributing factor.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 14%
Student > Master 4 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 11%
Lecturer 2 7%
Other 7 25%
Unknown 5 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 14%
Psychology 3 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 5 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 October 2015.
All research outputs
#13,909,322
of 24,469,913 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#2,928
of 8,686 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,603
of 279,543 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#68
of 214 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,469,913 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,686 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 279,543 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 214 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.