ArticleGynecologic and obstetric investigation2016
Clinical Outcomes among Women with Mucinous Adenocarcinoma of the Ovary.
Article in Gynecologic and obstetric investigation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Slippery Diagnosis: Primary Mucinous Adenocarcinoma of the Renal Pelvis in an Elderly Man.International journal of surgical pathology · 2026Article
- Abdominal Wall Reconstruction After Extirpation of a 140-Pound Primary Ovarian Mucinous Adenocarcinoma.Cureus · 2023Article
- Primary renal mucinous adenocarcinoma masquerading as a giant renal cyst: a case report.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Presentation and Prognosis of Primary Expansile and Infiltrative Mucinous Carcinomas of the Ovary.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Review
- Comparison of stage III mucinous and serous ovarian cancer: a case-control study.Journal of ovarian research · 2018Article
- Prognostic significance of preoperative serum CEA in primary mucinous ovarian carcinoma: a retrospective cohort study.Cancer management and research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsPatterns of metastasis and clinical behavior of mucinous ovarian cancers are poorly understood because of their rarity.
methodsA retrospective review of records of women identified with pure mucinous invasive ovarian/tubal/peritoneal cancer during 1992-2012 at one institution. Survival differences were compared using Kaplan-Meier methods with log-rank tests.
resultsAmong 42 women with mucinous adenocarcinomas, the median age was 55 (range 33-83 years). Most cancers were well differentiated (n = 26, 68%) and in stage I/II (n = 31, 74%). One of 27 women with sampled nodes had nodal metastasis; one additional woman had recurrence in a pelvic node. Most had no visible residual tumor after initial surgery, but of 10 women with stage III/IV cancer and documented residual, 8 had >2 cm residual. Except for 1 woman alive with disease at last follow-up, all who had a recurrence died of the disease. Five-year survival was 83% for stage I/II cases but 29% among stage III/IV cases. Stage was a strong predictor of survival (hazard ratio of death among women with stage III/IV cancer 7.73, 95% CI 2.33-25.66, p < 0.001 vs. women with stage I/II cancer).
conclusionMucinous ovarian cancers have a distinct biology, such that lymphadenectomy for staging is unnecessary and metastatic cancers have poor prognosis.
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.