ArticleModern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc2018
KRAS mutation of extraovarian implants of serous borderline tumor: prognostic indicator for adverse clinical outcome.
Article in Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Differentiating high- and low-grade serous ovarian carcinoma using radiomics: a pilot study.Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2026Observational
- Diagnostic Consistency and Morphological Limits of Extraovarian Lesions in Ovarian Serous Tumors: A Comparative Study Between Gynecological and General Pathologists.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The role of abnormal epigenetic regulation of small GTPases in glioma (Review).International journal of oncology · 2025Review
- Molecular Biomarkers in Borderline Ovarian Tumors: Towards Personalized Treatment and Prognostic Assessment.Cancers · 2025Review
- Eosinophilic Cells in Ovarian Borderline Serous Tumors as a Predictor of BRAF Mutation.Cancers · 2024Article
- KRAS mutation in primary ovarian serous borderline tumors correlates with tumor recurrence.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2023Article
- Role of RAS signaling in ovarian cancer.F1000Research · 2022Review
- The Diagnosis, Treatment, Prognosis and Molecular Pathology of Borderline Ovarian Tumors: Current Status and Perspectives.Cancer management and research · 2020Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In contrast to non-invasive extraovarian implants, invasive implants of ovarian serous borderline tumor/atypical proliferative serous tumor are associated with adverse outcome and have been reclassified as low-grade serous carcinoma. Mutations of KRAS and/or BRAF have been reported in up to 50% of serous borderline tumor/atypical proliferative serous tumor. We investigated KRAS and BRAF mutation frequencies in the two types of implants of serous borderline tumor/atypical proliferative serous tumor in correlation with clinical outcome. Forty-two implants of serous borderline tumor from 39 patients were included (invasive implants/low-grade serous carcinoma, n=20; non-invasive implants, n=22). KRAS mutation was found in 12 of 20 invasive implants (60%) and 3 of 22 non-invasive implants (14%). BRAF V600E mutation was found in 1 of 22 non-invasive implants (5%) and none in invasive implants (0%). Invasive implants were more frequently associated with higher stage disease. Nine of 14 patients (64%) with KRAS mutation were found to have stage IIIC disease, while 5 of 24 patients (20%) without the mutation had stage IIIC disease. Patients with invasive implants had higher recurrence rate compared to those with non-invasive implants (60 vs 14 %, P=0.0003, log-rank test) and worse disease-specific survival (P=0.0008, log-rank test). Regardless of the histological subtypes, patients with KRAS mutation positive implants had significantly higher recurrence rate than those without the mutation (71 vs 21%, P=0.0021, log-rank test) and an unfavorable disease-specific survival (P=0.0104, log-rank test). In conclusion, compared to those with non-invasive implants, patients with invasive implants present with higher stage of the disease, higher recurrence rate and worse survival. KRAS mutation, but not BRAF V600E mutation, is significantly associated with invasive implants of serous borderline tumor. Regardless of the histological subtypes of the implants, KRAS mutation is a significant prognostic indicator for high risk of tumor recurrence and worse disease-specific survival.
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.