Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30463533›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2018

The impact of clinicopathologic and surgical factors on relapse and pregnancy in young patients (≤40 years old) with borderline ovarian tumors.

Chenyan Fang, Lingqin Zhao, Xi Chen, Aijun Yu, Liang Xia, Ping Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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.

Chenyan FangDepartment of Gynecological Oncology, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, 1 Banshan East Road, Hangzhou, 310022, Zhejiang Province, China.
Lingqin ZhaoDepartment of Gynecological Oncology, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, 1 Banshan East Road, Hangzhou, 310022, Zhejiang Province, China.
Xi ChenDepartment of Gynecological Oncology, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, 1 Banshan East Road, Hangzhou, 310022, Zhejiang Province, China.
Aijun YuDepartment of Gynecological Oncology, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, 1 Banshan East Road, Hangzhou, 310022, Zhejiang Province, China.
Liang XiaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, 1 Banshan East Road, Hangzhou, 310022, Zhejiang Province, China. xialiang@zjcc.org.cn.
Ping ZhangDepartment of Gynecological Oncology, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, 1 Banshan East Road, Hangzhou, 310022, Zhejiang Province, China. Ping725020@sina.com.

Funding

Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province LY14H160010Zhejiang Medical Science and Technology Project 2017194140
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFertility sparing surgery has been extensively performed among patients with borderline ovarian tumors due to their age and favorable prognosis. Nevertheless, the prognosis and obstetric outcomes in these patients remain uncertain. Thus, the current study was carried out to evaluate the oncological safety and fertility benefits of different fertility sparing surgery subtypes and various clinicopathological parameters.

methodsYoung borderline ovarian tumor patients with an age of ≤40 years, who were admitted and treated in Zhejiang Cancer Hospital from January 1996 to December 2016, were enrolled in this study and reviewed retrospectively. The prognostic and obstetric effects of clinicopathological and surgical variables were evaluated using univariate/multivariate analyses and survival curves.

resultsA total of 92 eligible patients were enrolled in the analysis. Among these patients, 22 (24%) patients showed recurrence after a median follow-up of 46.5 months. Within the fertility sparing surgery group, patients at advanced stage (≥stage II), of serous type, with micropapillary and bilateral tumors were associated with a higher recurrence rate and a shorter recurrence interval. In terms of different modalities of fertility sparing surgery, adnexectomy was remarkably favored over cystectomy-including (P = 0.012); unilateral salpingo-oophorectomy had better prognosis than cystectomy and bilateral cystectomy was favored over unilateral salpingo-oophorectomy+contralateral cystectomy. Univariate Cox regression analysis indicated that the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage (≥Stage II), the presence of bilateral and micropapillary lesions, and the application of cystectomy-including surgery were correlated with poorer disease-free survival, while the mucinous type of borderline ovarian tumors was related to improved disease-free survival. In this study, a total of 22 patients attempted to conceive and 15 (68%) of these patients achieved successful pregnancy.

conclusionsUnilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and bilateral cystectomy should be recommended as the preferred choice of treatment for young patients with unilateral and bilateral borderline ovarian tumor who desire to preserve fertility. In addition, borderline ovarian tumor patients at advanced stage (≥stage II), of serous type, with micropapillary and bilateral tumors should pay more attention to the risk of recurrence. Therefore, these patients should choose fertility sparing surgery carefully and attempt to achieve pregnancy as soon as possible.

Indexed as

AdultCystectomyDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleFertilityFertility PreservationHumansNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasm StagingOutcome Assessment, Health CareOvarian NeoplasmsOvariectomyPregnancyPregnancy OutcomePrognosisProportional Hazards ModelsBorderline ovarian tumorsDisease-free survivalFertility sparing surgeryPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID30463533
PMCPMC6249857

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.