ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2022
Serology-Based Model for Personalized Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Risk Evaluation.
Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Random survival forest model in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer: a study based on SEER database and single center data.American journal of cancer research · 2025Article
- A novel CSN5/CRT O-GlcNAc/ER stress regulatory axis in platinum resistance of epithelial ovarian cancer.International journal of biological sciences · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to establish a prognosis-prediction model based on serological indicators in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Patients initially diagnosed as ovarian cancer and surgically treated in Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center from 2014 to 2018 were consecutively enrolled. Serological indicators preoperatively were collected. A risk model score (RMS) was constructed based on the levels of serological indicators determined by receiver operating characteristic curves. We correlated this RMS with EOC patients’ overall survival (OS). Finally, 635 patients were identified. Pearson’s χ2 results showed that RMS was significantly related to clinical parameters. Kaplan−Meier analysis demonstrated that an RMS less than 3 correlated with a longer OS (p < 0.0001). Specifically, significant differences were perceived in the survival curves of different subgroups. Multivariate Cox analysis revealed that age (p = 0.015), FIGO stage (p = 0.006), ascites (p = 0.015) and RMS (p = 0.005) were independent risk factors for OS. Moreover, RMS combined with age, FIGO and ascites could better evaluate for patients’ prognosis in DCA analyses. Our novel RMS-guided classification preoperatively identified the prognostic subgroups of patients with EOC and showed higher accuracy than the conventional method, meaning that it could be a useful and economical tool for tailored monitoring and/or therapy.
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.