ArticleJournal of ovarian research2025
Prognostic modeling of endometriosis-associated ovarian cancer based on molecular signatures: a retrospective study.
Article in Journal of ovarian research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Novel Exploratory Transcriptomic Candidates as Biomarkers and Cancer Hallmark Fingerprints for Ovarian Endometroid and Clear Cell Carcinomas in Women.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Systemic immune and coagulation amplifiers resolve diagnostic ambiguity in endometriosis-associated ovarian cancer.Journal of ovarian research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to investigate the distribution of molecular signatures in endometriosis- associated ovarian cancer (EAOC) and to develop a prognostic model based on these molecular signatures.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed EAOC patients treated at Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital between December 2015 and July 2023. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared across molecular subtype groups. Cox regression analysis identified independent recurrence risk factors in EAOC, and a nomogram was constructed using these factors.
resultsThe cohort included 191 patients. Pathological classification (clear cell carcinoma vs. endometrioid), advanced FIGO stage (III–IV vs. I–II), bilateral ovarian involvement, and MMRd status were identified as independent factors associated with recurrence risk (all P < 0.05). A nomogram incorporating these four variables demonstrated strong predictive performance, with a C-index of 0.844. The areas under the curve (AUCs) for predicting 1-, 3-, and 5-year PFS were 0.838, 0.912, and 0.898, respectively. Calibration curves showed excellent agreement between predicted and observed recurrence probabilities at 1, 3, and 5 years. Bootstrap internal validation confirmed the model’s robust discriminatory power.
conclusionsAdvanced FIGO stage, clear cell carcinoma histology, bilateral ovarian tumors, and MMRd molecular signatures were independent risk factors for EAOC recurrence. The molecular signature-integrated nomogram exhibited strong discrimination and calibration, offering a reliable tool for clinical decision-making in EAOC management.
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.