ArticleAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP2022
Prognostic Factors for Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Following Primary Cytoreductive Surgery or Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.
Article in Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The prognosis impact of NACT-IDS and PDS in advanced ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of gynecologic oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Development and Validation of a Predictive Model Combining [18F] FDG PET/CT and the Suidan Score for Primary Optimal Cytoreduction in Advanced High-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026Article
- Prognostic Role of Neutrophil, Monocyte and Platelet to Lymphocyte Ratios in Advanced Ovarian Cancer According to the Time of Debulking Surgery.International journal of molecular sciences · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo examine the association between clinicopathological factors and survival in advanced epithelial ovarian, tubal, and primary peritoneal cancers patients who had primary cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and those that received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC).
methodsWomen who had CRS or NAC between 2008-2017 were included. Association between clinical characteristics, pretreatment imaging, serum markers, surgical and pathological factors, and disease recurrence/progression/death was examined in multivariable analysis.
resultsTwo hundred and three women were recruited in this study (CRS 128 women and NAC 75 women). Median overall survival was 33.7 months for the CRS group and 27.9 months for the NAC group (p=0.04). Median progression-free survival was 14.9 months in the CRS group and 12.1 months in the NAC group (p=0.04). For the CRS group, factors independently associated with increased risk of death included primary peritoneal carcinoma (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 6.94), stable disease/progression at treatment completion (aHR 5.97), and initial tumor size of more than 12 cm (aHR 1.87). For the NAC group, stable disease/progression after complete treatment (aHR 6.45) and pre-treatment platelet to lymphocyte ratio of more than 310 (aHR 2.20) were significantly associated with an increased risk of death.
conclusionsNAC appeared to be a good alternative treatment for stage III/IV tubo-ovarian carcinoma. The worse survival outcome associated with primary peritoneal carcinoma and large initial tumor size in the patients who received CRS suggested that NAC could be an attractive option for those with these characteristics.
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.