On this page
Quick Reference
Overview and Recommendations
Background
- •Locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) — encompassing FIGO stages IB3 to IVA — represents a high-stakes clinical entity where definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) serves as the primary curative standard, replacing surgery for these stages. The paradigm shift toward CCRT was solidified by landmark trials showing that adding weekly to radiation reduces the risk of death by 30% to 50%, with a number needed to treat (NNT) of 17 to prevent one death.
- •Adjuvant radiation therapy is critical for preventing pelvic recurrence in early-stage patients (FIGO IA2–IIA) who undergo radical but harbor pathologic risk factors. These are categorized into high-risk (Peters criteria: positive margins, nodes, or parametria) and intermediate-risk (Sedlis criteria: large tumor size, deep stromal invasion, and lymphovascular space invasion), with the former requiring concurrent chemotherapy to improve 5-year survival by approximately 6%.
- •Image-guided adaptive brachytherapy (IGABT) has revolutionized local control in LACC, shifting the treatment focus from traditional point-based prescriptions to volume-based MRI optimization. Data from the EMBRACE-I study demonstrate that MRI-guided IGABT achieves 5-year local control rates of 92%, even in bulky tumors, by allowing for precise dose escalation to the high-risk clinical target volume (HR-CTV) while sparing adjacent organs.
- •The molecular landscape and the role of (HPV) drive the underlying pathophysiology, and emerging biomarkers like circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) are increasingly used to monitor treatment response. Despite high cure rates in localized disease, untreated or recurrent cases carry a poor prognosis, emphasizing the need for strict adherence to the 8-week total treatment duration window to prevent tumor repopulation.
- •Technological advancements, specifically the transition from 3D-conformal radiation to and , have halved the incidence of late grade ≥2 gastrointestinal toxicity (from 35% to 19% in the PARCER trial). This improvement in the therapeutic ratio allows for safer delivery of pelvic radiation, particularly in patients requiring extended-field radiation for para-aortic nodal involvement.
Evaluation
- •Suspect cervical cancer in any patient presenting with post-coital bleeding, intermenstrual spotting, or persistent malodorous vaginal discharge, and perform a thorough speculum and bimanual examination to assess clinical stage.
- •Order a pelvic as the gold-standard imaging modality for local staging; it is superior to CT for assessing tumor size, parametrial invasion, and vaginal extension, and is mandatory for modern brachytherapy planning.
- •Obtain a or CT of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis to evaluate for regional lymphadenopathy (pelvic and para-aortic) and distant metastases (FIGO IVB), as nodal involvement significantly alters the radiation field.
- •Review postoperative pathology for Peters Criteria (positive pelvic lymph nodes, positive surgical margins, or microscopic parametrial involvement), which mandate the initiation of adjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy.
- •Review postoperative pathology for Sedlis Criteria (combination of LVSI, deep stromal invasion, and tumor size ≥4 cm) to determine the need for adjuvant pelvic radiation alone to mitigate locoregional failure.
- •Perform a simulation CT with the patient in the supine position, utilizing a comfortably full bladder and an empty rectum to displace the small bowel superiorly and minimize gastrointestinal dose.
- •Define the Clinical Target Volume (CTV) to include the gross tumor (if present), cervix, uterus, parametria, and the upper 2–3 cm of the vagina, along with the internal, external, and common iliac lymph nodes.
- •Assess renal function (eGFR) and baseline hematologic parameters before initiating concurrent , as renal impairment may necessitate a switch to alternative agents like .
- •Evaluate the para-aortic lymph node (PALN) status carefully; if PALNs are positive on imaging, the radiation field must be extended superiorly to the level of the renal vessels (Extended-Field IMRT).
Management
- •Initiate definitive CCRT for FIGO stages IB3–IVA using weekly 40 mg/m² (maximum 70 mg per dose) for 5–6 cycles during the course of external beam radiotherapy.
- •Deliver EBRT to a total dose of 45.0–50.4 Gy in 1.8–2.0 Gy daily fractions using or to minimize dose to the small bowel, rectum, and bladder.
- •Administer image-guided adaptive brachytherapy (IGABT) as an indispensable component of curative treatment; it cannot be replaced by EBRT boosts or SBRT without compromising local control and survival.
- •Aim for a total cumulative dose (EBRT + brachytherapy) of EQD2 ≥85 Gy to the High-Risk Clinical Target Volume (HR-CTV) to maximize the probability of local cure.
- •Complete the entire course of radiation (EBRT plus brachytherapy) within 56 days (8 weeks), as treatment delays beyond this window result in a ~1% decrease in local control per day.
- •Adhere to strict OAR (Organs at Risk) constraints to minimize late toxicity: keep the Bladder D2cc <80 Gy, Rectum D2cc <65 Gy, and Sigmoid D2cc <70 Gy (all EQD2).
- •Utilize interstitial brachytherapy (ISBT) or hybrid applicators for bulky tumors or those with significant parametrial extension that cannot be adequately covered by standard intracavitary applicators.
- •Prescribe adjuvant CCRT for patients meeting Peters criteria (high-risk) post-hysterectomy to improve overall survival and reduce the risk of pelvic recurrence.
- •Consider adjuvant RT alone for patients meeting Sedlis criteria (intermediate-risk), although some clinicians may add chemotherapy for "high-intermediate" risk cases despite the lack of definitive trial evidence for this subgroup.
- •Manage acute radiation-induced diarrhea with or probiotics like Saccharomyces boulardii (250 mg/day) and monitor for hematologic toxicity (neutropenia/lymphopenia) weekly.
- •Recommend the early and consistent use of vaginal dilators and topical estrogens following the completion of radiation to prevent vaginal stenosis and maintain sexual health.
- •Provide palliative RT (e.g., 30 Gy in 10 fractions or 8 Gy in a single fraction) for patients with FIGO IVB disease to control hemorrhage, pelvic pain, or symptomatic bone metastases.
- •Avoid the use of adjuvant systemic chemotherapy after the completion of standard CCRT, as the OUTBACK trial demonstrated no survival benefit with this approach.
Board Review — High Yield
- •Peters Criteria — Positive nodes, margins, or parametria; mandates adjuvant CCRT.
- •Sedlis Criteria — LVSI, deep stromal invasion, and large tumor size; warrants adjuvant RT alone.
- •8-Week Rule — Total treatment duration (EBRT + Brachy) must be <56 days to prevent tumor repopulation.
- •MRI-Guided Brachytherapy — The gold standard for LACC; delivers EQD2 ≥85 Gy to the HR-CTV.
- •IMRT vs. 3D-CRT — IMRT significantly reduces late Grade ≥2 GI toxicity (NNT=7).
- •OUTBACK Trial — Adjuvant chemotherapy after CCRT does not improve overall survival.
- •Para-aortic Nodes — If positive, the radiation field must be extended to the renal vessels (Extended-Field RT).
- •Cisplatin Dose — 40 mg/m² weekly, capped at 70 mg per dose.
Deep Dive — Evidence Details
Indications by Stage
- ▸The supplied evidence is concentrated in FIGO 2018 stages IB3–IVA and does not establish new indications for every earlier-stage subgroup. [191,198,200,202]
- ▸For IB3–IIIA disease, definitive CCRT with external-beam radiation, concurrent chemotherapy, and brachytherapy is the principal radiation framework represented in the evidence. [188,202]
- ▸Stage IIIC management should address nodal disease with comprehensive radiation planning; surgery has not been shown to universally replace CCRT. [191,202]
- ▸Stage IVA disease can remain eligible for curative-intent chemoradiation and image-guided brachytherapy, but requires explicit fistula-risk assessment and counseling. [201]
- ▸MRI-guided brachytherapy is supported as the reference approach, while ultrasound may be a practical alternative where MRI or CT access is limited. [189]
- ▸Induction chemotherapy, immune-checkpoint inhibitors, TACE, biomarker-guided selection, and model-based dose scaling remain investigational or selectively applied rather than universal stage-based standards. [185,188,190,197,200,206,207,208]
- ▸When brachytherapy is unavailable, external-beam boost strategies have been used in resource-limited settings, but they should not automatically be considered equivalent to image-guided brachytherapy. [192]
Scope and staging
Treatment selection should be based on histologic confirmation, FIGO 2018 stage, nodal status, tumor size, local extension, performance status, renal function, and access to brachytherapy or other radiation resources. The contemporary evidence supplied here is concentrated in stage IB3–IVA disease and does not establish new radiation indications for every earlier-stage subgroup. [191][198][200][202]
Stage IA–IB2 and small, node-negative tumors
The supplied references do not provide a new stage-specific randomized comparison for IA–IB2 disease. Management should therefore remain individualized according to tumor size, depth of stromal invasion, lymphovascular-space involvement, nodal assessment, surgical fitness, and the feasibility of definitive radiation. The available radiation literature includes patients across stages IB2–IVA, but the reported studies do not isolate an indication or preferred modality for IA–IB2 disease. [203][205]
Stage IB3 and IIA2
Tumors classified as FIGO 2018 IB3 or IIA2 are represented in the locally advanced cohort literature and should be evaluated in a multidisciplinary setting for definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT), radical surgery, or a protocol-based approach. A prospective multicenter propensity-score-matched cohort specifically compared radical surgery with CCRT in IB3, IIA2, and locally resectable IIICr disease, reflecting continued clinical variation but not establishing that surgery should replace radiation as a universal standard. [202]
A retrospective study also evaluated transcatheter arterial chemoembolization combined with surgery or CCRT in IB3 and IIA2 disease; because this was a nonrandomized, single-center analysis, TACE should not be considered routine radiation intensification outside appropriately selected protocols or specialist practice. [207] In a national physician survey, IB3–IVA disease was categorized as locally advanced cervical cancer, and treatment decisions were influenced by physician specialty, disease characteristics, and treatment factors, underscoring the need for multidisciplinary selection rather than stage alone. [198]
Stage IIB–IIIA
For FIGO 2018 stage IIB–IIIA, definitive pelvic external-beam radiation with concurrent cisplatin-based chemotherapy and brachytherapy is the principal radiation framework represented by the supplied evidence. A phase II trial enrolled previously untreated patients with stages IIB–IVA and combined IMRT or VMAT, three-dimensional brachytherapy, cisplatin, and camrelizumab; the study was single-arm and therefore supports investigation of immunotherapy rather than routine substitution for established CCRT. [188]
A retrospective study of stages IIB and IIIA compared CCRT alone with TACE plus CCRT, but its design does not establish TACE as standard treatment. [207] Induction chemotherapy before definitive chemoradiotherapy remains investigational or selectively used: a multicenter cohort found worse 5-year overall survival among patients receiving induction chemotherapy, although treatment selection and baseline risk may have influenced outcomes. [190]
Radiation quality and treatment completion are clinically important. NRG GY017 evaluated atezolizumab as an immune primer or concurrently with radiation and CCRT in node-positive locally advanced disease; protocol-defined IMRT contouring, dose specifications, and central plan review were used, but the available report primarily addresses workflow and quality oversight rather than a stage-specific indication. [86]A1b A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials across cancers evaluated adding immune-checkpoint inhibitors to radiotherapy; its broad scope does not by itself establish routine checkpoint inhibition for cervical cancer. [197]
Stage IIIC
Stage IIIC disease should be managed according to nodal involvement and the feasibility of comprehensive radiation to the primary tumor, pelvis, and involved nodes. The prospective comparative cohort included locally resectable IIICr disease and evaluated radical surgery versus CCRT, while the South African real-world cohort included stages IB3–IVA referred for radiation. Neither study supports routine omission of definitive radiation for node-positive disease. [202][191]
When brachytherapy is available, image-guided adaptive brachytherapy should be integrated with external-beam treatment. MRI is generally treated as the reference imaging approach, but a systematic review found ultrasound to be a potentially accessible alternative for image-guided brachytherapy, particularly where MRI or CT access is limited. [189]C MRI-only HDR planning requires attention to systematic source-position uncertainty; modeling in stages IB2–IVA showed that positional errors of ±1–±5 mm can affect dosimetry and that robust planning strategies may reduce this vulnerability. [203]
Stage IVA
Stage IVA disease requires individualized definitive-intent chemoradiation and image-guided brachytherapy when technically feasible, with explicit assessment of bladder, rectal, and fistula risk. In a retrospective MRI-guided brachytherapy series, stage IVA represented 22 of 151 patients (14.6%) and was associated with worse outcomes than stages I–III; the study specifically evaluated overall survival, disease-free survival, central failure, and fistula formation. [201] These data support careful counseling and close surveillance rather than automatic exclusion from curative-intent radiation. [201]
Brachytherapy remains important for tumor dose escalation and normal-tissue sparing, but acute gastrointestinal toxicity must be monitored: a multicenter study of 688 patients receiving CCRT evaluated the independent association between brachytherapy and acute diarrhea. [196] Where brachytherapy is unavailable, an Rwandan cohort used pelvic IMRT with 45 Gy to the whole pelvis and a simultaneous integrated boost to 70 Gy in 30 fractions to the primary tumor and involved nodes; this is a resource-adapted approach and should not automatically be considered equivalent to image-guided brachytherapy. [192]
Cross-stage personalization and follow-up
MRI-derived fractal dimension, ultrasound-plus-biomarker models, and molecular radiosensitivity markers are prognostic or predictive research tools rather than established indications for selecting radiation by stage. [185][200][206] Model-based dose scaling may provide a therapeutic gain in selected patients: among 53 patients in whom escalation was feasible, 16 (30.2%) met the predefined criterion of a tumor-control-probability increase greater than 3%, subject to normal-tissue complication thresholds. [208]C
After pelvic radiotherapy, survivorship care should address vaginal atrophy, sexual function, pain, and quality of life. A randomized, double-blind pilot trial is evaluating six months of topical vaginal estriol versus placebo in cervical-cancer survivors aged 18–55 years after definitive radiation, with histologic epithelial maturation as the primary endpoint; this evidence informs supportive care, not initial stage-based treatment selection. [183]C
Evidence limitations
Most stage-specific observations in the supplied literature are retrospective, single-arm, cohort, survey, dosimetric, or systematic-review evidence. Accordingly, treatment should be individualized through multidisciplinary review, with clinical-trial participation favored for induction chemotherapy, immune-checkpoint inhibitors, TACE, adaptive dose escalation, and other treatment intensification strategies. [86]A1b[188][190][197][198][201][202][207][208]C
| Stage or clinical group | Radiation-management implication | Evidence and limitations |
|---|---|---|
| IA–IB2 | No new stage-specific indication is established by the supplied references; individualize surgery versus definitive radiation. | Evidence includes broader IB2–IVA populations but does not isolate IA–IB2 outcomes. [203][205] |
| IB3–IIA2 | Multidisciplinary evaluation for definitive CCRT, radical surgery, or trial-based treatment. | Prospective comparative cohort; TACE evidence is retrospective. [202][207] |
| IIB–IIIA | Definitive external-beam radiation with concurrent chemotherapy and brachytherapy is the principal represented framework. | Immunotherapy and TACE studies are nondefinitive for routine adoption. [188][207] |
| IIIC | Comprehensive radiation addressing primary and involved nodes; integrate brachytherapy when feasible. | Surgery has not been shown to universally replace CCRT. [191][202] |
| IVA | Consider curative-intent chemoradiation and image-guided brachytherapy when feasible, with fistula-risk assessment. | Stage IVA has worse outcomes and requires individualized counseling. [201] |
| Any stage requiring definitive radiation without brachytherapy access | Consider carefully planned external-beam boost only as a resource-adapted strategy. | Reported regimen: 45 Gy pelvis plus 70 Gy/30 fractions boost; equivalence to brachytherapy is unproven. [192] |
External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT)
- ▸IMRT/VMAT significantly reduces late GI toxicity compared to 3D-CRT (NNT=7 to prevent Grade ≥2 events).
- ▸Hypofractionated IMRT (40 Gy in 16 fractions) is a safe and efficient alternative to conventional fractionation in the postoperative setting.
- ▸Adaptive radiotherapy (Plan-of-the-Day) is essential for managing significant anatomical changes and bladder volume variability during treatment.
utilization for definitive cervical cancer treatment increased from 31% to 68% between 2004 and 2019, reflecting a shift toward advanced conformal techniques to mitigate toxicity [87]B2c (2c). Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy ( ) allow for superior dose distribution, escalating the dose to target volumes while sparing adjacent (OARs) such as the small bowel, rectum, and bladder [37]D5 (5). The NCCN guidelines emphasize that IMRT is preferred over three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy ( ) in the postoperative setting to reduce late (GI) toxicity [37]D5 (5).
Step 1: Simulation and Target Volume Definition
Accurate simulation requires managing internal organ motion, particularly the uterus and bladder. Patients should undergo simulation with a comfortably full bladder and an empty rectum to displace the small bowel superiorly. The PARCER trial demonstrated that image-guided IMRT (IG-IMRT) significantly reduces late GI toxicity compared to 3D-CRT [9]A1b (1b). Target volumes typically include the gross tumor volume (GTV), the clinical target volume (CTV) encompassing the cervix, uterus, parametria, and upper vagina, and the pelvic lymph nodes (internal, external, and common iliac) [86]A1b (1b).
Step 2: Dose and Fractionation Selection
Standard fractionation remains the global benchmark, but hypofractionation is increasingly supported by prospective data. The conventional dose is 45.0–50.4 Gy delivered in 1.8–2.0 Gy daily fractions [37]D5 (5). The POHIM-CCRT trial (N=84) established the safety of hypofractionated IMRT, delivering 40 Gy in 16 fractions (2.5 Gy/fx) with concurrent ; Grade 3+ acute GI toxicity occurred in only 2.4% of patients [21]B2b (2b). Similarly, the HYPOCx-iRex trial found no significant difference in toxicity between 44 Gy in 20 fractions and 45 Gy in 25 fractions [76]A1b (1b).
Step 3: Adaptive Radiotherapy (ART) and Plan-of-the-Day
Anatomical changes during the 5-6 week course of , such as uterine shrinkage or intrauterine fluid drainage, can lead to significant target volume shifts [84]C4 (4). Library-based "Plan-of-the-Day" (PoD) adaptive radiotherapy utilizes multiple planning CTs (empty, intermediate, and full bladder) to select the most appropriate daily plan based on cone-beam CT (CBCT) imaging [81]B2b (2b). This approach ensures target coverage while minimizing OAR exposure, particularly in patients with high bladder volume variability [81]B2b (2b).
Step 4: Extended-Field Radiotherapy (EF-IMRT)
Patients with positive para-aortic (PALN) or common iliac lymph nodes (CILN) require extended-field IMRT (EF-IMRT) to cover the para-aortic region up to the renal vessels [82]B2b (2b). A multicenter prospective study of EF-IMRT combined with concurrent chemotherapy and showed manageable toxicity and favorable progression-free survival in node-positive disease [82]B2b (2b). Prophylactic para-aortic irradiation is currently being evaluated in the PRO-PARA trial for pelvic node-positive cases to reduce distant recurrence [43]D5 (5).
Step 5: OAR Sparing and Toxicity Mitigation
Late GI toxicity is the primary dose-limiting factor in pelvic EBRT. In the PARCER trial, IG-IMRT reduced 3-year Grade ≥2 late GI toxicity from 35% to 19% compared to 3D-CRT (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.28–0.77); NNT = 7 to prevent one case of late Grade ≥2 GI toxicity [9]A1b (1b). For young patients, ovarian transposition (oophoropexy) followed by intensity-modulated (IMPT) or VMAT can optimize ovarian dose sparing, though IMPT provides the lowest radiobiological estimates of ovarian damage [85]C4 (4).
Controversies and Guideline Disagreement
| Question | Position A | Position B | Strength | Implication |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Role of Hypofractionation | Standard Practice (NCCN/ESMO) — Conventional fractionation (45-50 Gy) remains the standard for definitive and adjuvant CCRT [37]D5. | Emerging Evidence (POHIM/HYPOCx) — Hypofractionation (40 Gy/16 fx or 44 Gy/20 fx) is safe and non-inferior in acute toxicity [21]B2b[76]A1b. | Moderate | Hypofractionation reduces treatment duration but requires IMRT/VMAT and strict IGRT to ensure safety. |
| Prophylactic PALN Irradiation | Standard Practice — PALN irradiation is reserved for documented nodal involvement [82]B2b. | PRO-PARA Trial — Suggests potential benefit in pelvic node-positive cases to prevent PALN failure [43]D5. | Mild | Routine prophylactic PALN irradiation is not yet standard but is an active area of investigation. |
Pearl: Image-guided IMRT is the preferred EBRT technique as it reduces late Grade ≥2 GI toxicity by nearly 50% compared to 3D-CRT (NNT=7) [9]A1b. Hypofractionated regimens (40 Gy in 16 fractions) are safe alternatives in the postoperative setting when delivered with IMRT and concurrent chemotherapy [21]B2b[79]B2b.
| Regimen | Total Dose | Fraction Size | Indication | Evidence Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conventional | 45.0–50.4 Gy | 1.8–2.0 Gy | Standard definitive/adjuvant | 1a [37]D5 |
| POHIM Regimen | 40.0 Gy | 2.5 Gy | Postoperative adjuvant | 2b [21]B2b[79]B2b |
| HYPOCx Regimen | 44.0 Gy | 2.2 Gy | Locally advanced (LACC) | 1b [76]A1b |
| Extended-Field | 45.0–50.4 Gy | 1.8–2.0 Gy | PALN or CILN positive | 2b [82]B2b |
Brachytherapy
- ▸Brachytherapy is a mandatory component of curative treatment for LACC and cannot be replaced by EBRT boosts.
- ▸MRI-guided planning (IGABT) significantly improves local control (92% at 5 years) compared to traditional point-based planning.
- ▸Total treatment duration must be kept under 56 days to prevent tumor repopulation and loss of local control.
is the indispensable component of curative-intent treatment for locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC), providing a steep dose gradient that allows for dose escalation to the primary tumor while sparing adjacent (OARs) [1]A1c[57]D5. The NCCN v3.2019 guidelines state that brachytherapy cannot be replaced by ( ) boosts, such as or , as these modalities fail to achieve the same therapeutic ratio and are associated with inferior outcomes [1]A1c (1c). The integration of image-guided adaptive brachytherapy (IGABT), particularly using MRI, has shifted the paradigm from point-based prescriptions to volume-based optimization, significantly improving local control rates [30]B2b[51]B2b.
Step 1: Timing and Patient Preparation
Initiate brachytherapy towards the end of concurrent chemoradiation, typically after 40–45 Gy of EBRT, to allow for sufficient tumor regression and optimal applicator geometry [1]A1c[35]D5. The total treatment duration (EBRT + brachytherapy) should ideally not exceed 8 weeks (56 days), as prolonged treatment times are associated with a decrease in local control of approximately 1% per day of delay [1]A1c (1c). Ensure the patient is optimized for anesthesia or conscious sedation, as precise applicator placement is critical for dosimetric accuracy [97]A1a.
Step 2: Applicator Selection and Placement
Select the applicator based on the residual tumor volume and vaginal anatomy at the time of the procedure. Tandem-and-ovoid (T-O) or tandem-and-ring (T-R) applicators are standard for intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) [44]A1b. A randomized comparison of T-O vs. T-R applicators showed no significant difference in rectal D2cc (EQD2: 62.5 Gy vs. 63.1 Gy, p=0.78), though T-R may offer more consistent positioning in narrow vaginal vaults [44]A1b (1b). For bulky tumors or those with significant parametrial extension that cannot be adequately covered by ICBT, utilize interstitial brachytherapy (ISBT) or hybrid applicators to ensure adequate target coverage [30]B2b[96]A1a.
Step 3: Image-Guided Planning (IGABT)
Utilize MRI as the gold standard for volume-based planning to define the High-Risk Clinical Target Volume (HR-CTV), which includes the entire cervix and any residual macroscopic disease [30]B2b[57]D5. The EMBRACE-I study (N=1318) demonstrated that MRI-guided IGABT achieves a 5-year local control rate of 92% (95% CI 90–93%) [30]B2b[51]B2b (2b). If MRI is unavailable, CT-guided planning is an acceptable alternative, though it often overestimates the tumor width compared to MRI [92]C4[97]A1a.
Step 4: Dosimetry and Dose Constraints
Prescribe the dose using the Equivalent Dose in 2 Gy fractions (EQD2), accounting for both EBRT and brachytherapy. The target cumulative dose for the HR-CTV D90 is ≥85 Gy [30]B2b[51]B2b. Strict adherence to OAR constraints is mandatory to minimize late toxicity:
- Bladder D2cc: <80 Gy EQD2
- Rectum D2cc: <65 Gy EQD2
- Sigmoid D2cc: <70 Gy EQD2 [30]B2b[96]A1a.
Step 5: Monitoring and Resolution
Perform a clinical assessment and consider a standardized biopsy protocol at the completion of treatment or 6 weeks post-therapy if residual disease is suspected [90]B3b. In a retrospective cohort, biopsy-proven residual cancer at the end of chemoradiation predicted significantly poorer outcomes [90]B3b (3b). Long-term management must include sexual health support, as brachytherapy can cause vaginal stenosis and dryness; early use of vaginal dilators and topical estrogens is recommended [95]A1a (1a).
Controversies and Guideline Disagreement
| Question | Position A | Position B | Strength of Disagreement | Implication for Practice |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brachytherapy vs. Surgery after CRT | Standard Care (NCCN/ESMO): Brachytherapy is the mandatory final step for LACC [1]A1c[6]A1b. | Experimental (Cetina et al.): Radical after CRT showed similar OS (74% vs 75%) but higher morbidity [6]A1b. | Strong (Surgery is not standard post-CRT) | Surgery after CRT does not improve survival and increases complications; brachytherapy remains the standard [6]A1b. |
| Chemotherapy Choice in Elderly | Standard: Weekly 40 mg/m² [1]A1c. | Alternative: Lobaplatin 30 mg/m² every 3 weeks showed higher completion rates (83.9% vs 54.5%) in elderly patients [89]A1b. | Moderate (Emerging evidence for lobaplatin) | Lobaplatin may be a better-tolerated alternative for patients ≥65 years who cannot tolerate cisplatin [89]A1b. |
Pearl: MRI-guided adaptive brachytherapy (IGABT) is the gold standard for LACC, achieving >90% local control by delivering a cumulative EQD2 ≥85 Gy to the HR-CTV while strictly limiting OAR D2cc [30]B2b[51]B2b.
| Modality | Indication | Technique | Advantage | Evidence Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intracavitary (ICBT) | Standard LACC, good regression | Tandem and Ovoids/Ring | Simple, standardized | 1c [1]A1c |
| Interstitial (ISBT) | Bulky disease, parametrial extension | Perineal templates or hybrid needles | Better coverage of large volumes | 2b [30]B2b[96]A1a |
| MRI-Guided (IGABT) | All LACC (Gold Standard) | Adaptive volume-based planning | Superior local control, lower OAR dose | 2b [30]B2b[51]B2b |
| Agent / Target | Starting Dose | Target / Max Dose | Key Monitoring |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cisplatin (Concurrent) | 40 mg/m² IV weekly | Max 70 mg weekly | Cr, CBC, Audiogram [1]A1c[11]A1b |
| Lobaplatin (Elderly) | 30 mg/m² IV q3w | 2 cycles total | CBC, Hepatic function [89]A1b |
| HR-CTV D90 (EQD2) | ≥85 Gy (Total) | Dose-optimized per OAR | MRI/CT planning [30]B2b[51]B2b |
| Rectum D2cc (EQD2) | N/A | <65 Gy | Late proctitis symptoms [30]B2b[96]A1a |
| Bladder D2cc (EQD2) | N/A | <80 Gy | Cystitis, hematuria [30]B2b[96]A1a |
Concurrent Chemoradiation
- ▸Weekly cisplatin 40 mg/m² for 5–6 cycles is the Category 1 standard for stage IB3–IVA disease.
- ▸Adjuvant CCRT is mandatory for high-risk features including positive nodes, margins, or parametria.
- ▸Systemic chemotherapy following definitive CCRT (adjuvant maintenance) does not improve overall survival.
Weekly 40 mg/m² (maximum 70 mg/dose) for 5–6 cycles during ( ) is the definitive standard of care for FIGO stage IB3–IVA cervical cancer [1]A1c[14]A1b[35]D5. This concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) regimen improves 5-year overall survival (OS) by approximately 10% compared to radiation alone; NNT = 10 to prevent one death at 5 years [23]A1a. While tri-weekly cisplatin 75 mg/m² is an alternative, the weekly schedule is generally preferred due to its established efficacy and manageable toxicity profile [14]A1b.
Adjuvant CCRT and High-Risk Features
Post- patients with high-risk features—defined by the Peters criteria as positive pelvic lymph nodes, positive surgical margins, or microscopic parametrial involvement—require adjuvant CCRT to reduce recurrence risk [1]A1c[5]A1b. In patients with stage IIIB disease, the addition of cisplatin to radiation significantly improves the disease-free interval (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.29–0.93), although the absolute OS benefit in this advanced subgroup may be more modest; NNT not calculable from reported data [11]A1b. For intermediate-risk disease (Sedlis criteria), the benefit of adding chemotherapy to adjuvant radiation remains a subject of ongoing clinical investigation [3]A1b[66]B3b.
Alternative Regimens and Special Populations
Nedaplatin 30 mg/m² weekly serves as a non-inferior alternative to cisplatin for patients with renal impairment or severe intolerance, demonstrating comparable 3-year OS (HR 0.131, 95% CI 0.016–1.068); NNT not calculable from reported data [15]A1b[48]A1a. In elderly patients (≥65 years), lobaplatin 30 mg/m² every 3 weeks has shown higher chemotherapy completion rates (83.9% vs. 54.5%) with efficacy similar to weekly cisplatin [89]A1b. Older women derive significant benefit from the addition of cisplatin to definitive radiation, and age alone should not preclude standard CCRT [36]B2c.
Induction and Maintenance Strategies
The addition of induction chemotherapy (ICT) before CCRT or adjuvant systemic chemotherapy after CCRT has not consistently improved survival outcomes in randomized trials [17]A1b[22]A1a. The OUTBACK trial demonstrated that four cycles of adjuvant and after standard CCRT did not improve 5-year OS (72% vs 71%, HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.82–1.24); NNT not calculable from reported data [17]A1b. Similarly, the CALLA trial found that adding the PD-L1 inhibitor to CCRT did not significantly improve progression-free survival (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.65–1.08); NNT not calculable from reported data [16]A1b.
Supportive Care and Monitoring
Nausea and emesis management is critical for treatment adherence; adding fosaprepitant 150 mg to palonosetron and significantly increases the complete response rate for vomiting during the 5-week course; NNT not calculable from reported data [18]A1b. Monitoring of (HPV) circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is emerging as a potent biomarker for tracking treatment response and predicting early relapse [7]A1b[56]B3b[71]B2b.
Controversies and Guideline Disagreement
| Question | Position A | Position B | Strength | Implication |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adjuvant therapy for intermediate-risk disease | RT alone is the standard for Sedlis-positive patients [1]A1c[2]A1c. | CCRT may improve recurrence-free survival (RFS) [3]A1b[66]B3b. | Moderate | CCRT is increasingly considered for "high-intermediate" risk [3]A1b. |
| Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy (NACT) | CCRT is superior to NACT followed by surgery [8]A1b[25]A1a[101]A1b. | NACT followed by surgery is an alternative in specific settings [100]A1b. | Strong | CCRT remains the global standard for locally advanced disease [1]A1c[8]A1b. |
Pearl: CCRT with weekly cisplatin 40 mg/m² is the cornerstone of management for locally advanced disease, as adding adjuvant systemic chemotherapy after CCRT does not improve survival [17]A1b.
| Regimen | Dose and Schedule | Clinical Context |
|---|---|---|
| Cisplatin (Standard) | 40 mg/m² IV weekly (max 70 mg) | Definitive or adjuvant CCRT [1]A1c[14]A1b |
| Nedaplatin | 30 mg/m² IV weekly | Alternative for renal/GI intolerance [15]A1b[48]A1a |
| Lobaplatin | 30 mg/m² IV every 3 weeks | Elderly patients (≥65 years) [89]A1b |
| Cisplatin (Tri-weekly) | 75 mg/m² IV every 3 weeks | Alternative to weekly schedule [14]A1b |
Adjuvant and Palliative Radiotherapy
- ▸Adjuvant CCRT improves 5-year survival by 6% in high-risk patients (positive nodes, margins, or parametria).
- ▸IG-IMRT significantly reduces late GI toxicity compared to 3D-CRT (8.1% vs 21.1%, NNH=8).
- ▸The GOG-263 trial confirmed that adding cisplatin to adjuvant RT does not improve outcomes for intermediate-risk disease.
Adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) reduces the risk of pelvic recurrence by approximately 47% in patients with intermediate-risk factors following (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.31-0.92); NNT = 8 to prevent one recurrence [110]D5. Selection for adjuvant therapy depends on the pathologic assessment of "intermediate" or "high" risk features, traditionally defined by the Sedlis and Peters criteria, respectively.
Adjuvant Management of Intermediate-Risk Disease
Intermediate-risk factors include a combination of lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI), deep stromal invasion (middle or deep third), and large clinical tumor size (≥4 cm) [110]D5[126]C4. While RT alone was the historical standard for these patients, the NRG Oncology/GOG-263 trial recently demonstrated that adding concurrent weekly (40 mg/m²) to RT does not significantly improve recurrence-free survival (RFS) compared to RT alone in this population [3]A1b[128]A1b. Consequently, NCCN and ESMO guidelines continue to support RT alone as a standard for intermediate risk, though some clinicians favor concurrent chemoradiation (CCRT) for patients at the higher end of the intermediate-risk spectrum [66]B3b[129]B2b.
Adjuvant Management of High-Risk Disease
High-risk disease—defined by positive pelvic lymph nodes, positive surgical margins, or parametrial involvement—mandates adjuvant CCRT [19]A1a[110]D5. A landmark meta-analysis of 13 trials confirmed that CCRT provides a 6% absolute improvement in 5-year overall survival compared to RT alone (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.71-0.91); NNT = 17 to prevent one death at 5 years [19]A1a. Sequential chemoradiation (SCRT), involving cycles of chemotherapy before or after RT, has also shown promise in the STARS trial, improving 3-year disease-free survival to 90% compared to 82% with RT alone (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.35-0.76); NNT = 13 to prevent one recurrence at 3 years [20]A1b.
Technical Considerations and Toxicity
The transition from three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy ( ) to image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IG- ) has significantly improved the therapeutic ratio. The PARCER trial demonstrated that IG-IMRT reduces 3-year grade ≥2 late toxicity from 21.1% to 8.1% compared to 3D-CRT (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.22-0.98); NNH = 8 for 3D-CRT to cause one additional late GI event [9]A1b. For patients with node-positive disease requiring para-aortic irradiation, is an emerging option that further spares the bowel and bone marrow [131]B2b. In patients living with HIV, NCCN guidelines emphasize that cancer treatment should not be de-escalated based on HIV status alone, though drug-drug interactions with antiretrovirals must be monitored [123]A1c.
Palliative and Salvage Regimens
Palliative RT provides rapid relief for distressing symptoms such as vaginal bleeding, pelvic pain, or bone metastases, though access remains a critical challenge in low- and middle-income countries [133]B2a[134]D5. In the setting of localized pelvic recurrence after prior definitive CCRT, salvage high-dose-rate (HDR) interstitial may be attempted; the use of hydrogel spacers can reduce the dose to the rectum and bladder, potentially mitigating the high risk of fistulization in reirradiated tissues [132]C4.
Controversies and Guideline Disagreement
| Question | Position A (RT Alone) | Position B (CCRT) | Strength | Implication |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adjuvant therapy for intermediate risk | Standard per GOG-92 and GOG-263 [3]A1b[110]D5 | May benefit "high-intermediate" subgroups [66]B3b[127]B2b | Level 1b (RT) vs 2b (CCRT) | RT remains the standard of care; CCRT is not routinely indicated for intermediate risk. |
Pearl: Adjuvant CCRT is the absolute standard for high-risk features (nodes, margins, parametria), providing a 6% survival benefit (NNT=17), whereas RT alone remains the preferred evidence-based choice for intermediate-risk disease [3]A1b[19]A1a.
| Risk Category | Pathologic Features | Recommended Adjuvant Therapy |
|---|---|---|
| Intermediate (Sedlis) | LVSI (+) and deep stromal invasion; or LVSI (+) and large tumor size; or deep stromal invasion and large tumor size [110]D5 | Pelvic RT alone [3]A1b[110]D5 |
| High (Peters) | Positive pelvic lymph nodes, positive surgical margins, or parametrial involvement [110]D5 | Concurrent Chemoradiation (CCRT) [19]A1a[110]D5 |
Acute and Late Toxicity
- ▸IG-IMRT significantly reduces late grade ≥2 gastrointestinal toxicity compared to 3D-CRT (p=0.047).
- ▸Pretreatment L1 CT attenuation values are an easily detectable predictor for radiation-related pelvic insufficiency fractures.
- ▸Bevacizumab use in previously irradiated fields significantly increases the risk of gastrointestinal and genitourinary fistulas.
Pelvic irradiation frequently induces acute and late (GI) sequelae due to the proximity of the small and large bowel loops to the target volume. The phase III PARCER trial demonstrated that image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IG- ) significantly reduces late grade ≥2 GI toxicity compared to 3D-conformal radiation therapy ( ) (p=0.047) [9]A1b. (NNT not calculable from reported data). To further mitigate rectal dose, the use of polyethylene glycol (PEG) hydrogel spacers during reduces rectal V30 and V40 doses, potentially lowering the incidence of [140]A1b. For acute management, the yeast-based probiotic Saccharomyces boulardii (250 mg/day) administered one week prior to and during RT reduces the incidence of grade ≥2 diarrhea [141]A1b. (NNT not calculable from reported data). Long-term survivors also face a pooled increased risk of secondary rectal cancer (RR 1.3–1.6), necessitating prolonged surveillance [26]A1a.
Genitourinary and Fistula Risks
Genitourinary (GU) toxicity remains a primary concern, particularly in patients with FIGO stage IVA disease where bladder or rectal mucosal invasion is present. In these high-risk cases, definitive RT is associated with significant morbidity, including a pooled incidence of late grade 3–4 GU toxicity of approximately 15–20% [144]B2a. The addition of anti-angiogenic agents like (15 mg/kg) to the treatment of recurrent or advanced disease increases the risk of GI-vaginal or GU-vaginal fistulas, especially in previously irradiated fields [137]B2b[139]A1b. While minimally invasive radical (MIRH) is associated with specific urologic complications like ureterovaginal fistulas, the subsequent addition of adjuvant RT can exacerbate these tissue healing deficits [143]B2a.
Bone and Hematologic Complications
Pelvic insufficiency fractures (PIF) occur as a late complication of high-dose pelvic RT, often manifesting within the first two years post-treatment. Pretreatment CT attenuation values of the L1 vertebra serve as a predictive biomarker; lower Hounsfield units (HU) correlate with an increased risk of radiation-related bone side effects [65]B2b. Hematologic toxicity, specifically radiation-induced lymphopenia (RIL), is common during fractionated RT and can impact long-term tumor control by depleting the circulating immune pool [145]B2c. Concurrent -based chemoradiation further increases acute hematologic and GI toxicity compared to RT alone, though long-term follow-up confirms these effects are generally manageable and do not outweigh the survival benefit [136]A1b.
Vaginal and Sexual Health
Radiation vaginitis and subsequent vaginal stenosis significantly impair quality of life and sexual function. This inflammatory process can progress to ulcers, necrosis, and adhesions [138]A1a. While conventional dilator therapy is standard, systematic reviews suggest that certain herbal medicines may offer a favorable safety profile in preventing these adhesions, though evidence remains heterogeneous [138]A1a.
Controversies and Guideline Disagreement
| Question | Position A | Position B | Strength | Implication |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adjuvant strategy for high-risk Stage IB2-IIB | Concurrent Chemoradiation (Standard of Care) [136]A1b | Adjuvant Chemotherapy alone [142]B3b | Retrospective (3b) | Potential to avoid RT-related toxicity in select patients if RFS is comparable. |
Pearl: Transitioning from 3D-CRT to IG-IMRT reduces late grade ≥2 GI toxicity, while pretreatment L1 CT attenuation serves as a critical predictor for pelvic insufficiency fractures [9]A1b[65]B2b.
| System | Acute Toxicities | Late Toxicities |
|---|---|---|
| Gastrointestinal | Diarrhea, nausea, proctitis | Bowel obstruction, chronic diarrhea, secondary rectal cancer |
| Genitourinary | Cystitis, dysuria | Vesicovaginal fistula, ureteral stricture, bladder contracture |
| Hematologic | Lymphopenia, neutropenia, anemia | Bone marrow atrophy |
| Skeletal | N/A | Pelvic insufficiency fractures (PIF) |
| Vaginal | Vaginitis, mucositis | Vaginal stenosis, dryness, dyspareunia |
Outcomes and Prognosis
- ▸Cisplatin-based CCRT improves 5-year survival by 6% compared to radiotherapy alone (NNT = 17).
- ▸MRI-guided adaptive brachytherapy achieves 92% local control in locally advanced disease.
- ▸The Moore criteria (race, PS, pelvic disease, prior cisplatin, PFI) are the standard for risk-stratifying advanced cases.
Five-year survival rates for locally advanced cervical cancer reach approximately 66% when integrating -based concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) with definitive radiation [55]D5. A meta-analysis of 18 randomized trials demonstrates that adding chemotherapy to radiotherapy provides a 6% absolute improvement in 5-year survival (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.71-0.91); NNT = 17 to prevent one death at 5 years [19]A1a. Modern image-guided adaptive (IGABT) has further refined these outcomes, achieving local control rates of 92% at 2 years in locally advanced cases [30]B2b.
Prognostic Factors and Risk Stratification
Prognosis is heavily influenced by clinical and metabolic factors. The Moore criteria provide a validated framework for advanced disease, categorizing patients into low-, mid-, and high-risk groups based on five negative factors: black race, performance status 1, pelvic disease, prior cisplatin exposure, and a progression-free interval <365 days [108]B2c. Additionally, pretreatment FDG-PET SUVmax and intratumoral metabolic heterogeneity serve as significant predictors of disease-free survival [112]B2b. Emerging biomarkers, such as ultrasensitive circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and circulating human papillomavirus (cHPV) DNA, are increasingly used to track minimal residual disease and predict relapse [7]A1b.
Recurrence and Long-Term Sequelae
Relapse occurs in 30% to 50% of patients with locally advanced disease following standard CCRT [7]A1b. Most recurrences manifest within the first 24 to 36 months post-treatment, necessitating rigorous surveillance. Survivors often face long-term quality-of-life disruptions, including chronic fatigue, pelvic pain, and psychosocial distress, which can persist for 9 to 30 months or longer after the initial diagnosis [150]A1b. While immunotherapy combinations (e.g., plus chemotherapy) have improved survival in the recurrent setting, the primary goal remains curative-intent management of the initial presentation [147]A1b[159]A1b.
Controversies and Guideline Disagreement
| Question | Position A | Position B | Strength | Implication |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Surgical Approach | Open radical is the standard for early-stage disease [149]A1b[158]A1b. | Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) was previously common but shows higher recurrence [167]D5. | High (Level 1b) | NCCN guidelines now prefer open surgery for radical hysterectomy [167]D5. |
| Adjuvant Strategy | Adjuvant CCRT is standard for high-risk factors (Peters criteria) [19]A1a. | Adjuvant RT alone may suffice for intermediate-risk factors (Sedlis criteria) [3]A1b. | Moderate | Ongoing trials (GOG-263) are refining the role of CRT in intermediate-risk disease [3]A1b. |
Pearl: Concurrent chemoradiotherapy provides a 6% absolute survival benefit over radiation alone, with modern MRI-guided brachytherapy pushing local control rates above 90% [19]A1a[30]B2b.
| Factor | Good Prognosis | Poor Prognosis |
|---|---|---|
| Race | Non-Black | Black |
| Performance Status | 0 | 1 |
| Pelvic Disease | Absent | Present |
| Prior Cisplatin | No | Yes |
| Progression-Free Interval | >365 days | <365 days |
| Risk Category | Low (0-1 factors) | High (4-5 factors) |
Related Pages
Part of the Cervical Cancer family. Cross-cutting management is split across dedicated child pages:
- — diagnostic page (definition, epidemiology, staging, biomarkers, prognosis)
- — operations by stage, fertility-sparing options, sentinel node mapping, adjuvant triggers (Sedlis / Peters)
- — concurrent / adjuvant / metastatic chemotherapy, targeted therapy, immune checkpoint inhibitors
- — early integration, symptom management, palliative procedures, end-of-life care
- — post-treatment surveillance schedule, late toxicity, survivorship, patient counselling
- — local-regional salvage, distant metastatic systemic therapy, oligometastatic disease
Pearl: Use these links to hop between management modalities; the parent Cervical Cancer page carries diagnosis + staging that informs every decision here.
References
- [1]
Koh WJ, Abu-Rustum NR, Bean S et al.. “Cervical Cancer, Version 3.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.” Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN (2019). PMID: 30659131 ↗
L1GUIDELINECited in: Indications by Stage, Brachytherapy, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [2]
Koh WJ, Greer BE, Abu-Rustum NR et al.. “Cervical cancer.” Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN (2013). PMID: 23486458 ↗
L1GUIDELINECited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [3]
Ryu SY, Deng W, Albuquerque K et al.. “Randomized phase III trial of adjuvant radiation versus chemoradiation in intermediate-risk, early-stage cervical cancer following radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy: results from NRG Oncology/GOG-263/KGOG 1008.” Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology (2025). PMID: 40947016 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation, Adjuvant and Palliative RT, Outcomes - [4]
Sugiyama T, Fujiwara K, Ohashi Y et al.. “Phase III placebo-controlled double-blind randomized trial of radiotherapy for stage IIB-IVA cervical cancer with or without immunomodulator Z-100: a JGOG study.” Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology (2014). PMID: 24569914 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [5]
Sehouli J, Runnebaum IB, Fotopoulou C et al.. “A randomized phase III adjuvant study in high-risk cervical cancer: simultaneous radiochemotherapy with cisplatin (S-RC) versus systemic paclitaxel and carboplatin followed by percutaneous radiation (PC-R): a NOGGO-AGO Intergroup Study.” Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology (2012). PMID: 22357252 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [6]
Cetina L, González-Enciso A, Cantú D 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 : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology (2013). PMID: 23609186 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Indications by Stage, Brachytherapy, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [7]
Mayadev J, Vázquez Limón JC, Ramírez Godinez FJ et al.. “Ultrasensitive detection and tracking of circulating tumor DNA to predict relapse and survival in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer: phase III CALLA trial analyses.” Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology (2025). PMID: 40500687 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [8]
Kenter GG, Greggi S, Vergote I et al.. “Randomized Phase III Study Comparing Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Followed by Surgery Versus Chemoradiation in Stage IB2-IIB Cervical Cancer: EORTC-55994.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2023). PMID: 37656948 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [9]
Chopra S, Gupta S, Kannan S et al.. “Late Toxicity After Adjuvant Conventional Radiation Versus Image-Guided Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy for Cervical Cancer (PARCER): A Randomized Controlled Trial.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2021). PMID: 34506246 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Indications by Stage, External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT), Concurrent Chemoradiation, Adjuvant and Palliative RT, Acute and Late Toxicity - [10]
da Costa SCS, Bonadio RC, Gabrielli FCG et al.. “Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy With Cisplatin and Gemcitabine Followed by Chemoradiation Versus Chemoradiation for Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: A Randomized Phase II Trial.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2019). PMID: 31449470 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [11]
Zuliani AC, Esteves SC, Teixeira LC et al.. “Concomitant cisplatin plus radiotherapy and high-dose-rate brachytherapy versus radiotherapy alone for stage IIIB epidermoid cervical cancer: a randomized controlled trial.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2014). PMID: 24449243 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Indications by Stage, Brachytherapy, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [12]
Blohmer JU, Paepke S, Sehouli J et al.. “Randomized phase III trial of sequential adjuvant chemoradiotherapy with or without erythropoietin Alfa in patients with high-risk cervical cancer: results of the NOGGO-AGO intergroup study.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2011). PMID: 21860000 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [13]
Dueñas-González A, Zarbá JJ, Patel F et al.. “Phase III, open-label, randomized study comparing concurrent gemcitabine plus cisplatin and radiation followed by adjuvant gemcitabine and cisplatin versus concurrent cisplatin and radiation in patients with stage IIB to IVA carcinoma of the cervix.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2011). PMID: 21444871 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Indications by Stage - [14]
Ryu SY, Nam BH, Kim MH et al.. “A randomized phase III clinical trial of weekly versus tri-weekly cisplatin-based chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer: results of the TACO (GCIG/KGOG 1027/THAI 2012) study.” ESMO open (2026). PMID: 41812622 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [15]
Yang X, Ren H, Li Z et al.. “A phase III randomized, controlled trial of nedaplatin versus cisplatin concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with cervical cancer.” ESMO open (2022). PMID: 35994789 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [16]
Monk BJ, Toita T, Wu X et al.. “Durvalumab versus placebo with chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer (CALLA): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial.” The Lancet. Oncology (2023). PMID: 38039991 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [17]
Mileshkin LR, Moore KN, Barnes EH et al.. “Adjuvant chemotherapy following chemoradiotherapy as primary treatment for locally advanced cervical cancer versus chemoradiotherapy alone (OUTBACK): an international, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.” The Lancet. Oncology (2023). PMID: 37080223 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [18]
Ruhlmann CH, Christensen TB, Dohn LH et al.. “Efficacy and safety of fosaprepitant for the prevention of nausea and emesis during 5 weeks of chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer (the GAND-emesis study): a multinational, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial.” The Lancet. Oncology (2016). PMID: 26952945 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [19]
. “Reducing uncertainties about the effects of chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data from 18 randomized trials.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2008). PMID: 19001332 ↗
L1SR_OBSCited in: Indications by Stage, Adjuvant and Palliative RT, Outcomes - [20]
Huang H, Feng YL, Wan T et al.. “Effectiveness of Sequential Chemoradiation vs Concurrent Chemoradiation or Radiation Alone in Adjuvant Treatment After Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer: The STARS Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.” JAMA oncology (2021). PMID: 33443541 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation, Adjuvant and Palliative RT, Outcomes - [21]
Cho WK, Park W, Kim SW et al.. “Postoperative Hypofractionated Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy With Concurrent Chemotherapy in Cervical Cancer: The POHIM-CCRT Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.” JAMA oncology (2024). PMID: 38662364 ↗
L2RCTCited in: Indications by Stage, External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT), Concurrent Chemoradiation - [22]
Andrade MO, Al-Alam OCM, Kim HJS et al.. “Induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.” Cancer treatment reviews (2025). PMID: 40408847 ↗
L1SR_OBSCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [23]
Tzioras S, Pavlidis N, Paraskevaidis E et al.. “Effects of different chemotherapy regimens on survival for advanced cervical cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis.” Cancer treatment reviews (2007). PMID: 17112673 ↗
L1SR_OBSCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [24]
Petrelli F, Riboldi V, Bruschieri L et al.. “First-line treatment of locally advanced cervical carcinoma: An updated systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.” Cancer treatment reviews (2025). PMID: 40086103 ↗
L1SR_OBSCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [25]
Marchetti C, Fagotti A, Tombolini V et al.. “Survival and toxicity in neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery versus definitive chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.” Cancer treatment reviews (2020). PMID: 31838220 ↗
L1SR_OBSCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [26]
Rombouts AJM, Hugen N, van Beek JJP et al.. “Does pelvic radiation increase rectal cancer incidence? - A systematic review and meta-analysis.” Cancer treatment reviews (2018). PMID: 29957373 ↗
L1SR_OBSCited in: Indications by Stage, Acute and Late Toxicity - [27]
Gouy S, Morice P, Narducci F et al.. “Prospective multicenter study evaluating the survival of patients with locally advanced cervical cancer undergoing laparoscopic para-aortic lymphadenectomy before chemoradiotherapy in the era of positron emission tomography imaging.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2013). PMID: 23857967 ↗
L2TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Indications by Stage - [28]
de la Rochefordiere A, Kamal M, Floquet A et al.. “PIK3CA Pathway Mutations Predictive of Poor Response Following Standard Radiochemotherapy ± Cetuximab in Cervical Cancer Patients.” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2015). PMID: 25724520 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Indications by Stage, Outcomes - [29]
Nakano T, Suzuki Y, Ohno T et al.. “Carbon beam therapy overcomes the radiation resistance of uterine cervical cancer originating from hypoxia.” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2006). PMID: 16609033 ↗
L4RCTCited in: Indications by Stage, Outcomes - [30]
Pötter R, Tanderup K, Schmid MP et al.. “MRI-guided adaptive brachytherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer (EMBRACE-I): a multicentre prospective cohort study.” The Lancet. Oncology (2021). PMID: 33794207 ↗
L2TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Indications by Stage, Brachytherapy, Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [31]
Mayadev JS, Enserro D, Lin YG et al.. “Sequential Ipilimumab After Chemoradiotherapy in Curative-Intent Treatment of Patients With Node-Positive Cervical Cancer.” JAMA oncology (2020). PMID: 31774464 ↗
L4TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [32]
Höckel M, Wolf B, Schmidt K et al.. “Surgical resection based on ontogenetic cancer field theory for cervical cancer: mature results from a single-centre, prospective, observational, cohort study.” The Lancet. Oncology (2019). PMID: 31383547 ↗
L2COHORTCited in: Indications by Stage, Adjuvant and Palliative RT, Outcomes - [33]
Bertolazzi M, Genta ML, Lopes A et al.. “Randomized trial of autologous ovarian graft to preserve ovarian function in young women undergoing pelvic radiotherapy for cervical cancer.” European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology (2026). PMID: 41759360 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Indications by Stage - [34]
Corbeau A, Spampinato S, Charnalia M et al.. “Normal tissue complication probability models for gastrointestinal toxicity after adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy for cervical cancer in the PARCER trial.” Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (2026). PMID: 41698508 ↗
L2RCTCited in: Indications by Stage, External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT), Concurrent Chemoradiation, Acute and Late Toxicity - [35]
Flint ML, Byrne ME, Friedman CF. “Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: What is the Preferred Systemic Treatment?” Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN (2025). PMID: 41671446 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Indications by Stage, Brachytherapy, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [36]
Xiang M, Kidd EA. “Benefit of Cisplatin With Definitive Radiotherapy in Older Women With Cervical Cancer.” Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN (2019). PMID: 31390586 ↗
L2OTHERCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [37]
Loiselle C, Koh WJ. “The emerging use of IMRT for treatment of cervical cancer.” Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN (2010). PMID: 21147905 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Indications by Stage, External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT) - [38]
Dyer BA, Zamarin D, Eskandar RN et al.. “Role of Immunotherapy in the Management of Locally Advanced and Recurrent/Metastatic Cervical Cancer.” Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN (2019). PMID: 30659133 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [39]
Papadopoulos KP, Johnson ML, Lockhart AC et al.. “First-In-Human Study of Cemiplimab Alone or In Combination with Radiotherapy and/or Low-dose Cyclophosphamide in Patients with Advanced Malignancies.” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2020). PMID: 31796520 ↗
L4TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [40]
Nogueira-Rodrigues A, do Carmo CC, Viegas C et al.. “Phase I trial of erlotinib combined with cisplatin and radiotherapy for patients with locally advanced cervical squamous cell cancer.” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2008). PMID: 18829516 ↗
L4TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Indications by Stage, Brachytherapy, Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [41]
Kunos CA, Waggoner S, von Gruenigen V et al.. “Phase I trial of pelvic radiation, weekly cisplatin, and 3-aminopyridine-2-carboxaldehyde thiosemicarbazone (3-AP, NSC #663249) for locally advanced cervical cancer.” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2010). PMID: 20145183 ↗
L4TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [42]
Tewari KS. “Immune Checkpoint Blockade in PD-L1-Positive Platinum-Refractory Cervical Carcinoma.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2019). PMID: 31026210 ↗
L5CASE_REPORTCited in: Indications by Stage, Brachytherapy, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [43]
. “Prophylactic para-aortic irradiation vs pelvic radiotherapy in pelvic node-positive carcinoma cervix in the setting of concurrent chemoradiation: a phase II open-label multi centric randomized controlled trial (PRO-PARA).” Trials (2026). PMID: 41792812 ↗
L5RCTCited in: Indications by Stage, External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT), Brachytherapy, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [44]
Bonala SR, Raja SA, Subramanian BV et al.. “Randomized comparison of tandem-ring versus tandem-ovoid applicators in volume-based brachytherapy for cervical cancer: Dosimetric analysis and early clinical outcomes.” Brachytherapy (2026). PMID: 41679999 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Indications by Stage, Brachytherapy - [45]
Yokoi A, Machida H, Okazawa-Sakai M et al.. “Optimal adjuvant strategy in intermediate-risk cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” International journal of clinical oncology (2026). PMID: 42012622 ↗
L1SR_OBSCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation, Adjuvant and Palliative RT - [46]
Zhou L, Sun C, Diao P et al.. “Efficacy and safety of adding immune checkpoint inhibitors to standard chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy for advanced or recurrent cervical cancer: a meta-analysis.” Frontiers in immunology (2026). PMID: 41869324 ↗
L1SR_OBSCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [47]
Hathout L, Zhang Y, Lymberis S et al.. “A Systematic Review of Patient-Reported Outcomes on the Impact of Radiation Therapy on Sexual Health in Patients With Gynecologic Cancer.” International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics (2026). PMID: 41720168 ↗
L2SR_OBSCited in: Indications by Stage - [48]
Umemiya M, Kou K, Inayama Y et al.. “Comparison of nedaplatin and cisplatin in concurrent chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” International journal of clinical oncology (2026). PMID: 41612081 ↗
L1SR_OBSCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [49]
Chargari C, Martinez A, Michels J et al.. “[French recommendations for clinical practice, Nice/Saint-Paul-de-Vence 2024-2025: Management of localized cervical cancer].” Bulletin du cancer (2026). PMID: 41617621 ↗
L1GUIDELINECited in: Indications by Stage, Brachytherapy, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [50]
Cho Y, Kim KH, Yoon HI et al.. “Tumor-related leukocytosis is associated with poor radiation response and clinical outcome in uterine cervical cancer patients.” Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology (2016). PMID: 27502717 ↗
L3OTHERCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [51]
Schmid MP, Lindegaard JC, Mahantshetty U et al.. “Risk Factors for Local Failure Following Chemoradiation and Magnetic Resonance Image-Guided Brachytherapy in Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: Results From the EMBRACE-I Study.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2023). PMID: 36599120 ↗
L2OTHERCited in: Indications by Stage, Brachytherapy, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [52]
Dryden-Peterson S, Bvochora-Nsingo M, Suneja G et al.. “HIV Infection and Survival Among Women With Cervical Cancer.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2016). PMID: 27573661 ↗
L2OTHERCited in: Indications by Stage, Brachytherapy, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [53]
Rose PG, Java J, Whitney CW et al.. “Nomograms Predicting Progression-Free Survival, Overall Survival, and Pelvic Recurrence in Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer Developed From an Analysis of Identifiable Prognostic Factors in Patients From NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group Randomized Trials of Chemoradiotherapy.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2015). PMID: 25732170 ↗
L3OTHERCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [54]
Wenzel HHB, Olthof EP, Bekkers RLM et al.. “Primary or adjuvant chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer with intraoperative lymph node metastasis - A review.” Cancer treatment reviews (2022). PMID: 34773774 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [55]
Wieringa HW, van der Zee AG, de Vries EG et al.. “Breaking the DNA damage response to improve cervical cancer treatment.” Cancer treatment reviews (2016). PMID: 26643553 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [56]
Cabel L, Bonneau C, Bernard-Tessier A et al.. “HPV ctDNA detection of high-risk HPV types during chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer.” ESMO open (2021). PMID: 34022731 ↗
L3OTHERCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [57]
Westerveld H, Nesvacil N, Fokdal L et al.. “Definitive radiotherapy with image-guided adaptive brachytherapy for primary vaginal cancer.” The Lancet. Oncology (2020). PMID: 32135119 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Indications by Stage, Brachytherapy, Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [58]
Elbanna M, Pynda Y, Kalinchuk O et al.. “Radiotherapy resources in Latin America and the Caribbean: a review of current and projected needs based on International Atomic Energy Agency data.” The Lancet. Oncology (2023). PMID: 37657478 ↗
L2REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Indications by Stage, Brachytherapy - [59]
Hajeer A, Salem A, Akash M et al.. “Assessing the global demand and supply of brachytherapy resources: a population-based observational study.” The Lancet. Oncology (2026). PMID: 41785895 ↗
L2OTHERCited in: Indications by Stage, Brachytherapy - [60]
Elmore SNC, Polo A, Bourque JM et al.. “Radiotherapy resources in Africa: an International Atomic Energy Agency update and analysis of projected needs.” The Lancet. Oncology (2021). PMID: 34478675 ↗
L2OTHERCited in: Indications by Stage - [61]
Rodin D, Burger EA, Atun R et al.. “Scale-up of radiotherapy for cervical cancer in the era of human papillomavirus vaccination in low-income and middle-income countries: a model-based analysis of need and economic impact.” The Lancet. Oncology (2019). PMID: 31151906 ↗
L2OTHERCited in: Indications by Stage - [62]
Scott JG, Berglund A, Schell MJ et al.. “A genome-based model for adjusting radiotherapy dose (GARD): a retrospective, cohort-based study.” The Lancet. Oncology (2017). PMID: 27993569 ↗
L3OTHERCited in: Indications by Stage - [63]
Höckel M, Hentschel B, Horn LC. “Association between developmental steps in the organogenesis of the uterine cervix and locoregional progression of cervical cancer: a prospective clinicopathological analysis.” The Lancet. Oncology (2014). PMID: 24656439 ↗
L2OTHERCited in: Indications by Stage, Adjuvant and Palliative RT - [64]
Du Q, Liu Q, Zhou Y et al.. “Primary prophylaxis with pegylated G-CSF is associated with improved treatment completion and progression-free survival in locally advanced cervical cancer undergoing concurrent chemoradiotherapy: a retrospective cohort study.” Future oncology (London, England) (2026). PMID: 41930746 ↗
L3COHORTCited in: Indications by Stage - [65]
Malikova H, Graffneter K, Kremenova K et al.. “Pretreatment computed tomography L1 attenuation values: Easy reaching predicting factor for radiation-related bone insufficiency fractures in females treated for advanced cervical cancer (prospective study).” Women's health (London, England) (2026). PMID: 41746818 ↗
L2COHORTCited in: Indications by Stage, Acute and Late Toxicity - [66]
Agustí N, Viveros-Carreño D, Wu CF et al.. “Adjuvant Chemoradiotherapy vs Radiotherapy Alone for Patients With Intermediate-Risk Cervical Cancer.” JAMA oncology (2025). PMID: 40079948 ↗
L3OTHERCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation, Adjuvant and Palliative RT - [67]
Wang Y, Farmer M, Izaguirre EW et al.. “Association of Definitive Pelvic Radiation Therapy With Survival Among Patients With Newly Diagnosed Metastatic Cervical Cancer.” JAMA oncology (2018). PMID: 30054609 ↗
L3OTHERCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [68]
Colbert LE, El Alam MB, Wang R et al.. “Tumor-resident Lactobacillus iners confer chemoradiation resistance through lactate-induced metabolic rewiring.” Cancer cell (2023). PMID: 37863066 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Indications by Stage - [69]
Lukovic J, Pintilie M, Han K et al.. “An Immune Gene Expression Risk Score for Distant Metastases after Radiotherapy for Cervical Cancer.” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2024). PMID: 38180733 ↗
L3OTHERCited in: Indications by Stage - [70]
Mondini M, Deutsch E. “(Chemo)Radiotherapy-Immunotherapy Combinations: Time to Get Tailored?” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2021). PMID: 33986023 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [71]
Seo A, Xiao W, Gjyshi O et al.. “Human Papilloma Virus Circulating Cell-Free DNA Kinetics in Patients with Cervical Cancer Undergoing Definitive Chemoradiation.” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2025). PMID: 39680029 ↗
L2OTHERCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [72]
Chaudary N, Pintilie M, Jelveh S et al.. “Plerixafor Improves Primary Tumor Response and Reduces Metastases in Cervical Cancer Treated with Radio-Chemotherapy.” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2017). PMID: 27697997 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [73]
Chen J, Chen C, Zhan Y et al.. “Heterogeneity of IFN-Mediated Responses and Tumor Immunogenicity in Patients with Cervical Cancer Receiving Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy.” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2021). PMID: 33766815 ↗
L2OTHERCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [74]
Ju XZ, Yang JM, Zhou XY et al.. “EMMPRIN expression as a prognostic factor in radiotherapy of cervical cancer.” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2008). PMID: 18223224 ↗
L3OTHERCited in: Indications by Stage, Brachytherapy - [75]
Lee J, Chang CL, Lin JB et al.. “Skeletal Muscle Loss Is an Imaging Biomarker of Outcome after Definitive Chemoradiotherapy for Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer.” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2018). PMID: 29959140 ↗
L3OTHERCited in: Indications by Stage, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [76]
Dankulchai P, Prasartseree T, Sittiwong W et al.. “Early Results of Hypofractionated Chemoradiation in Cervical Cancer with 44 Gy/ 20 F vs 45 Gy/ 25 F: A Phase II, Open-Label, Randomised Controlled Trial (HYPOCx-iRex Trial).” Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)) (2025). PMID: 40897075 ↗
L1RCTCited in: External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT) - [77]
Cho WK, Park W, Lee JH et al.. “Postoperative conventional versus hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiation therapy with concurrent chemotherapy in cervical cancer: a prospective multicenter randomized phase III trial (POHIM_P3 trial).” Journal of gynecologic oncology (2026). PMID: 40676909 ↗
L5TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT) - [78]
Zeng Z, Chen Y, Qiu J et al.. “Moderately hypofractionated online adaptive radiotherapy (SWIFT-1) in cervical cancer patients: study protocol for a multi-centered, open-label, two-arm, phase III, randomized controlled study.” Radiation oncology (London, England) (2025). PMID: 40671096 ↗
L5TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT) - [79]
Cho WK, Park W, Kim SW et al.. “Postoperative hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiation therapy in cervical cancer: prospective phase 2 trial (POHIM_RT study).” Gynecologic oncology (2025). PMID: 40449127 ↗
L2TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT), Adjuvant and Palliative RT - [80]
You J, Wu D, Tie J et al.. “Phase I clinical trial of lobaplatin combined with image-guided volume-modulated arc radiation therapy in locally advanced cervical cancer.” BMC cancer (2026). PMID: 42168915 ↗
L4TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT), Brachytherapy - [81]
Lebret D, Lafond C, Leseur J et al.. “Prospective multi-institutional study of library-based adaptive radiotherapy for cervical cancer: Evaluation of plan-of-the-day selection and population analysis.” Journal of applied clinical medical physics (2025). PMID: 41253687 ↗
L2TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT) - [82]
Ma J, Wang G, Wang W et al.. “Extended-field intensity-modulated radiation therapy and high-dose-rate brachytherapy with concurrent chemotherapy for cervical cancer with positive para-aortic or common iliac lymph nodes: a multicenter prospective cohort study.” Journal of gynecologic oncology (2026). PMID: 42210768 ↗
L2COHORTCited in: External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT), Brachytherapy, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [83]
Riggenbach E, Mose L, Imboden S et al.. “Intensified radiochemotherapy with cisplatin and gemcitabine for cervical cancer in the modern era: a retrospective cohort study.” Journal of gynecologic oncology (2026). PMID: 41413788 ↗
L3COHORTCited in: External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT), Brachytherapy - [84]
Manea E, Anghel B, Stanescu AD et al.. “Adaptive Target Volume and Dosimetry in Image-Guided Radiotherapy for Cervical Cancer.” Journal of clinical medicine (2025). PMID: 40429413 ↗
L4CASE_REPORTCited in: External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT) - [85]
Xu M, Kang K, Zhao M et al.. “Optimizing ovarian dose sparing for young cervical cancer patients after oophoropexy: a dosimetric and radiobiological comparison of three radiotherapy techniques (IMPT, TOMO, and VMAT).” Radiation oncology (London, England) (2026). PMID: 42243980 ↗
L4OTHERCited in: External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT) - [86]
Mayadev J, Deng W, Kim H et al.. “Radiation Quality and Workflow in NRG GY017: Anti PD-L1 (Atezolizumab) as an immune primer or concurrently with RT for node positive locally advanced cervical cancer.” International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics (2026). PMID: 42184868 ↗
L1OTHERCited in: External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT) - [87]
Lee SS, Weil CR, Boyd L et al.. “Trends in Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Utilization for Definitive Treatment of Intact Cervical Cancer, 2004-2019.” Advances in radiation oncology (2026). PMID: 42183318 ↗
L2OTHERCited in: External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT) - [88]
Shinde P, Ak A, Agarwal P et al.. “Spatially fractionated radiotherapy using straight and bending virtual rods as an alternative for cervical cancer brachytherapy-results from preclinical in-silico dose comparison and quality assurance.” The British journal of radiology (2026). PMID: 42179164 ↗
L4OTHERCited in: External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT) - [89]
Hu L, Li J, Du Y et al.. “Lobaplatin versus cisplatin in concurrent chemoradiotherapy for elderly cervical cancer: randomized controlled phase II study.” Journal of gynecologic oncology (2026). PMID: 41381401 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Brachytherapy, Concurrent Chemoradiation - [90]
Ebner C, Purtscheller R, Feroz B et al.. “Biopsy-proven residual cervical cancer at the end of combined chemoradiation predicts poor outcome-Retrospective single-center cohort study.” Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica (2026). PMID: 41423908 ↗
L3COHORTCited in: Brachytherapy - [91]
Zhou J, Cai J, Li X et al.. “Pelvic radiotherapy combined with immunotherapy and chemotherapy for stage IVB cervical cancer: a retrospective study.” International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society (2026). PMID: 41411697 ↗
L3COHORTCited in: Brachytherapy - [92]
Sun Y, Chen Y, Zeng Z et al.. “Metal artifact reduction in spectral computed tomography for intracavity brachytherapy in cervical cancer patients: a prospective study.” Radiation oncology (London, England) (2025). PMID: 41327225 ↗
L4COHORTCited in: Brachytherapy - [93]
Cvancarova M, Samuelsen SO, Magelssen H et al.. “Reproduction rates after cancer treatment: experience from the Norwegian radium hospital.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2009). PMID: 19075285 ↗
L2OTHERCited in: Brachytherapy - [94]
Nakashima T, Matsumoto K, Yoshitake T et al.. “Impact of high-dose pelvic radiotherapy combined with chemotherapy on local control, symptom relief, and safety in patients with stage IVB cervical cancer (FIGO 2018): a two-center retrospective study.” Japanese journal of radiology (2026). PMID: 41441948 ↗
L3COHORTCited in: Brachytherapy, Acute and Late Toxicity - [95]
Liu R, Fan Z, Ma H et al.. “Best evidence summary on sexual health management for patients undergoing intracavitary brachytherapy for gynecological neoplasms.” Frontiers in oncology (2026). PMID: 41695375 ↗
L1SR_OBSCited in: Brachytherapy - [96]
Straathof R, Pool LI, van Vliet-Pérez SM et al.. “Clinical factors affecting the therapeutic dose window in cervical cancer brachytherapy: A systematic review and meta-regression.” Brachytherapy (2026). PMID: 41444098 ↗
L1SR_OBSCited in: Brachytherapy - [97]
Sargazi V, Naseri S, Gholamhosseinian H et al.. “Applicator reconstruction in cervical cancer brachytherapy: A systematic review of current methods, challenges, and AI-driven future directions.” Brachytherapy (2026). PMID: 41344965 ↗
L1SR_OBSCited in: Brachytherapy - [98]
Noordhuis MG, Eijsink JJ, Ten Hoor KA et al.. “Expression of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and activated EGFR predict poor response to (chemo)radiation and survival in cervical cancer.” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2009). PMID: 19920104 ↗
L3OTHERCited in: Brachytherapy - [99]
Ilia G, Thomopoulos A, Chronas D. “Preserved Menstruation After Chemoradiotherapy in Stage IIIC1 Cervical Cancer: A Unique Case.” Journal of clinical medicine (2026). PMID: 41753237 ↗
L4CASE_REPORTCited in: Brachytherapy - [100]
Lissoni AA, Colombo N, Pellegrino A et al.. “A phase II, randomized trial of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy comparing a three-drug combination of paclitaxel, ifosfamide, and cisplatin (TIP) versus paclitaxel and cisplatin (TP) followed by radical surgery in patients with locally advanced squamous cell cervical carcinoma: the Snap-02 Italian Collaborative Study.” Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology (2009). PMID: 19181826 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation - [101]
Gupta S, Maheshwari A, Parab P 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 : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2018). PMID: 29432076 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [102]
Kitagawa R, Katsumata N, Shibata T et al.. “Paclitaxel Plus Carboplatin Versus Paclitaxel Plus Cisplatin in Metastatic or Recurrent Cervical Cancer: The Open-Label Randomized Phase III Trial JCOG0505.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2015). PMID: 25732161 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [103]
Symonds RP, Gourley C, Davidson S et al.. “Cediranib combined with carboplatin and paclitaxel in patients with metastatic or recurrent cervical cancer (CIRCCa): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial.” The Lancet. Oncology (2015). PMID: 26474517 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [104]
Tewari KS, Sill MW, Long HJ et al.. “Improved survival with bevacizumab in advanced cervical cancer.” The New England journal of medicine (2014). PMID: 24552320 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation - [105]
Penson RT, Huang HQ, Wenzel LB et al.. “Bevacizumab for advanced cervical cancer: patient-reported outcomes of a randomised, phase 3 trial (NRG Oncology-Gynecologic Oncology Group protocol 240).” The Lancet. Oncology (2015). PMID: 25638326 ↗
L1TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [106]
Tewari KS, Colombo N, Monk BJ et al.. “Pembrolizumab or Placebo Plus Chemotherapy With or Without Bevacizumab for Persistent, Recurrent, or Metastatic Cervical Cancer: Subgroup Analyses From the KEYNOTE-826 Randomized Clinical Trial.” JAMA oncology (2024). PMID: 38095881 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation - [107]
Thaker PH, Salani R, Brady WE et al.. “A phase I trial of paclitaxel, cisplatin, and veliparib in the treatment of persistent or recurrent carcinoma of the cervix: an NRG Oncology Study (NCT#01281852).” Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology (2017). PMID: 27998970 ↗
L4TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [108]
Tewari KS, Sill MW, Monk BJ et al.. “Prospective Validation of Pooled Prognostic Factors in Women with Advanced Cervical Cancer Treated with Chemotherapy with/without Bevacizumab: NRG Oncology/GOG Study.” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2015). PMID: 26672085 ↗
L2RCTCited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [109]
Li K, Chen J, Hu Y et al.. “Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus camrelizumab for locally advanced cervical cancer (NACI study): a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial.” The Lancet. Oncology (2024). PMID: 38048802 ↗
L4TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation - [110]
Gray HJ. “Primary management of early stage cervical cancer (IA1-IB) and appropriate selection of adjuvant therapy.” Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN (2008). PMID: 18267058 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation, Adjuvant and Palliative RT - [111]
Oaknin A, Ghamande SA, Kasamatsu Y et al.. “Phase I Trial of First-line Bintrafusp Alfa in Patients with Locally Advanced or Persistent/Recurrent/Metastatic Cervical Cancer.” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2024). PMID: 38165683 ↗
L4TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation - [112]
Kidd EA, Grigsby PW. “Intratumoral metabolic heterogeneity of cervical cancer.” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2008). PMID: 18698042 ↗
L2TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [113]
Piya IJ, Riya IJ, Sharma V. “Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors with chemoradiotherapy/chemotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer patients: a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis.” Journal of gynecologic oncology (2026). PMID: 41267534 ↗
L1SR_OBSCited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [114]
Long HJ. “Management of metastatic cervical cancer: review of the literature.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2007). PMID: 17617528 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation - [115]
Wei S, Li X, Liu Z et al.. “Nimotuzumab plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy sequential maintenance treatment for locally advanced cervical squamous cell carcinoma (NOTABLE-306): a multicenter, prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.” Journal of gynecologic oncology (2026). PMID: 41514314 ↗
L5TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation - [116]
Pectasides D, Kamposioras K, Papaxoinis G et al.. “Chemotherapy for recurrent cervical cancer.” Cancer treatment reviews (2008). PMID: 18657909 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [117]
Gennigens C, Jerusalem G, Lapaille L et al.. “Recurrent or primary metastatic cervical cancer: current and future treatments.” ESMO open (2022). PMID: 36108558 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation - [118]
Gouy S, Morice P, Narducci F et al.. “Nodal-staging surgery for locally advanced cervical cancer in the era of PET.” The Lancet. Oncology (2012). PMID: 22554549 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation - [119]
Zhang Y, Meng Y, Shi H et al.. “Prevalence and influencing factors of depressive and anxiety symptoms in cervical cancer patients during the peri-chemoradiotherapy period: A systematic review meta-analysis.” Medicine (2026). PMID: 41559991 ↗
L2SR_OBSCited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation - [120]
Zhao X, Singhal A, Park S et al.. “Cancer Mutations Converge on a Collection of Protein Assemblies to Predict Resistance to Replication Stress.” Cancer discovery (2024). PMID: 38236062 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation - [121]
Ishida S, McCormick F, Smith-McCune K et al.. “Enhancing tumor-specific uptake of the anticancer drug cisplatin with a copper chelator.” Cancer cell (2010). PMID: 20541702 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation, Outcomes - [122]
Sannigrahi MK, Sharma R, Singh V et al.. “Role of Host miRNA Hsa-miR-139-3p in HPV-16-Induced Carcinomas.” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2017). PMID: 28143871 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Concurrent Chemoradiation - [123]
Reid E, Suneja G, Ambinder RF et al.. “Cancer in People Living With HIV, Version 1.2018, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.” Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN (2018). PMID: 30099375 ↗
L1GUIDELINECited in: Adjuvant and Palliative RT - [124]
Chargari C, Ducassou A, Laville A et al.. “Radiotherapy and brachytherapy for cervical cancer: Recommendations of the Société française de radiothérapie oncologique.” Cancer radiotherapie : journal de la Societe francaise de radiotherapie oncologique (2025). PMID: 41086563 ↗
L1GUIDELINECited in: Adjuvant and Palliative RT - [125]
Park JY, Kim DY, Kim JH et al.. “Management of occult invasive cervical cancer found after simple hysterectomy.” Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology (2010). PMID: 19858083 ↗
L3OTHERCited in: Adjuvant and Palliative RT, Outcomes - [126]
Park JY, Kim DY, Kim JH et al.. “Outcomes after radical hysterectomy according to tumor size divided by 2-cm interval in patients with early cervical cancer.” Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology (2011). PMID: 20595451 ↗
L4OTHERCited in: Adjuvant and Palliative RT - [127]
Bai F, Wu G, Qu X et al.. “Optimal adjuvant radiotherapy strategy for cervical cancer: a multi-center database cohort study.” International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society (2026). PMID: 41308331 ↗
L2COHORTCited in: Adjuvant and Palliative RT - [128]
Chase DM, Huang HQ, Deng W et al.. “Patient-reported outcomes of a randomized phase III clinical trial of adjuvant radiation versus chemoradiation in intermediate risk, stage I/IIA cervical cancer patients treated with initial radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy (NRG/GOG-0263).” Gynecologic oncology (2025). PMID: 41056581 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Adjuvant and Palliative RT - [129]
Hardie AN, Wenzel HHB, Schnack TH et al.. “Oncological outcomes after radical hysterectomy followed by adjuvant (chemo)radiation or no further treatment in women with cervical cancer FIGO 2018 IB2-IIA2 - A multinational population-based cohort study.” European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) (2025). PMID: 40795525 ↗
L2COHORTCited in: Adjuvant and Palliative RT - [130]
Kidd EA, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F et al.. “Lymph node staging by positron emission tomography in cervical cancer: relationship to prognosis.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2010). PMID: 20308664 ↗
L2OTHERCited in: Adjuvant and Palliative RT - [131]
Russo AL, Depauw N, Horick NK et al.. “Long-Term Results of a Phase 2 Study of Adjuvant Proton Radiation Therapy for Node-Positive Cancer of the Uterus and Cervix.” International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics (2025). PMID: 40089072 ↗
L2TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Adjuvant and Palliative RT - [132]
Okuma K, Murakami N, Inaba K et al.. “Gel spacer-assisted salvage brachytherapy for pelvic recurrence after definitive chemoradiotherapy in cervical cancer: A single-institution retrospective study.” Brachytherapy (2025). PMID: 40769797 ↗
L4COHORTCited in: Adjuvant and Palliative RT - [133]
Ooko F, Mothiba T, Van Bogaert P et al.. “Access to palliative care in patients with advanced cancer of the uterine cervix in the low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.” BMC palliative care (2023). PMID: 37726748 ↗
L2SR_OBSCited in: Adjuvant and Palliative RT - [134]
Sarfati D, Dyer R, Sam FA et al.. “Cancer control in the Pacific: big challenges facing small island states.” The Lancet. Oncology (2019). PMID: 31395476 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Adjuvant and Palliative RT - [135]
Weidhaas JB, Li SX, Winter K et al.. “Changes in gene expression predicting local control in cervical cancer: results from Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0128.” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2009). PMID: 19509178 ↗
L2OTHERCited in: Adjuvant and Palliative RT - [136]
Rose PG, Ali S, Watkins E et al.. “Long-term follow-up of a randomized trial comparing concurrent single agent cisplatin, cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy, or hydroxyurea during pelvic irradiation for locally advanced cervical cancer: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2007). PMID: 17502627 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Acute and Late Toxicity - [137]
Monk BJ, Sill MW, Burger RA et al.. “Phase II trial of bevacizumab in the treatment of persistent or recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix: a gynecologic oncology group study.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2009). PMID: 19139430 ↗
L2TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Acute and Late Toxicity - [138]
Chen G, Wang M, Lin E et al.. “Herbal medicines for radiation vaginitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.” Phytomedicine : international journal of phytotherapy and phytopharmacology (2025). PMID: 41086674 ↗
L1SR_OBSCited in: Acute and Late Toxicity - [139]
Takekuma M, Nishio S, Yamaguchi S et al.. “Atezolizumab, bevacizumab, and platinum chemotherapy in cervical cancer: results of Japanese population from BEATcc.” Journal of gynecologic oncology (2025). PMID: 40968753 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Acute and Late Toxicity - [140]
Wang Y, Zhang X, Wang F et al.. “Dosimetric and Clinical Effects of Polyethylene Glycol Gel in Radical Concurrent Chemoradiation Therapy for Cervical Cancer: A Phase 3 Prospective Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.” International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics (2026). PMID: 40876576 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Acute and Late Toxicity - [141]
Muangwong P, Tharavichitkul E, Thiennimitr P et al.. “Impact of Saccharomyces boulardii on acute gastrointestinal toxicities in patients undergoing pelvic radiotherapy for gynecologic cancers: a randomized controlled trial.” Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (2025). PMID: 40526282 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Acute and Late Toxicity - [142]
Chikazawa K, Imai K, Ko H et al.. “Adjuvant chemotherapy after radical hysterectomy yields comparable outcomes to chemoradiation for stage IB2-IIB and IIIC1-2 cervical cancer: a single-center retrospective study.” Journal of gynecologic oncology (2025). PMID: 40114548 ↗
L3COHORTCited in: Acute and Late Toxicity - [143]
Hwang JH, Kim B. “Postoperative Urinary Complications in Minimally Invasive Versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy: A Meta-Analysis With a Focus on Ureterovaginal Fistula.” Journal of minimally invasive gynecology (2025). PMID: 39710105 ↗
L2SR_OBSCited in: Acute and Late Toxicity - [144]
Saini SK, Srivastava S, Goel A et al.. “Outcomes of Stage IVA Cervical Cancer Treated with Radiation Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics (2026). PMID: 42034194 ↗
L2SR_OBSCited in: Acute and Late Toxicity - [145]
Pham TN, Coupey J, Valable S et al.. “Tumor Site-Specific Radiation-Induced Lymphocyte Depletion Models After Fractionated Radiotherapy: Considerations of Model Structure From an Aggregate Data Meta-Analysis.” JCO clinical cancer informatics (2025). PMID: 41118606 ↗
L2SR_OBSCited in: Acute and Late Toxicity - [146]
Kelley J, Yao M, Chau D et al.. “Maintenance bevacizumab following chemotherapy is associated with improved survival in patients with advanced and recurrent cervical cancer in a single-institution retrospective study.” Gynecologic oncology reports (2025). PMID: 40092738 ↗
L3COHORTCited in: Acute and Late Toxicity - [147]
Lorusso D, Colombo N, Dubot C et al.. “Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy for advanced and recurrent cervical cancer: final analysis according to bevacizumab use in the randomized KEYNOTE-826 study.” Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology (2025). PMID: 39393777 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Outcomes - [148]
Nam JH, Park JY, Kim DY et al.. “Laparoscopic versus open radical hysterectomy in early-stage cervical cancer: long-term survival outcomes in a matched cohort study.” Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology (2012). PMID: 21841155 ↗
L3COHORTCited in: Outcomes - [149]
Ramirez PT, Robledo KP, Frumovitz M et al.. “LACC Trial: Final Analysis on Overall Survival Comparing Open Versus Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2024). PMID: 38810208 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Outcomes - [150]
Wenzel L, Osann K, Hsieh S et al.. “Psychosocial telephone counseling for survivors of cervical cancer: results of a randomized biobehavioral trial.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2015). PMID: 25713429 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Outcomes - [151]
Monk BJ, Mas Lopez L, Zarba JJ et al.. “Phase II, open-label study of pazopanib or lapatinib monotherapy compared with pazopanib plus lapatinib combination therapy in patients with advanced and recurrent cervical cancer.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2010). PMID: 20606083 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Outcomes - [152]
Lorusso D, Ferrandina G, Pignata S et al.. “Evaluation of pemetrexed (Alimta, LY231514) as second-line chemotherapy in persistent or recurrent carcinoma of the cervix: the CERVIX 1 study of the MITO (Multicentre Italian Trials in Ovarian Cancer and Gynecologic Malignancies) Group.” Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology (2010). PMID: 19605508 ↗
L4TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Outcomes - [153]
Zagouri F, Korakiti AM, Zakopoulou R et al.. “Taxanes during pregnancy in cervical cancer: A systematic review and pooled analysis.” Cancer treatment reviews (2019). PMID: 31442939 ↗
L2SR_OBSCited in: Outcomes - [154]
Bentivegna E, Gouy S, Maulard A et al.. “Oncological outcomes after fertility-sparing surgery for cervical cancer: a systematic review.” The Lancet. Oncology (2016). PMID: 27299280 ↗
L2SR_OBSCited in: Outcomes - [155]
Oaknin A, Moore K, Meyer T et al.. “Nivolumab with or without ipilimumab in patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer (CheckMate 358): a phase 1-2, open-label, multicohort trial.” The Lancet. Oncology (2024). PMID: 38608691 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Outcomes - [156]
McCredie MR, Sharples KJ, Paul C et al.. “Natural history of cervical neoplasia and risk of invasive cancer in women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3: a retrospective cohort study.” The Lancet. Oncology (2008). PMID: 18407790 ↗
L3COHORTCited in: Outcomes - [157]
Vergote I, González-Martín A, Fujiwara K et al.. “Tisotumab Vedotin as Second- or Third-Line Therapy for Recurrent Cervical Cancer.” The New England journal of medicine (2024). PMID: 38959480 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Outcomes - [158]
Ramirez PT, Frumovitz M, Pareja R et al.. “Minimally Invasive versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer.” The New England journal of medicine (2018). PMID: 30380365 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Outcomes - [159]
Colombo N, Dubot C, Lorusso D et al.. “Pembrolizumab for Persistent, Recurrent, or Metastatic Cervical Cancer.” The New England journal of medicine (2021). PMID: 34534429 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Outcomes - [160]
. “Quadrivalent vaccine against human papillomavirus to prevent high-grade cervical lesions.” The New England journal of medicine (2007). PMID: 17494925 ↗
L1RCTCited in: Outcomes - [161]
Frenel JS, Le Tourneau C, O'Neil B et al.. “Safety and Efficacy of Pembrolizumab in Advanced, Programmed Death Ligand 1-Positive Cervical Cancer: Results From the Phase Ib KEYNOTE-028 Trial.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2017). PMID: 29095678 ↗
L4TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Outcomes - [162]
Naumann RW, Hollebecque A, Meyer T et al.. “Safety and Efficacy of Nivolumab Monotherapy in Recurrent or Metastatic Cervical, Vaginal, or Vulvar Carcinoma: Results From the Phase I/II CheckMate 358 Trial.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2019). PMID: 31487218 ↗
L4TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Outcomes - [163]
Lan C, Shen J, Wang Y et al.. “Camrelizumab Plus Apatinib in Patients With Advanced Cervical Cancer (CLAP): A Multicenter, Open-Label, Single-Arm, Phase II Trial.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2020). PMID: 33052760 ↗
L4TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Outcomes - [164]
Youn JW, Hur SY, Woo JW et al.. “Pembrolizumab plus GX-188E therapeutic DNA vaccine in patients with HPV-16-positive or HPV-18-positive advanced cervical cancer: interim results of a single-arm, phase 2 trial.” The Lancet. Oncology (2020). PMID: 33271094 ↗
L4TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Outcomes - [165]
Frumovitz M, Obermair A, Coleman RL et al.. “Quality of life in patients with cervical cancer after open versus minimally invasive radical hysterectomy (LACC): a secondary outcome of a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.” The Lancet. Oncology (2020). PMID: 32502445 ↗
L1TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Outcomes - [166]
Abu-Rustum NR, Sonoda Y. “Fertility-sparing surgery in early-stage cervical cancer: indications and applications.” Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN (2010). PMID: 21147906 ↗
L4OTHERCited in: Outcomes - [167]
Pennington KP, Urban RR, Gray HJ. “Revisiting Minimally Invasive Surgery in the Management of Early-Stage Cervical Cancer.” Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN (2019). PMID: 30659132 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Outcomes - [168]
Hong DS, Concin N, Vergote I et al.. “Tisotumab Vedotin in Previously Treated Recurrent or Metastatic Cervical Cancer.” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2020). PMID: 31796521 ↗
L4TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Outcomes - [169]
Stevanović S, Helman SR, Wunderlich JR et al.. “A Phase II Study of Tumor-infiltrating Lymphocyte Therapy for Human Papillomavirus-associated Epithelial Cancers.” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2019). PMID: 30518633 ↗
L4TRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Outcomes - [170]
Mi X, Lin T, Zhu X et al.. “Efficacy and safety of cadonilimab for malignant solid tumor treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” Frontiers in immunology (2026). PMID: 42292353 ↗
L1SR_OBSCited in: Outcomes - [171]
Zhang D, Meng Y, Dong X et al.. “Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with antiangiogenic agents in advanced cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” Frontiers in immunology (2026). PMID: 42253994 ↗
L1SR_OBSCited in: Outcomes - [172]
Wang X, Zhang Y, Wang C et al.. “Efficacy and safety of first-line therapies for persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer: a systematic review and exploratory network meta-analysis of immunotherapy.” Frontiers in immunology (2026). PMID: 42079658 ↗
L1SR_OBSCited in: Outcomes - [173]
Panczel I, Herold M, Borbenyi E et al.. “Survival Difference in Advanced-Stage Cervical and Ovarian Cancer Patients Treated with Concomitant Modulated Electro-Hyperthermia in Comparison to Classic Treatment Modalities: Results of a Pilot Study and Meta-Analysis.” Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) (2026). PMID: 41892820 ↗
L2SR_OBSCited in: Outcomes - [174]
Zhou J, Ye W, Ranarisoa SN et al.. “Comparison of drug regimens for recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.” Frontiers in immunology (2026). PMID: 41822503 ↗
L1SR_OBSCited in: Outcomes - [175]
Zhuang Q, Liu Y. “Efficacy and safety of Cadonilimab in the treatment of recurrent/metastatic and advanced cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” Frontiers in immunology (2025). PMID: 41601625 ↗
L2SR_OBSCited in: Outcomes - [176]
Shi A, Yerebake M, Du Z et al.. “Acupuncture as Adjunctive Therapy for Cervical Cancer Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” Journal of pain and symptom management (2026). PMID: 41482014 ↗
L1SR_OBSCited in: Outcomes - [177]
Verleye L, Vergote I, Reed N et al.. “Quality assurance for radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: the view of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer--Gynecological Cancer Group (EORTC-GCG).” Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology (2009). PMID: 19556323 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Outcomes - [178]
Kim JH, Hwang WY, Choi CH et al.. “Oncologic outcomes and the impact of minimally invasive surgery in early-stage cervical cancer patients undergoing radical trachelectomy: A retrospective multicenter cohort study from the Korean Gynecologic Oncology Group Study (KGOG 1048).” Gynecologic oncology (2026). PMID: 42013607 ↗
L3COHORTCited in: Outcomes - [179]
Ventriglia J, Paciolla I, Pisano C et al.. “Immunotherapy in ovarian, endometrial and cervical cancer: State of the art and future perspectives.” Cancer treatment reviews (2017). PMID: 28800469 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Outcomes - [180]
Tu H, Huang H, Li Y et al.. “Sentinel-Lymph-Node Biopsy Alone or with Lymphadenectomy in Cervical Cancer.” The New England journal of medicine (2025). PMID: 41092328 ↗
L1OTHERCited in: Outcomes - [181]
Kim SS, Shen S, Miyauchi S et al.. “B Cells Improve Overall Survival in HPV-Associated Squamous Cell Carcinomas and Are Activated by Radiation and PD-1 Blockade.” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2020). PMID: 32193227 ↗
L2OTHERCited in: Outcomes - [182]
Da Silva DM, Enserro DM, Mayadev JS et al.. “Immune Activation in Patients with Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer Treated with Ipilimumab Following Definitive Chemoradiation (GOG-9929).” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2020). PMID: 32816895 ↗
L4OTHERCited in: Outcomes - [183]
Ramalho NM, Lima Sales JTO, Carneiro VCG et al.. “Effect of topical vaginal estrogen after radiotherapy for cervical cancer: a randomized, double-blind pilot trial.” International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society (2026). PMID: 42468465 ↗
L4Cited in: Indications by Stage - [184]
Li Y, Han J, Xiao S et al.. “Prognostic utility of systemic immune-inflammation markers in locally advanced cervical cancer undergoing radical radiotherapy.” The oncologist (2026). PMID: 42015386 ↗
L1bCited in: Indications by Stage - [185]
Girbovan AH, Balan C, Kirsch-Mangu AT et al.. “Molecular Biomarkers of Radiosensitivity and Radioresistance in Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review.” International journal of molecular sciences (2026). PMID: 42589685 ↗
L2aCited in: Indications by Stage - [186]
Lim H, Lee C, Back JW et al.. “Association of primary treatment modality and programmed death-ligand 1 expression with survival outcomes in locally advanced human papillomavirus-independent endocervical adenocarcinoma.” International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society (2026). PMID: 41965228 ↗
L2bCited in: Indications by Stage - [187]
Li L, You J, Yuan Y et al.. “Prophylactic extended-field radiotherapy with concurrent chemotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer: a propensity-score matching analysis.” International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society (2026). PMID: 41935414 ↗
L2bCited in: Indications by Stage - [188]
Xiao Y, Yang L, Yu X et al.. “Efficacy and Safety of Camrelizumab Combined with Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy in Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: A Phase II Single-Arm Clinical Trial.” Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)) (2026). PMID: 42546669 ↗
L2bCited in: Indications by Stage - [189]
Ong P, Chua VH, Rebosa LMF et al.. “Ultrasound for image-guided brachytherapy in cervical cancer: Geometric accuracy and dosimetric evidence compared with MRI and CT.” Brachytherapy (2026). PMID: 42143002 ↗
L4Cited in: Indications by Stage - [190]
Yang XL, Li XM, Shi YG et al.. “Induction chemotherapy prior to definitive chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer patients: A multi-center cohort study.” Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (2026). PMID: 42362088 ↗
L3bCited in: Indications by Stage - [191]
Ayeni OA, Mmereki D, Mistry H et al.. “Disease characteristics, treatment, and overall survival outcomes of patients with locally advanced cervical cancer referred for radiation therapy in Johannesburg, South Africa: a 2-year retrospective study.” BMC women's health (2026). PMID: 42310589 ↗
L3bCited in: Indications by Stage - [192]
Rubagumya F, Shankar V, Kwizera V et al.. “Survival outcomes of cervical cancer patients treated with external beam radiotherapy boost in Rwanda.” International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society (2026). PMID: 42247771 ↗
L3bCited in: Indications by Stage - [193]
Jian W, Zhu L, Zhang B et al.. “Megavoltage CT enhancement for cervical cancer tomotherapy using a generative adversarial network with deformable convolution and self-attention.” Medical physics (2026). PMID: 41968645 ↗
L3bCited in: Indications by Stage - [194]
Cho O, El Naqa I. “Prognostic impact of pelvic bone magnetic resonance imaging features in patients with cervical cancer undergoing definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy.” International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society (2026). PMID: 41965225 ↗
L3bCited in: Indications by Stage - [195]
Chalif J, Morton M, Gonzalez A et al.. “Evaluation of immunotherapy response in the radiated field in patients with recurrent endometrial and cervical cancer.” Gynecologic oncology (2026). PMID: 41930528 ↗
L4Cited in: Indications by Stage - [196]
Nakai M, Yoshida K, Morita H et al.. “Association Between Brachytherapy and Acute Diarrhea During Chemoradiotherapy for Cervical Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.” Anticancer research (2026). PMID: 42373244 ↗
L2bCited in: Indications by Stage - [197]
Liu K, Zhu Y, Zhu H. “The clinical value of adding immune checkpoint inhibitors to radiotherapy for cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” Annals of medicine (2026). PMID: 42613912 ↗
L1aCited in: Indications by Stage - [198]
Peng P, Yin Y, Zhang B et al.. “Treatment Patterns and Decision Drivers in Chinese Patients with Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: Results from a National Physician Survey.” Advances in therapy (2026). PMID: 42377744 ↗
L3bCited in: Indications by Stage - [199]
Zhang M, Gao L, Bai X. “Health-related hardiness and influencing factors among cervical cancer radiotherapy patients: A cross-sectional study.” Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (2026). PMID: 41920363 ↗
L3bCited in: Indications by Stage - [200]
Lyu T, Li M, Li H et al.. “Integrated multiparametric ultrasound and biomarker assessment for clinical staging and treatment response prediction in cervical cancer: A single-center retrospective study.” Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers (2026). PMID: 42631493 ↗
L3bCited in: Indications by Stage - [201]
Landman Y, De Sousa Smith C, Ke S et al.. “Image-guided brachytherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer: clinical outcomes and fistula risk in stage IVA disease.” International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society (2026). PMID: 42531776 ↗
L3bCited in: Indications by Stage - [202]
Liu Q, Liu W, Huang Y et al.. “Comparative effectiveness of radical surgery versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy in stages IB3, IIA2, or locally resectable IIICr cervical cancer: a prospective, multicenter, propensity score-matched cohort study.” BMC cancer (2026). PMID: 42387473 ↗
L2bCited in: Indications by Stage - [203]
Singh A, Karshafian R, Ravi A et al.. “Dosimetric evaluation of systematic source position uncertainty along the source path and robust planning during MRI-only cervical HDR brachytherapy.” Journal of applied clinical medical physics (2026). PMID: 42775606 ↗
L3bCited in: Indications by Stage - [204]
Krishna A, Lobo JL, Ms P et al.. “Evaluation and Clinical Relevance of Plan Quality Indices in Intracavitary Brachytherapy for Cervical Cancer.” F1000Research (2026). PMID: 42728918 ↗
L3bCited in: Indications by Stage - [205]
Shimizu A, Chikazawa K, Fukuda Y et al.. “Real-World Outcomes of Weekly Paclitaxel-Carboplatin-Based Chemoradiotherapy Versus Cisplatin-Based Chemoradiotherapy for FIGO Stage IB2-IVA Cervical cancer: A Retrospective Observational Study.” The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research (2026). PMID: 42706612 ↗
L3bCited in: Indications by Stage - [206]
Gökhan Açıkgöz S, Bakır A, Demir Çendek B et al.. “Pre-treatment MRI-derived fractal dimension as a prognostic marker in cervical cancer treated with definitive radiotherapy with or without concurrent chemotherapy.” BMC medical imaging (2026). PMID: 42464209 ↗
L3bCited in: Indications by Stage - [207]
Zhang J, Li B, He J et al.. “A Retrospective Study With a 5-Year Follow-up on the Effectiveness of Transcatheter Arterial Chemoembolization for Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer.” Journal of vascular and interventional radiology : JVIR (2026). PMID: 42425449 ↗
L3bCited in: Indications by Stage - [208]
Suzuki T, Takahashi R, Tachibana H et al.. “Patient stratification for dose scaling in cervical cancer: a model-based analysis using image-guided adaptive brachytherapy.” Journal of radiation research (2026). PMID: 42411646 ↗
L4Cited in: Indications by Stage