ArticlePloS one2008
Systematic evaluation of candidate blood markers for detecting ovarian cancer.
Article in PloS one, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
45 citing papers in PubMed, 84 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of ovarian cancer remission markers HE4, MMP7 and Mesothelin by comparison to the established marker CA125.Gynecologic oncology · 2012Trial
- Added value of serum proteins to clinical and ultrasound information in predicting the risk of malignancy in ovarian tumors.iScience · 2025Article
- Article
- Quantitative global lipidomics analysis of patients with ovarian cancer versus benign adnexal mass.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- NETest Liquid Biopsy Is Diagnostic of Lung Neuroendocrine Tumors and Identifies Progressive Disease.Neuroendocrinology · 2019Article
- Autoantibody biomarkers for the detection of serous ovarian cancer.Gynecologic oncology · 2017Article
- Two-stage sampling designs for external validation of personal risk models.Statistical methods in medical research · 2016Article
- Measurement of circulating transcripts and gene cluster analysis predicts and defines therapeutic efficacy of peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) in neuroendocrine tumors.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2016Article
- Identification of novel candidate plasma metabolite biomarkers for distinguishing serous ovarian carcinoma and benign serous ovarian tumors.Gynecologic oncology · 2016Article
- The clinical utility of a novel blood-based multi-transcriptome assay for the diagnosis of neuroendocrine tumors of the gastrointestinal tract.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2015Article
- Validation of LRG1 as a potential biomarker for detection of epithelial ovarian cancer by a blinded study.PloS one · 2015Article
- A PCR blood test outperforms chromogranin A in carcinoid detection and is unaffected by proton pump inhibitors.Endocrine connections · 2014Article
- OvMark: a user-friendly system for the identification of prognostic biomarkers in publically available ovarian cancer gene expression datasets.Molecular cancer · 2014Article
- Biomarker testing for ovarian cancer: clinical utility of multiplex assays.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2013Review
- Challenges in Biomarker Discovery: Combining Expert Insights with Statistical Analysis of Complex Omics Data.Expert opinion on medical diagnostics · 2013Article
- HE4 protein and SMRP: Potential novel biomarkers in ovarian cancer detection.Oncology letters · 2012Article
- High preoperative blood levels of HE4 predicts poor prognosis in patients with ovarian cancer.Journal of ovarian research · 2012Article
- Impact of screening test performance and cost on mortality reduction and cost-effectiveness of multimodal ovarian cancer screening.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2012Article
- A critical assessment of SELDI-TOF-MS for biomarker discovery in serum and tissue of patients with an ovarian mass.Proteome science · 2012Article
- Multiplex targeted proteomic assay for biomarker detection in plasma: a pancreatic cancer biomarker case study.Journal of proteome research · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEpithelial ovarian cancer is a significant cause of mortality both in the United States and worldwide, due largely to the high proportion of cases that present at a late stage, when survival is extremely poor. Early detection of epithelial ovarian cancer, and of the serous subtype in particular, is a promising strategy for saving lives. The low prevalence of ovarian cancer makes the development of an adequately sensitive and specific test based on blood markers very challenging. We evaluated the performance of a set of candidate blood markers and combinations of these markers in detecting serous ovarian cancer. METHODS AND
findingsWe selected 14 candidate blood markers of serous ovarian cancer for which assays were available to measure their levels in serum or plasma, based on our analysis of global gene expression data and on literature searches. We evaluated the performance of these candidate markers individually and in combination by measuring them in overlapping sets of serum (or plasma) samples from women with clinically detectable ovarian cancer and women without ovarian cancer. Based on sensitivity at high specificity, we determined that 4 of the 14 candidate markers--MUC16, WFDC2, MSLN and MMP7--warrant further evaluation in precious serum specimens collected months to years prior to clinical diagnosis to assess their utility in early detection. We also reported differences in the performance of these candidate blood markers across histological types of epithelial ovarian cancer.
conclusionsBy systematically analyzing the performance of candidate blood markers of ovarian cancer in distinguishing women with clinically apparent ovarian cancer from women without ovarian cancer, we identified a set of serum markers with adequate performance to warrant testing for their ability to identify ovarian cancer months to years prior to clinical diagnosis. We argued for the importance of sensitivity at high specificity and of magnitude of difference in marker levels between cases and controls as performance metrics and demonstrated the importance of stratifying analyses by histological type of ovarian cancer. Also, we discussed the limitations of studies (like this one) that use samples obtained from symptomatic women to assess potential utility in detection of disease months to years prior to clinical detection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.