ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Prognosis Following Surgery for Recurrent Ovarian Cancer and Diagnostic Criteria Predictive of Cytoreduction Success: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long non-coding RNA KCNQ1OT1 promotes ovarian cancer cell malignant characteristics by targeting the miR-140-5p/KLK10 axis.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2026Article
- Review
- Tumor-informed circulating tumor DNA detection for personalized monitoring of treatment response in epithelial ovarian cancer.Practical laboratory medicine · 2025Article
- Multidisciplinary multivisceral resections involving the upper digestive tract: a United Kingdom tertiary cancer centre experience.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2025Article
- Immunological mechanisms and antibody-drug conjugates targeting B7-H3 and B7-H4 in ovarian cancer.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Prognostic Impact of Pre-Treatment CRP/Albumin Ratio in Patients with Advanced-Stage Epithelial Ovarian Cancer.OncoTargets and therapy · 2025Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For women achieving clinical remission after the completion of initial treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer, 80% with advanced-stage disease will develop recurrence. However, the standard treatment of women with recurrent platinum-sensitive diseases remains poorly defined. Secondary (SCS), tertiary (TCS) or quaternary (QCS) cytoreduction surgery for recurrence has been suggested to be associated with increased overall survival (OS). We searched five databases for studies reporting death rate, OS, cytoreduction rates, post-operative morbidity/mortality and diagnostic models predicting complete cytoreduction in a platinum-sensitive disease recurrence setting. Death rates calculated from raw data were pooled based on a random-effects model. Meta-regression/linear regression was performed to explore the role of complete or optimal cytoreduction as a moderator. Pooled death rates were 45%, 51%, 66% for SCS, TCS and QCS, respectively. Median OS for optimal cytoreduction ranged from 16-91, 24-99 and 39-135 months for SCS, TCS and QCS, respectively. Every 10% increase in complete cytoreduction rates at SCS corresponds to a 7% increase in median OS. Complete cytoreduction rates ranged from 9-100%, 35-90% and 33-100% for SCS, TCS and QCS, respectively. Major post-operative thirty-day morbidity was reported to range from 0-47%, 13-33% and 15-29% for SCS, TCS and QCS, respectively. Thirty-day post-operative mortality was 0-6%, 0-3% and 0-2% for SCS, TCS and QCS, respectively. There were two externally validated diagnostic models predicting complete cytoreduction at SCS, but none for TCS and QCS. In conclusion, our data confirm that maximal effort higher order cytoreductive surgery resulting in complete cytoreduction can improve survival.
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.