Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39115678›Full record

ReviewCurrent oncology reports2024

Prevention of Ovarian Cancer: Where are We Now and Where are We Going?

Isabel V Rodriguez, Talayeh Ghezelayagh, Kathryn P Pennington, Barbara M Norquist

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current oncology reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
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

4 authors.

Isabel V RodriguezDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Washington, NE Pacific ST, Box 356460, Seattle, WA, 98195-6460, USA.
Talayeh GhezelayaghDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Kathryn P PenningtonAlaska Women's Cancer Care, 3851 Piper St Ste U264, Anchorage, AK, 99508, USA.
Barbara M NorquistDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Washington, NE Pacific ST, Box 356460, Seattle, WA, 98195-6460, USA. bnorquis@uw.edu.

Funding

TRAINING IN CANCER BIOLOGY &TRANSPLANTATIONT32CA009515 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI NANCY ELLEN DAVIDSON, Effie W Petersdorf · 1985 to 2026
$16.2M
Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs OC180282NCI NIH HHS T32 CA009515NIH HHS T32CA9515-37
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewTo describe current and future strategies to reduce the burden of ovarian cancer through prevention. RECENT

findingsCurrent strategies in genetic testing are missing a substantial number of individuals at risk, representing a missed opportunity for ovarian cancer prevention. Past efforts at screening and early detection have thus far failed to improve ovarian cancer mortality, and novel techniques are needed. Surgical prevention is highly effective, but surgical menopause from oophorectomy has significant side effects. Novel surgical strategies aimed at reducing risk while minimizing these harms are currently being studied. To maximize ovarian cancer prevention, a multi-pronged approach is needed. We propose that more inclusive and accurate genetic testing to identify more individuals at risk, novel molecular screening and early detection, surgical prevention that maximizes quality of life while reducing risk, and broader adoption of targeted and opportunistic salpingectomy will together reduce the burden of ovarian cancer.

Indexed as

Ovarian NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerFemaleGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenetic TestingHumansOvariectomyQuality of LifeBRCACancer preventionGenetic testingInherited riskOvarian cancerSalpingectomy

Identifiers

PMID39115678

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.