Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35138400›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2022

Outcomes From Opportunistic Salpingectomy for Ovarian Cancer Prevention.

Gillian E Hanley, Celeste Leigh Pearce, Aline Talhouk, Janice S Kwon, Sarah J Finlayson, Jessica N McAlpine, David G Huntsman, Dianne Miller

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 73 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
73citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
19.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

73 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 116 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. Opportunistic salpingectomy during gynecologic and non-gynecologic abdominopelvic procedures for ovarian cancer primary prevention: a cost-effectiveness analysis.International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Improving ovarian cancer risk assessment using a machine learning model developed on data from the Prostate Lung Colorectal Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial.International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Complications Following Bilateral Salpingectomy by Indication: Population-Based Cohort Study.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Ovarian cancer.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2026
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

13 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Gillian E HanleyDivision of Gynaecologic Oncology, Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Celeste Leigh PearceDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor.
Aline TalhoukDivision of Gynaecologic Oncology, Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Janice S KwonDivision of Gynaecologic Oncology, Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Sarah J FinlaysonDivision of Gynaecologic Oncology, Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Jessica N McAlpineDivision of Gynaecologic Oncology, Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
David G HuntsmanDivision of Gynaecologic Oncology, Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Dianne MillerDivision of Gynaecologic Oncology, Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
University of British Columbia · CAUniversity of Michigan · US

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Opportunistic salpingectomy (OS), which is the removal of fallopian tubes during hysterectomy or instead of tubal ligation without removal of ovaries, is recommended to prevent ovarian cancer, particularly serous ovarian cancer. However, the effectiveness of OS is still undetermined. Objective: To examine observed vs expected rates of ovarian cancer among individuals who have undergone OS. Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a population-based, retrospective cohort study of all individuals in British Columbia, Canada, who underwent OS or a control surgery (hysterectomy alone or tubal ligation) between 2008 and 2017, with follow-up until December 31, 2017. Those with any gynecological cancer diagnosed before or within 6 months of their procedure were excluded. Data analysis was performed from April to August 2021. Exposures: Removal of both fallopian tubes at the time of hysterectomy or instead of tubal ligation while leaving ovaries intact. Main Outcomes and Measures: An ovarian cancer diagnosis listed in the British Columbia Cancer Registry. Age-specific rates of epithelial and serous ovarian cancer in the control group were combined with the specific follow-up time in the OS group to calculate expected numbers (and 95% CIs) of ovarian cancers in the OS group. These were compared with observed numbers. Age-adjusted expected and observed numbers of breast and colorectal cancers were also examined in the OS group. Results: There were 25 889 individuals who underwent OS (mean [SD] age, 40.2 [7.1] years; median [IQR] follow-up, 3.2 [1.6-5.1] years) and 32 080 who underwent hysterectomy alone or tubal ligation (mean [SD] age, 38.2 [7.9] years; median [IQR] follow-up, 7.3 [4.6-8.7] years). There were no serous ovarian cancers in the OS group and 5 or fewer epithelial ovarian cancers. The age-adjusted expected number was 5.27 (95% CI, 1.78-19.29) serous cancers and 8.68 (95% CI, 3.36-26.58) epithelial ovarian cancers. Age-adjusted expected vs observed numbers of breast cancers (22.1 expected vs 23 observed) and colorectal cancers (9.35 expected vs 8 observed) were not significantly different. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, the OS group had significantly fewer serous and epithelial ovarian cancers than were expected according to the rate at which they arose in the control group. These findings suggest that OS is associated with reduced ovarian cancer risk.

Indexed as

AdultBritish ColumbiaCarcinoma, Ovarian EpithelialFemaleHumansHysterectomyRetrospective StudiesSalpingectomy

Identifiers

PMID35138400
PMCPMC8829665
OpenAlexW4210893233

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.