ArticleMolecular and clinical oncology2022
Predictive features of borderline ovarian tumor recurrence in patients with childbearing potential undergoing conservative treatment.
Article in Molecular and clinical oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of ovarian cystectomy on oncological and reproductive outcomes in borderline ovarian tumors: a retrospective study from a tertiary center.Journal of ovarian research · 2025Article
- Factors Affecting Recurrence in 165 Patients with Serous Borderline Ovarian Tumours: The Pattern of Micro-Invasion Is Main Prognostic Factor.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Comparison of the diagnostic efficiency between the O-RADS US risk stratification system and doctors' subjective judgment.BMC medical imaging · 2023Article
- Evaluation of Borderline Ovarian Tumor Recurrence Rate after Surgery with or without Fertility-Sparing Approach: Results of a Retrospective Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Borderline ovarian tumors (BOT) represent 10-12% of ovarian cancer cases with a higher prevalence in young patients. Although reproductive outcomes are satisfactory after conservative treatment, several authors reported a higher relapse rate in patients undergoing fertility-sparing surgery compared with radical treatment. The aim of the present study was to identify predictive factors of BOT recurrence in patients with childbearing potential undergoing conservative treatment with unilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. From January 2010 to December 2020 all patients with childbearing potential undergoing conservative treatment for early-stage BOT were included in the analysis. Expert sonographers performed the ultrasounds and classified the ovarian lesion according to International Ovarian Tumor Analysis criteria. A total of 230 patients with BOT that underwent surgical treatment during the study period were analyzed. Of these, 82 patients met the inclusion criteria. Relapse was experienced in 11 cases (13.4%), one (1.2%) peritoneal surface and 10 (12.2%) recurrences on the contralateral ovary. Ovarian tumor size >50 mm (P=0.032; OR 7.317; 95% CI 0.89-60.29), multilocular cysts >10 loculi (P=0.016; OR 7.543; 95% CI 1.64-34.78), cysts with >4 papillae (P=0.025; OR 6.190; 95% CI 1.40-27.36) were statistically correlated with recurrent BOT. Overall, the present study showed that lesions with maximum diameter >50 mm (P=0.014), multilocular cysts >10 loculi (P=0.012) and cysts with >4 papillae (P=0.003) were independent predictive factors of BOT recurrence (P<0.001; correlation coefficient R=0.481) in patients with the potential to bear children undergoing conservative treatment.
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.