Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27377917›Full record

ArticleJournal of ovarian research2016

Magnetic resonance imaging for distinguishing ovarian clear cell carcinoma from high-grade serous carcinoma.

Feng-Hua Ma, Jin-Wei Qiang, Guo-Fu Zhang, Hai-Ming Li, Song-Qi Cai, Ya-Min Rao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of ovarian research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. MRI-based morphology of ovarian clear cell carcinomas.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. CT review of ovarian fibrothecoma.The British journal of radiology · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Current update on malignant epithelial ovarian tumors.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2021
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

6 authors.

Feng-Hua MaDepartment of Radiology, Obstetrics & Gynecology Hospital, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, 419 Fangxie Road, Shanghai, 200011, Huangpu District, China.
Jin-Wei QiangDepartment of Radiology, Jinshan Hospital, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, 1508 Longhang Road, Shanghai, 201508, Jinshan District, China. dr.jinweiqiang@163.com.
Guo-Fu ZhangDepartment of Radiology, Obstetrics & Gynecology Hospital, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, 419 Fangxie Road, Shanghai, 200011, Huangpu District, China. guofuzh@fudan.edu.cn.
Hai-Ming LiDepartment of Radiology, Jinshan Hospital, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, 1508 Longhang Road, Shanghai, 201508, Jinshan District, China.
Song-Qi CaiDepartment of Radiology, Jinshan Hospital, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, 1508 Longhang Road, Shanghai, 201508, Jinshan District, China.
Ya-Min RaoDepartment of Pathology, Obstetrics & Gynecology Hospital, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200011, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo compare the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features of ovarian clear cell carcinoma (CCC) and high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC), to distinguish CCC from HGSC.

methodsMRI features (laterality, shape, size, configuration, papillary projection, signal intensity, enhancement, peritoneal implant, lymphadenopathy, ascites) of 40 tumors in 37 patients with CCC, confirmed by surgery and pathology, were compared with those of 62 tumors in 40 patients with HGSC. Statistical analysis was performed using Mann-Whitney and Fisher's exact tests.

resultsThere was a statistically significant difference in the mean maximum diameter, laterality, and FIGO stage (P = 0.002, P < 0.001, P < 0.001, respectively) between CCC and HGSC. Compared to HGSCs, CCCs were more frequently oval (30/40, 75 % vs 12/62, 19 %; P < 0.001), more often cystic (21/40, 53 % vs 8/62, 13 %; P < 0.001) and unilocular (23/29, 79 % vs 7/31, 23 %; P < 0.001), had T1-hyperintense cystic components more often (18/29, 62 % vs 5/29, 17 %; P < 0.001), had larger papillary projections (5.13 ± 0.4 cm vs 2.91 ± 0.3 cm; P < 0.001), were peritoneally implanted less frequently (P = 0.001) and had fewer ascites (P < 0.001).

conclusionsCCC typically showed an oval, unilocular cystic mass with large papillary projection and T1-hyperintense cystic components. MRI could be helpful for distinguishing CCC from HGSC.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingAdenocarcinoma, Clear CellBiomarkers, TumorCystadenocarcinoma, SerousDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleHumansImage EnhancementImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMenopauseMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingOvarian NeoplasmsReproducibility of ResultsTumor BurdenBiomarkers, TumorClear cell carcinomaHigh-grade serous carcinomaMagnetic resonance imagingOvary

Identifiers

PMID27377917
PMCPMC4932691

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.