Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38622323›Full record

ArticleVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2025

Evaluation of the prognostic potential of histopathological subtyping in high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma.

Hein S Zelisse, Robin A Hwan, Marc J van de Vijver, Frederike Dijk, Constantijne H Mom, Gerrit K J Hooijer, Mignon D J M van Gent, Malou L H Snijders

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hein S ZelisseDepartment of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam Reproduction & Development Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. h.s.zelisse@amsterdamumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4155-6331
Robin A HwanDepartment of Pathology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Marc J van de VijverDepartment of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0385-4787
Frederike DijkDepartment of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3970-6601
Constantijne H MomDepartment of Gynaecologic Oncology, Centre for Gynaecologic Oncology Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2838-2031
Gerrit K J HooijerDepartment of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Mignon D J M van GentDepartment of Gynaecologic Oncology, Centre for Gynaecologic Oncology Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Malou L H SnijdersDepartment of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. m.l.h.snijders@amsterdamumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6295-2291
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLAmsterdam Neuroscience · NL

Funding

KWF Kankerbestrijding 11774
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

High-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSOC) can be categorized into four gene expression-based subtypes, with supposedly distinct prognoses and treatment responses. Murakami et al. translated these gene expression-based subtypes into the histopathological mesenchymal, immunoreactive, solid and proliferative, and papilloglandular subtypes, showing differences in survival outcomes. Miyagawa et al. refined these criteria to improve the interobserver concordance. The current retrospective study evaluated the interobserver variability and the prognostic differences between the histopathologic subtypes using the criteria of both Murakami et al. and Miyagawa et al. in 208 HGSOC cases. The mesenchymal subtype was considered first, followed by the immunoreactive subtype. Non-conforming cases were categorized as solid and proliferative or papilloglandular. The mesenchymal subtype was identified in 122 patients (58.7%) for both criteria. Using the criteria of Murakami et al., 10 cases (4.8%) were immunoreactive, 26 (12.5%) solid and proliferative, and 50 (24%) papilloglandular, with a concordance rate of 62.5% (κ = 0.34, p < .001). Using the Miyagawa et al. criteria, 23 cases (11%) were immunoreactive, 20 (9.6%) solid and proliferative, and 43 (20.7%) papilloglandular. No survival differences were observed between the subtypes. The fair reproducibility of the histopathological subtype classification of HGSOC and the lack of survival differences among these subtypes indicate the need for further refinement of the criteria and exploration of their correlation with overall survival outcomes before clinical application.

Indexed as

Cystadenocarcinoma, SerousOvarian NeoplasmsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkers, TumorFemaleHumansImmunohistochemistryMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingObserver VariationPrognosisReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesBiomarkers, TumorEpithelial ovarian carcinomaHigh-grade serous ovarian carcinomaPrognosisSubtypes

Identifiers

PMID38622323
PMCPMC11876211
OpenAlexW4394851409

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.