| Citation: |
MA Xing, LIU Chang. Prognosis and Treatment Strategies of FIGO 2018 Stage ⅢC Cervical Cancer[J]. Medical Journal of Peking Union Medical College Hospital, 2024, 15(6): 1253-1260. DOI: 10.12290/xhyxzz.2024-0097
|
Tumor stage and lymph node involvement are the most important prognostic factors for patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. For cervical cancer, gynecologic oncologists generally apply the criteria of the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics(FIGO). However, in the current FIGO 2018 staging system, stage ⅢC is based only on the anatomical location of metastatic lymph nodes, without considering local tumor factors and other lymphatic status parameters, which limits its prognostic significance to a certain extent. The aim of this article is to summarize the influence of local tumor factors and different lymphatic status parameters on prognosis and treatment options for stage ⅢC cervical cancer.
| [1] |
Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel R L, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2021, 71(3): 209-249. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21660
|
| [2] |
Zou Z R, Fairley C K, Ong J J, et al. Domestic HPV vaccine price and economic returns for cervical cancer prevention in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis[J]. Lancet Glob Health, 2020, 8(10): e1335-e1344. DOI: 10.1016/S2214-109X(20)30277-1
|
| [3] |
Wright J D, Matsuo K, Huang Y M, et al. Prognostic performance of the 2018 international federation of gynecology and obstetrics cervical cancer staging guidelines[J]. Obstet Gynecol, 2019, 134(1): 49-57. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003311
|
| [4] |
Long X T, He M S, Yang L L, et al. Validation of the 2018 FIGO staging system for predicting the prognosis of patients with stage ⅢC cervical cancer[J]. Clin Med Insights Oncol, 2023, 17: 11795549221146652. DOI: 10.1177/11795549221146652
|
| [5] |
刘萍, 黎志强, 柳攀, 等. FIGO 2018子宫颈癌分期Ⅲ期各亚期设置合理性探讨[J]. 中国实用妇科与产科杂志, 2021, 37(6): 669-672.
Liu P, Li Z Q, Liu P, et al. Rationality of stage Ⅲ substaging in FIGO 2018 staging of cervical cancer[J]. Chin J Pract Gynecol Obstet, 2021, 37(6): 669-672.
|
| [6] |
Van Kol K G G, Ebisch R M F, Van Der Aa M, et al. The prognostic value of the presence of pelvic and/or para-aortic lymph node metastases in cervical cancer patients; the influence of the new FIGO classification (stage ⅢC)[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2023, 171: 9-14. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2023.01.023
|
| [7] |
Zhang Y, Wang C H, Zhao Z Y, et al. Survival outcomes of 2018 FIGO stage ⅢC versus stages ⅢA and ⅢB in cervical cancer: a systematic review with meta-analysis[J]. Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 2024, 165(3): 959-968. DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.15218
|
| [8] |
Matsuo K, Machida H, Mandelbaum R S, et al. Validation of the 2018 FIGO cervical cancer staging system[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2019, 152(1): 87-93. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2018.10.026
|
| [9] |
Grigsby P W, Massad L S, Mutch D G, et al. FIGO 2018 staging criteria for cervical cancer: Impact on stage migration and survival[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2020, 157(3): 639-643. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.03.027
|
| [10] |
McComas K N, Torgeson A M, Ager B J, et al. The variable impact of positive lymph nodes in cervical cancer: Implications of the new FIGO staging system[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2020, 156(1): 85-92. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.10.025
|
| [11] |
Ayhan A, Aslan K, Bulut A N, et al. Is the revised 2018 FIGO staging system for cervical cancer more prognostic than the 2009 FIGO staging system for women previously staged as ⅠB disease?[J]. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol, 2019, 240: 209-214. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2019.07.002
|
| [12] |
Pedone Anchora L, Carbone V, Gallotta V, et al. Should the number of metastatic pelvic lymph nodes be integrated into the 2018 FIGO staging classification of early stage cervical cancer?[J]. Cancers (Basel), 2020, 12(6): 1552. DOI: 10.3390/cancers12061552
|
| [13] |
Duan H, Li H M, Kang S, et al. Rationality of FIGO 2018 ⅢC restaging of cervical cancer according to local tumor size: a cohort study[J]. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 2023, 102(8): 1045-1052. DOI: 10.1111/aogs.14612
|
| [14] |
Li Z Q, Duan H, Guo J X, et al. Discussion on the rationality of FIGO 2018 stage ⅢC for cervical cancer with oncological outcomes: a cohort study[J]. Ann Transl Med, 2022, 10(2): 122. DOI: 10.21037/atm-21-6374
|
| [15] |
Soares L C, De Souza R J, Oliveira M A P. Reviewing FIGO 2018 cervical cancer staging[J]. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 2023, 102(12): 1757-1758. DOI: 10.1111/aogs.14667
|
| [16] |
Guo Q H, Zhu J, Wu Y, et al. Comparison of different lymph node staging systems in patients with node-positive cervical squamous cell carcinoma following radical surgery[J]. J Cancer, 2020, 11(24): 7339-7347. DOI: 10.7150/jca.48085
|
| [17] |
Yan D D, Tang Q, Chen J H, et al. Prognostic value of the 2018 FIGO staging system for cervical cancer patients with surgical risk factors[J]. Cancer Manag Res, 2019, 11: 5473-5480. DOI: 10.2147/CMAR.S203059
|
| [18] |
Kwon J, Eom K Y, Kim Y S, et al. The prognostic impact of the number of metastatic lymph nodes and a new prognostic scoring system for recurrence in early-stage cervical cancer with high risk factors: a multicenter cohort study (KROG 15-04)[J]. Cancer Res Treat, 2018, 50(3): 964-974. DOI: 10.4143/crt.2017.346
|
| [19] |
Olthof E P, Mom C H, Snijders M L H, et al. The prognostic value of the number of positive lymph nodes and the lymph node ratio in early-stage cervical cancer[J]. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 2022, 101(5): 550-557. DOI: 10.1111/aogs.14316
|
| [20] |
Yong J H, Ding B C, Dong Y Q, et al. Impact of examined lymph node number on lymph node status and prognosis in FIGO stage ⅠB-ⅡA cervical squamous cell carcinoma: a population-based study[J]. Front Oncol, 2022, 12: 994105. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.994105
|
| [21] |
Guo Q H, Wu Y, Wen H, et al. Effect of the number of removed lymph nodes on survival in patients with FIGO stage ⅠB-ⅡA cervical squamous cell carcinoma following open radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy: a retrospective cohort study[J]. J Oncol, 2021, 2021: 6201634.
|
| [22] |
Fan X, Wang Y F, Yang N, et al. Prognostic analysis of patients with stage ⅢC1p cervical cancer treated by surgery[J]. World J Surg Oncol, 2023, 21(1): 186. DOI: 10.1186/s12957-023-03076-9
|
| [23] |
Aslan K, Meydanli M M, Oz M, et al. The prognostic value of lymph node ratio in stage ⅢC cervical cancer patients triaged to primary treatment by radical hysterectomy with systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy[J]. J Gynecol Oncol, 2020, 31(1): e1. DOI: 10.3802/jgo.2020.31.e1
|
| [24] |
Lee Y H, Chong G O, Kim S J, et al. Prognostic value of lymph node characteristics in patients with cervical cancer treated with radical hysterectomy[J]. Cancer Manag Res, 2021, 13: 8137-8145. DOI: 10.2147/CMAR.S332612
|
| [25] |
Cui H X, Huang Y, Wen W B, et al. Prognostic value of lymph node ratio in cervical cancer: a meta-analysis[J]. Medicine (Baltimore), 2022, 101(42): e30745. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000030745
|
| [26] |
Qin F Y, Pang H T, Yu T, et al. Treatment strategies and prognostic factors of 2018 FIGO stage ⅢC cervical cancer: a review[J]. Technol Cancer Res Treat, 2022, 21: 15330338221086403. DOI: 10.1177/15330338221086403
|
| [27] |
Yi J Y, Liu Z L, Wang L, et al. Development and validation of novel nomograms to predict the overall survival and Cancer-Specific survival of cervical cancer patients with lymph node metastasis[J]. Front Oncol, 2022, 12: 857375. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.857375
|
| [28] |
Halle M K, Bozickovic O, Forsse D, et al. Clinicopathological and radiological stratification within FIGO 2018 stages improves risk-prediction in cervical cancer[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2024, 181: 110-117. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2023.12.014
|
| [29] |
Zeng J, Zuo J, Li N, et al. Clinical analysis of 312 patients with stage ⅠB1-ⅡA2 cervical squamous cell carcinoma and research on the influencing factors of postoperative recurrence[J]. BMC Womens Health, 2023, 23(1): 82. DOI: 10.1186/s12905-023-02159-9
|
| [30] |
Han K, Zou J F, Zhao Z, et al. Clinical validation of human papilloma virus circulating tumor DNA for early detection of residual disease after chemoradiation in cervical cancer[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2024, 42(4): 431-440. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.23.00954
|
| [31] |
Cibula D, Pötter R, Planchamp F, et al. The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology/European Society of Pathology guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer[J]. Int J Gynecol Cancer, 2018, 28(4): 641-655. DOI: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000001216
|
| [32] |
Schmid M P, Lindegaard J C, 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[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2023, 41(10): 1933-1942. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.22.01096
|
| [33] |
Gennigens C, De Cuypere M, Hermesse J, et al. Optimal treatment in locally advanced cervical cancer[J]. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther, 2021, 21(6): 657-671. DOI: 10.1080/14737140.2021.1879646
|
| [34] |
Knoth J, Pötter R, Jürgenliemk-Schulz I M, et al. Clinical and imaging findings in cervical cancer and their impact on FIGO and TNM staging-an analysis from the EMBRACE study[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2020, 159(1): 136-141. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.07.007
|
| [35] |
Zhu Y X, Shen B M, Pei X, et al. CT, MRI, and PET imaging features in cervical cancer staging and lymph node metastasis[J]. Am J Transl Res, 2021, 13(9): 10536-10544.
|
| [36] |
Bizzarri N, Russo L, Dolciami M, et al. Radiomics systematic review in cervical cancer: gynecological oncologists' perspective[J]. Int J Gynecol Cancer, 2023, 33(10): 1522-1541. DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2023-004589
|
| [37] |
Abu-Rustum N R, Yashar C M, Arend R, et al. NCCN guidelines® insights: cervical cancer, version 1.2024[J]. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2023, 21(12): 1224-1233. DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2023.0062
|
| [38] |
Wenzel H H B, Olthof E P, Bekkers R L M, et al. Primary or adjuvant chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer with intraoperative lymph node metastasis-a review[J]. Cancer Treat Rev, 2022, 102: 102311. DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2021.102311
|
| [39] |
Huang H, Feng Y L, 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[J]. JAMA Oncol, 2021, 7(3): 361-369. DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.7168
|
| [40] |
Soochit A, Zhang C Y, Feng Y L, et al. Impact of different post-operative treatment modalities on long-term outcomes in International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2018 stage ⅢCp cervical cancer[J]. Int J Gynecol Cancer, 2023, 33(6): 882-889. DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2022-004234
|
| [41] |
Kashima Y, Murakami K, Miyagawa C, et al. Treatment for locally resectable stage ⅢC1 cervical cancer: a retrospec-tive, single-institution study[J]. Healthcare (Basel), 2023, 11(5): 632.
|
| [42] |
Kagabu M, Nagasawa T, Tatsuki S, et al. Comparison of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy and concurrent chemoradiotherapy for FIGO2018 stage ⅢC1 cervical cancer: a retrospective study[J]. Medicina (Kaunas), 2021, 57(6): 548. DOI: 10.3390/medicina57060548
|
| [43] |
Zhong M L, Wang Y N, Liang M R, et al. Consolidation chemotherapy in early-stage cervical cancer patients with lymph node metastasis after radical hysterectomy[J]. Int J Gynecol Cancer, 2020, 30(5): 602-606. DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2019-000690
|
| [44] |
Gadducci A, Cosio S. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer: review of the literature and perspectives of clinical research[J]. Anticancer Res, 2020, 40(9): 4819-4828. DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.14485
|
| [45] |
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[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2018, 36(16): 1548-1555. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2017.75.9985
|
| [46] |
Hu Y J, Han Y Y, Shen Y M, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for patients with international federation of gynecology and obstetrics stages ⅠB3 and ⅡA2 cervical cancer: a multicenter prospective trial[J]. BMC Cancer, 2022, 22(1): 1270. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-022-10355-3
|
| [47] |
Ye Y N, Li Z Q, Kang S, et al. Treatment of FIGO 2018 stage ⅢC cervical cancer with different local tumor factors[J]. BMC Cancer, 2023, 23(1): 421. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-023-10801-w
|
| [48] |
Liu X L, Wang W P, Hu K, et al. A risk stratification for patients with cervical cancer in stage ⅢC1 of the 2018 FIGO staging system[J]. Sci Rep, 2020, 10(1): 362. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-57202-3
|
| [49] |
Olthof E P, Wenzel H, Van Der Velden J, et al. Treatment of bulky lymph nodes in locally advanced cervical cancer: boosting versus debulking[J]. Int J Gynecol Cancer, 2022, 32(7): 861-868. DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2022-003357
|
| [50] |
Díaz-Feijoó B, Acosta Ú, Torné A, et al. Surgical outcomes of laparoscopic pelvic lymph node debulking during staging aortic lymphadenectomy in locally advanced cervical cancer: a multicenter study[J]. Cancers (Basel), 2022, 14(8): 1974. DOI: 10.3390/cancers14081974
|
| [51] |
Marnitz S, Tsunoda A T, Martus P, et al. Surgical versus clinical staging prior to primary chemoradiation in patients with cervical cancer FIGO stages ⅡB-ⅣA: oncologic results of a prospective randomized international multicenter (Uterus-11) intergroup study[J]. Int J Gynecol Cancer, 2020, 30(12): 1855-1861. DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2020-001973
|
| [52] |
He M S, Guo M F, Zhou Q, et al. Efficacy of lymph node dissection on stage ⅢCr of cervical cancer before CCRT: study protocol for a phase Ⅲ, randomized controlled clinical trial (CQGOG0103)[J]. J Gynecol Oncol, 2023, 34(3): e55. DOI: 10.3802/jgo.2023.34.e55
|
| [53] |
Kenter G, Greggi S, Vergote I, et al. Results from neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery compared to chemoradiation for stage Ⅰb2-Ⅱb cervical cancer, EORTC 55994[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2019, 37(15_suppl): 5503. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2019.37.15_suppl.5503
|
| [54] |
Lou J H, Zhang X X, Liu J J, et al. The prognostic value of radiological and pathological lymph node status in patients with cervical cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and followed hysterectomy[J]. Sci Rep, 2024, 14(1): 2045. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-49539-7
|
| [55] |
Ramirez P T, Frumovitz M, Pareja R, et al. Minimally invasive versus abdominal radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer[J]. N Engl J Med, 2018, 379(20): 1895-1904. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1806395
|
| [56] |
Qiu J J, Sun S G, Liu Q Q, et al. A comparison of concurrent chemoradiotherapy and radical surgery in patients with specific locally advanced cervical cancer (stage ⅠB3, ⅡA2, ⅢCr): trial protocol for a randomized controlled study (C-CRAL trial)[J]. J Gynecol Oncol, 2023, 34(5): e64. DOI: 10.3802/jgo.2023.34.e64
|
| [57] |
Melamed A, Margul D J, Chen L, et al. Survival after minimally invasive radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer[J]. N Engl J Med, 2018, 379(20): 1905-1914. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1804923
|
| [58] |
Fusegi A, Kanao H, Tsumura S, et al. Minimally invasive radical hysterectomy and the importance of avoiding cancer cell spillage for early-stage cervical cancer: a narrative review[J]. J Gynecol Oncol, 2023, 34(1): e5. DOI: 10.3802/jgo.2023.34.e5
|
| [59] |
Chiva L, Zanagnolo V, Querleu D, et al. SUCCOR study: an international European cohort observational study comparing minimally invasive surgery versus open abdominal radical hysterectomy in patients with stage ⅠB1 cervical cancer[J]. Int J Gynecol Cancer, 2020, 30(9): 1269-1277. DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2020-001506
|
| [60] |
Salvo G, Ramirez P T, Leitao M M, et al. Open vs minimally invasive radical trachelectomy in early-stage cervical cancer: international radical trachelectomy assess-ment study[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2022, 226(1): 97. e1-e97. e16. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2021.08.029
|
| [61] |
Wang R M, Hu Y Y, Xia H X, et al. Does the use of a uterine manipulator or intracorporeal colpotomy confer an inferior prognosis in minimally invasive surgery-treated early-stage cervical cancer?[J]. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2023, 30(2): 156-163. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2022.11.009
|
| [1] | WANG Yajuan, WANG Yuan, REN Xinyu. Correlation of CD117 and DOG1 Expression with the Clinicopathological Features and Prognosis in Triple-negative Breast Cancer[J]. Medical Journal of Peking Union Medical College Hospital, 2024, 15(3): 616-623. DOI: 10.12290/xhyxzz.2023-0454 |
| [2] | ZHOU Gaosheng, WANG Xiaoting, LIU Jingjing, ZHANG Hongmin, ZHANG Qing, LIU Dawei. Relationship between Oxygen Extraction Ratio and Prognosis in Septic Shock Patients During Early Resuscitation[J]. Medical Journal of Peking Union Medical College Hospital, 2023, 14(6): 1217-1223. DOI: 10.12290/xhyxzz.2023-0008 |
| [3] | LIU Huan, HUANG Xiaoling, DAI Mengying, GUO Jiejie, GAO feng. Clinical Characteristics and Inflammatory Markers of Omicron BA.5.2 Variant Infection in Hospitalized Patients and Their Predictive Role in Disease Prognosis[J]. Medical Journal of Peking Union Medical College Hospital, 2023, 14(5): 1038-1045. DOI: 10.12290/xhyxzz.2023-0055 |
| [4] | ZHANG Ning, ZHU Wen-ling, LIU Xiao-hong, CHEN Wei, KANG Jun-ren, ZHU Ming-lei, TIAN Ran. Impact of Frailty on the Short-term Prognosis of Hospitalized Elderly Patients with Coronary Heart Disease:A Prospective Cohort Study[J]. Medical Journal of Peking Union Medical College Hospital, 2021, 12(1): 59-66. DOI: 10.12290/xhyxzz.20190150 |
| [5] | Jian-hua DENG, Han-zhong LI. Clinical Diagnosis and Prognosis of Metastatic Pheochromocytoma and Paraganglioma[J]. Medical Journal of Peking Union Medical College Hospital, 2019, 10(6): 654-659. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-9081.2019.06.018 |
| [6] | Jia-qi ZHANG, Lei LIU, Gui-ge WANG, Wen-liang BAI, Shan-qing LI. Clinical Pathological Features and Prognosis of Non-small Cell Lung Cancer with Skip N2 Lymph Node Metastasis[J]. Medical Journal of Peking Union Medical College Hospital, 2019, 10(3): 272-277. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-9081.2019.03.015 |
| [7] | Ran ZHOU, Tong-juan ZOU, Wan-hong YIN, Yao QIN, Yi LI, Jing YANG, Yan KANG. nfluence of Mitral Regurgitation on the Prognosis of Patients with Septic Shock[J]. Medical Journal of Peking Union Medical College Hospital, 2018, 9(5): 426-430. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-9081.2018.05.010 |
| [8] | Cheng HUANG, Ye-ye CHEN, Shan-qing LI, Xiao-yun ZHOU, Hong-sheng LIU, Li LI, Ying-zhi QIN, Jia HE, Dong-jie MA. Ectopic Adrenocorticotropic Hormone Syndrome Caused by Thoracic Neuroendocrine Tumors: Surgical Treatment and Prognosis Factors[J]. Medical Journal of Peking Union Medical College Hospital, 2017, 8(2-3): 147-153. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-9081.2017.03.012 |
| [9] | Qing-yuan DENG, Yi-cong YE, Ying ZHONG, Miao-miao SHENG, Feng-ming HUANG, Cheng-yu JIANG, Shu-yang ZHANG. Angiotensin Ⅱ in Predicting the In-hospital Prognosis of Patients Undergoing Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention[J]. Medical Journal of Peking Union Medical College Hospital, 2016, 7(1): 13-17. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-9081.2016.01.003 |
| [10] | Yu YANG, Quan-zong MAO, Han-zhong LI, Zhi-gang JI, Wei-gang YAN, Shi RONG, Guang-hua LIU, Wei-feng XU, He XIAO, Hui-jun WANG. Clinical Features and Prognosis of Paraneoplastic Syndromes in Renal Malignancies[J]. Medical Journal of Peking Union Medical College Hospital, 2012, 3(2): 195-199. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-9081.2012.02.014 |
| 1. |
董平，曹海虹，时永利，李子源，李晓娜，高敏，尹文强，陈钟鸣. 黄河流域基层医疗机构卫生资源配置公平性与效率研究. 中国农村卫生事业管理. 2025(01): 25-30+59 .
| |
| 2. |
李娜，刘洋，李玉乐，董哲，赵娜，李慧文，李洁. 借助新媒体提高临床实践指南传播力：《协和医学杂志》的探索与实践. 中国科技期刊研究. 2024(05): 658-663 .
| |
| 3. |
王蓓，郝剑，尚昆. 基于岗位胜任力应急医疗机构支援护士培训需求的质性研究. 全科护理. 2024(11): 2125-2128 .
| |
| 4. |
彭馨怡，谭华伟，杨琪娇，张雪雨，毕圣贤，陈迎春. 按病种分值付费对基层医疗卫生机构住院人次和费用的影响分析. 健康发展与政策研究. 2024(02): 142-147+156 .
| |
| 5. |
崔璐，王子怡，年涛，杨克虎，朱怡良，李秀霞. 乡村医生应对未来疫情的能力——基于甘肃省乡村医生调查数据分析. 中国卫生事业管理. 2024(07): 773-776+814 .
|
Supported by: Beijing Renhe Information Technology Co., Ltd. 
Submit
Review
Office
Email Alert
RSS
DownLoad: