Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36707423›Full record

ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2023

A questionnaire-based survey on the diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for patients with STIC in Germany.

Josche van der Ven, Valerie Catherine Linz, Katharina Anic, Mona Wanda Schmidt, Amelie Loewe, Slavomir Krajnak, Marcus Schmidt, Stefan Kommoss, Barbara Schmalfeldt, Jalid Sehouli and 2 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Mirvetuximab soravtansine: current and future applications.Journal of hematology & oncology · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
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

12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Josche van der Ven *Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Langenbeckstreet 1, 55131, Mainz, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany.
Valerie Catherine Linz *Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Langenbeckstreet 1, 55131, Mainz, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany. valerie.linz@unimedizin-mainz.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8018-5484
Katharina AnicDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Langenbeckstreet 1, 55131, Mainz, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany.
Mona Wanda SchmidtDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Langenbeckstreet 1, 55131, Mainz, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany.
Amelie LoeweDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Langenbeckstreet 1, 55131, Mainz, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany.
Slavomir KrajnakDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Langenbeckstreet 1, 55131, Mainz, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany.
Marcus SchmidtDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Langenbeckstreet 1, 55131, Mainz, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany.
Stefan KommossDepartment of Women's Health, Tübingen University Hospital, Calwerstreet 7, 72076, Tübingen, Baden-Württemberg, Germany.
Barbara SchmalfeldtDepartment of Gynaecology, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistreet 52, 20251, Hamburg, Germany.
Jalid SehouliDepartment of Gynaecology and Centre of Oncological Surgery, Charité Universitaetsmedizin Berlin Charité Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Annette HasenburgDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Langenbeckstreet 1, 55131, Mainz, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany.
Marco Johannes BattistaDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Langenbeckstreet 1, 55131, Mainz, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany.
Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DECharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEUniversität Hamburg · DEUniversity Children's Hospital Tübingen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeDespite the growing understanding of the carcinogenesis of pelvic high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC) of the ovary and peritoneum and its precursor lesion serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma (STIC), evidence-based proven recommendations on the clinical management of patients with STIC are lacking so far.

methodsA questionnaire containing 21 questions was developed to explore the clinical experience with patients with the diagnosis of STICs and the diagnostic, surgical and histopathological approaches in Germany. Overall, 540 clinical heads of department in all German gynaecological centres were asked to participate.

results131 questionnaires (response rate 24.3%) were included in this survey. 45.8% of the respondents had treated one to three STIC patients during their career. 75.6% of the respondents performed opportunistic bilateral salpingectomies during other gynaecological surgeries. Most of the participants (31.3%) started with the SEE-FIM (Sectioning and Extensively Examining the FIMbria) protocol in 2014. It was requested by 39.7% centres for prophylactic salpingectomies, by 13.7% for both prophylactic and opportunistic salpingectomies and by 22.1% for neither of both. 38.2%, 1.5% and 24.4% of the participants would use the laparoscopic, transverse and midline laparotomic approach for a surgical staging procedure, respectively. 25.6% (54.7%) of the respondents recommended a hysterectomy in premenopausal (versus postmenopausal) patients with a STIC, 24.4% (88.4%) a bilateral oophorectomy and 50.0% (4.7%) an affected side oophorectomy (all p values < 0.001). Omentectomy, pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy would be performed by 60.5% (64.0%), 9.3% (11.6%) and 9.3% (11.6%) of respondents in premenopausal (versus postmenopausal) patients (all p values > 0.05).

conclusionOur survey highlights significant inconsistency in the management of patients with STIC. Prospective data are urgently needed to elucidate the clinical impact of a STIC lesion and its clinical management.

Indexed as

Carcinoma in SituCystadenocarcinoma, SerousFallopian Tube NeoplasmsOvarian NeoplasmsFemaleHumansProspective StudiesSurveys and QuestionnairesBRCAOvarian cancerSalpingectomySEE-FIMSerous tubal intraepithelial carcinomaSTICSurvey

Identifiers

PMID36707423
PMCPMC10293341
OpenAlexW4318257702

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.