ArticleMolecular and clinical oncology2026
Differences in the clinical significance of CA125 for detecting progression among histological subtypes of epithelial ovarian carcinoma.
Article in Molecular and clinical oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Serum cancer antigen 125 (CA125) is the standard tool for surveillance of patients with epithelial ovarian carcinoma (OC). However, its utility may vary by histological subtype. The present study included patients with epithelial OC who completed primary therapy (surgery and chemotherapy) at the National Defense Medical College Hospital (Tokorozawa, Japan) between January 2006 and December 2022, achieved complete or partial response, and had a post-treatment CA125 level of <35 U/ml. Recurrence was defined using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors criteria via computed tomography (CT) imaging. Surveillance included quarterly CA125 testing for 5 years, and semiannual CT in year 1 followed by annual CT. All patients were classified into Group A, which included clear cell carcinoma and mucinous carcinoma, or Group B, which included high-grade serous carcinoma and other subtypes. Among 243 patients, there were 85 in Group A and 158 in Group B. First, the diagnostic performance of the standard CA125 cutoff (≥35 U/ml) for detecting recurrence was evaluated. The sensitivity was 28.6% in Group A and 81.8% in Group B; and the specificity was 98.4% in Group A and 98.8% in Group B. Second, because the sensitivity in Group A was very low, the CA125 ratio and a combined model (defined as CA125 ≥35 U/ml or CA125 ratio ≥1.5) were introduced. The CA125 ratio was defined as the maximum CA125 value measured at CT surveillance divided by the CA125 value measured just after the initial treatment for patients with CA125 <35 U/ml. The sensitivity was 66.7% in Group A and 93.5% in Group B; and the specificity was 84.1% in Group A and 86.4% in Group B. In conclusion, the utility of CA125 for the detection of recurrence differs substantially between histological subtypes, highlighting the need for histological subtype-specific surveillance strategies in epithelial OC.
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.