Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18317228›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of gynecological pathology : official journal of the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists2008

Pathogenesis of ovarian cancer: lessons from morphology and molecular biology and their clinical implications.

Robert J Kurman, Ie-Ming Shih

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of gynecological pathology : official journal of the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 223 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
223citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
51.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

223 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 459 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Activity of sorafenib in recurrent ovarian cancer and primary peritoneal carcinomatosis: a gynecologic oncology group trial.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2011
    Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, and peritoneum: 2025 update.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Review
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

163 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Robert J KurmanDepartment of Pathology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland 21231, USA. rkurman@jhmi.edu
Ie-Ming Shih
Johns Hopkins University · US

Funding

Molecular Diagnostics for Malignant EffusionR01CA103937 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI SHIH, IE-MING · 2004 to 2012
$2.7M
Pathogenesis of Ovarian Serous Borderline TumorsR01CA116184 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI KURMAN, ROBERT J. · 2007 to 2010
$1.2M
NCI NIH HHS CA103937NCI NIH HHS CA116184NCI NIH HHS R01 CA103937NCI NIH HHS R01 CA116184
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The accepted view of ovarian carcinogenesis is that carcinoma begins in the ovary, undergoes progressive "dedifferentiation" from a well to a poorly differentiated tumor, and then spreads to the pelvic and abdominal cavities before metastasizing to distant sites. It has therefore been reasoned that survival for this highly lethal disease could be improved by developing screening methods that detect disease when it is confined to the ovary. To date, however, no prospective randomized trial of any ovarian cancer screening test(s) has demonstrated a decrease in mortality. We believe that one of the main reasons for this is that the dogma underlying ovarian carcinogenesis is flawed. Based on studies performed in our laboratory during the last decade, we have proposed a model of ovarian carcinogenesis that takes into account the diverse nature of ovarian cancer and correlates the clinical, pathological, and molecular features of the disease. In this model, ovarian tumors are divided into 2 groups designated type I and type II. Type I tumors are slow growing, generally confined to the ovary at diagnosis, and develop from well-established precursor lesions that are termed "borderline" tumors. Type I tumors include low-grade micropapillary serous carcinoma, mucinous, endometrioid, and clear cell carcinomas. They are genetically stable and are characterized by mutations in a number of different genes including KRAS, BRAF, PTEN, and beta-catenin. Type II tumors are rapidly growing highly aggressive neoplasms for which well-defined precursor lesions have not been described. Type II tumors include high-grade serous carcinoma, malignant mixed mesodermal tumors (carcinosarcomas), and undifferentiated carcinomas. This group of tumors has a high level of genetic instability and is characterized by mutation of TP53. The model helps to explain why current screening techniques, aimed at detecting stage I disease, have not been effective. Tumors that remain confined to the ovary for a long period belong to the type I group, but they account for only 25% of the malignant tumors. Most of what is considered ovarian cancer belongs to the type II category, and these are only rarely confined to the ovary. Although the reasons for this are not entirely clear, possible explanations include rapid spread from the ovary early in carcinogenesis and development of carcinoma in extra ovarian sites, notably, the peritoneum and fallopian tube, with secondary involvement of the ovary. The latter tumors are advanced stage at their inception. Therefore, a more realistic end point for the early detection of ovarian cancer is volume and not stage of disease. The model does not replace the histopathologic classification but, by drawing attention to the molecular genetic events that play a role in tumor progression, sheds light on new approaches to early detection and treatment.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalCell ProliferationFemaleHumansMutationOvarian NeoplasmsProto-Oncogene ProteinsProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)ras ProteinsTumor Suppressor Protein p53BRAF protein, humanKRAS protein, humanProto-Oncogene ProteinsProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)ras ProteinsTumor Suppressor Protein p53

Identifiers

PMID18317228
PMCPMC2794425
OpenAlexW1994563300

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.