Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24265410›Full record

ReviewAnnals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology2013

Ovarian cancer: genomic analysis.

W Wei, D Dizon, V Vathipadiekal, M J Birrer

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Chlorpyrifos and Chlorpyrifos-Oxon: A Widening Spectrum of Toxicity.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

4 authors.

W WeiCenter for Cancer Research, Harvard Medical School.
D Dizon
V Vathipadiekal
M J Birrer

Funding

Genomic Stratification of Ovarian Cancer PatientsRC4CA156551 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI BIRRER, MICHAEL · 2010 to 2010
$3.7M
The FGF18/FGFR4 amplicon: Novel therapeutic biomarkers for ovarian cancerR01CA169200 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI BIRRER, MICHAEL, MOK, SAMUEL C · 2013 to 2017
$1.9M
Novel Biomarkers in Ovarian CancerR01CA142832 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI BIRRER, MICHAEL · 2010 to 2014
$1.7M
NCI NIH HHS 1R01CA142832NCI NIH HHS R01 CA169200NCI NIH HHS R01CA169200NCI NIH HHS RC4CA156551
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesDespite improvements in the management of ovarian cancer patients over the last 30 years, there has been only a minimal improvement in overall survival. While targeted therapeutic approaches for the treatment of cancer have evolved, major challenges in ovarian cancer research persist, including the identification of predictive biomarkers with clinical relevance, so that empirical drug selection can be avoided. In this article, we review published genomic analysis studies including data generated in our laboratory and how they have been incorporated into modern clinical trials in a rational and effective way.

methodsMultiple published genomic analysis studies were collected for review and discussion with emphasis on their potential clinical applicability.

resultsGenomic analysis has been shown to be a powerful tool to identify dysregulated genes, aberrantly activated pathways and to uncover uniqueness of subclasses of ovarian tumors. The application of this technology has provided a solid molecular basis for different clinical behaviors associated with tumor histology and grade. Genomic signatures have been obtained to predict clinical end points for patients with cancer, including response rates, progression-free survival, and overall survival. In addition, genomic analysis has provided opportunities to identify biomarkers, which either result in a modification of existing clinical management or to stratification of patients to novel therapeutic approaches designed as clinical trials.

conclusionsGenomic analyses have accelerated the identification of relevant biomarkers and extended our understanding of the molecular biology of ovarian cancer. This in turn, will hopefully lead to a paradigm shift from empirical, uniform treatment to a more rational, personalized treatment of ovarian cancers. However, validation of potential biomarkers on both the statistical and biological levels is needed to confirm they are of clinical relevance, in order to increase the likelihood that the desired outcome can be predicted and achieved.

Indexed as

GenomicsMolecular Targeted TherapyBiomarkers, TumorClinical Trials as TopicDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticHumansOvarian NeoplasmsBiomarkers, Tumorcancerclinical trialsgenomicsovarian

Identifiers

PMID24265410
PMCPMC3836569

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.