Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35302882›Full record

SynthesisJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology2022

Risk of Peritoneal Carcinomatosis After Risk-Reducing Salpingo-Oophorectomy: A Systematic Review and Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis.

Miranda P Steenbeek, Majke H D van Bommel, Johan Bulten, Julia A Hulsmann, Joep Bogaerts, Christine Garcia, Han T Cun, Karen H Lu, Heleen J van Beekhuizen, Lucas Minig and 12 more

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
15.5field-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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 89 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Tubal epithelial alterations: evolving concepts.Journal of gynecologic oncology · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Ovarian cancer.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2026
    Review
  9. Oncologic outcomes of incidental serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma and associated high-grade serous carcinoma in high-risk patients undergoing risk-reducing surgery.International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2026
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, and peritoneum: 2025 update.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Integrated Spatial Analysis of Ovarian Precancerous Lesions.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

22 authors at 10 institutions in 5 countries.

Miranda P SteenbeekRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6097-1579
Majke H D van BommelRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7562-9861
Johan BultenRadboud University Medical Center, Department of Pathology, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Julia A HulsmannRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-1273-9692
Joep BogaertsRadboud University Medical Center, Department of Pathology, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0772-6712
Christine GarciaKaiser Permanente Northern California, Division of Gynecologic Oncology San Francisco, San Francisco CA.
Han T CunDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.ORCID 0000-0002-1465-2267
Karen H LuDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.ORCID 0000-0002-5317-9927
Heleen J van BeekhuizenErasmus MC Cancer Center, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Department of Gynecological Oncology, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8899-7412
Lucas MinigGynecologic Oncology Unit, IMED Hospitales, Valencia, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-7648-5604
Katja N GaarenstroomLeiden University Medical Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Marielle NobbenhuisThe Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Department of Gynaecology, London, England.
Mateja KrajcInstitute of Oncology Ljubljana, Department of Clinical Genetics, Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID 0000-0003-0605-2592
Vilius RudaitisVilnius University Faculty of Medicine, Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Barbara M NorquistUniversity of Washington, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Seattle, WA.ORCID 0000-0001-5992-7845
Elizabeth M SwisherUniversity of Washington, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Seattle, WA.
Marian J E MouritsUniversity Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Groningen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-2385-2639
Leon F A G MassugerRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Nicoline HoogerbruggeRadboud University Medical Center, Department of Human Genetics, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-2393-8141
Rosella P M G HermensRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7624-7120
Joanna IntHoutRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department for Health Evidence, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Joanne A de HulluRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USUniversity of Washington · USErasmus MC Cancer Institute · NLInstitute of Oncology Ljubljana · SIKaiser Permanente · USLeiden University Medical Center · NLRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NLVilnius University · LT

Funding

Training of Academic Gynecologic OncologistsT32CA101642 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI ANIL K SOOD, Kathleen Schmeler · 2005 to 2026
$9.2M
NCI NIH HHS T32 CA101642
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAfter risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO),

methodsUnpublished data from three centers were supplemented by studies identified in a systematic review of EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane library describing women with a

resultsFrom 17 studies, individual patient data were available for 3,121 women, of whom 115 had a STIC at RRSO. The estimated hazard ratio to develop PC during follow-up in women with STIC was 33.9 (95% CI, 15.6 to 73.9),

conclusion

Indexed as

Cystadenocarcinoma, SerousFallopian Tube NeoplasmsOvarian NeoplasmsPeritoneal NeoplasmsFemaleHeterozygoteHumansMutationOvariectomySalpingo-oophorectomy

Identifiers

PMID35302882
PMCPMC9851686
OpenAlexW4220831823

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.