BACKGROUND: In the current study, the authors present pooled data from studies that investigated p53 protein expression and/or mutation in human epithelial ovarian tumors. METHODS: The English literature in the MEDLINE, PubMed, and Ingenta databases was searched to the end of the year 2000 to identify relevant studies. Data were pooled across eligible studies, and the prevalence of p53 expression and mutation among benign, low malignant potential (LMP), and invasive tumors was determined. Prevalence estimates by tumor histology, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage, and grade also were calculated. RESULTS: The pooled prevalence estimate for p53 overexpression among epithelial ovarian carcinomas was 51% (95% confidence intervals [95% CI], 50-53%) compared with 17% (95% CI, 15-20%) among LMP tumors and 7% (95% CI, 5-10%) among benign tumors. p53 mutation prevalence estimates were 45% (95% CI, 42-47%), 5% (95% CI, 2-9%), and 1% (95% CI, 0-5%), respectively, for invasive, LMP, and benign tumors. The prevalence of these p53 abnormalities was found to be associated positively with increasing tumor grade and stage. Differences based on histologic subtype also were found. CONCLUSIONS: Although these pooled estimates might appear to offer support for various hypotheses regarding the role of p53 in ovarian carcinoma, the limitations inherent in these data hamper the interpretation of the significance of any of the findings. Future studies will require innovative methods to address the limitations of many previous investigations and more comprehensive investigation into defective tumor suppression mechanisms. Copyright 2003 American Cancer Society
BACKGROUND: In the current study, the authors present pooled data from studies that investigated p53 protein expression and/or mutation in humanepithelial ovarian tumors. METHODS: The English literature in the MEDLINE, PubMed, and Ingenta databases was searched to the end of the year 2000 to identify relevant studies. Data were pooled across eligible studies, and the prevalence of p53 expression and mutation among benign, low malignant potential (LMP), and invasive tumors was determined. Prevalence estimates by tumor histology, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage, and grade also were calculated. RESULTS: The pooled prevalence estimate for p53 overexpression among epithelial ovarian carcinomas was 51% (95% confidence intervals [95% CI], 50-53%) compared with 17% (95% CI, 15-20%) among LMP tumors and 7% (95% CI, 5-10%) among benign tumors. p53 mutation prevalence estimates were 45% (95% CI, 42-47%), 5% (95% CI, 2-9%), and 1% (95% CI, 0-5%), respectively, for invasive, LMP, and benign tumors. The prevalence of these p53 abnormalities was found to be associated positively with increasing tumor grade and stage. Differences based on histologic subtype also were found. CONCLUSIONS: Although these pooled estimates might appear to offer support for various hypotheses regarding the role of p53 in ovarian carcinoma, the limitations inherent in these data hamper the interpretation of the significance of any of the findings. Future studies will require innovative methods to address the limitations of many previous investigations and more comprehensive investigation into defective tumor suppression mechanisms. Copyright 2003 American Cancer Society
Authors: Joellen M Schildkraut; Ellen L Goode; Merlise A Clyde; Edwin S Iversen; Patricia G Moorman; Andrew Berchuck; Jeffrey R Marks; Jolanta Lissowska; Louise Brinton; Beata Peplonska; Julie M Cunningham; Robert A Vierkant; David N Rider; Georgia Chenevix-Trench; Penelope M Webb; Jonathan Beesley; Xiaoqing Chen; Catherine Phelan; Rebecca Sutphen; Thomas A Sellers; Leigh Pearce; Anna H Wu; David Van Den Berg; David Conti; Christopher K Elund; Rebecca Anderson; Marc T Goodman; Galina Lurie; Michael E Carney; Pamela J Thompson; Simon A Gayther; Susan J Ramus; Ian Jacobs; Susanne Krüger Kjaer; Estrid Hogdall; Jan Blaakaer; Claus Hogdall; Douglas F Easton; Honglin Song; Paul D P Pharoah; Alice S Whittemore; Valerie McGuire; Lydia Quaye; Hoda Anton-Culver; Argyrios Ziogas; Kathryn L Terry; Daniel W Cramer; Susan E Hankinson; Shelley S Tworoger; Brian Calingaert; Stephen Chanock; Mark Sherman; Montserrat Garcia-Closas Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2009-03-10 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Joshua Z Press; Kaitlyn Wurz; Barbara M Norquist; Ming K Lee; Christopher Pennil; Rochelle Garcia; Piri Welcsh; Barbara A Goff; Elizabeth M Swisher Journal: Neoplasia Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 5.715
Authors: Karen S Anderson; Jessica Wong; Allison Vitonis; Christopher P Crum; Patrick M Sluss; Joshua Labaer; Daniel Cramer Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2010-03-03 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Joellen M Schildkraut; Edwin S Iversen; Melanie A Wilson; Merlise A Clyde; Patricia G Moorman; Rachel T Palmieri; Regina Whitaker; Rex C Bentley; Jeffrey R Marks; Andrew Berchuck Journal: PLoS One Date: 2010-04-08 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Bhavana Pothuri; Mario M Leitao; Douglas A Levine; Agnès Viale; Adam B Olshen; Crispinita Arroyo; Faina Bogomolniy; Narciso Olvera; Oscar Lin; Robert A Soslow; Mark E Robson; Kenneth Offit; Richard R Barakat; Jeff Boyd Journal: PLoS One Date: 2010-04-26 Impact factor: 3.240