ArticleGynecologic oncology2018
Processing of fallopian tube, ovary, and endometrial surgical pathology specimens: A survey of U.S. laboratory practices.
Article in Gynecologic oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Oophorectomy-Corrected Ovarian Cancer Incidence, Survival, and Mortality by Subtype, Race, Ethnicity.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma (STIC) outcomes in an average risk population.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2024Article
- Increase of fallopian tube and decrease of ovarian carcinoma: fact or fake?Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2021Article
- Article
- Population Frequency of Serous Tubal Intraepithelial Carcinoma (STIC) in Clinical Practice Using SEE-Fim Protocol.JNCI cancer spectrum · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveMany high-grade serous carcinomas initiate in fallopian tubes as serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma (STIC), a microscopic lesion identified with specimen processing according to the Sectioning and Extensive Examination of the Fimbria protocol (SEE-Fim). Given that the tubal origin of these cancers was recently recognized, we conducted a survey of pathology practices to assess processing protocols that are applied to gynecologic surgical pathology specimens in clinical contexts in which finding STIC might have different implications.
methodsWe distributed a survey electronically to the American Society for Clinical Pathology list-serve to determine practice patterns and compared results between practice types by chi-square (χ2) tests for categorical variables. Free text comments were qualitatively reviewed.
resultsSurvey responses were received from 159 laboratories (72 academic, 87 non-academic), which reported diverse specimen volumes and percentage of gynecologic samples. Overall, 74.1% of laboratories reported performing SEE-Fim for risk-reducing surgical specimens (82.5% academic versus 65.7% non-academic, p < 0.05). In specimens from surgery for benign indications in which initial microscopic sections showed an unanticipated suspicious finding, 75.9% of laboratories reported using SEE-Fim to process the remainder of the specimen (94.8% academic versus 76.4% non-academic, p < 0.01), and 84.6% submitted the entire fimbriae.
conclusionsChanges in the theories of pathogenesis of high-grade serous carcinoma have led to implementation of pathology specimen processing protocols that include detailed analysis of the fallopian tubes. These results have implications for interpreting trends in cancer incidence data and considering the feasibility of developing a bank of gynecologic tissues containing STIC or early cancer precursors.
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.