Literature DB >> 18317228

Pathogenesis of ovarian cancer: lessons from morphology and molecular biology and their clinical implications.

Robert J Kurman1, Ie-Ming Shih.   

Abstract

The accepted view of ovarian carcinogenesis is that carcinoma begins in the ovary, undergoes progressive "dedifferentiation" from a well to a poorly differentiated tumor, and then spreads to the pelvic and abdominal cavities before metastasizing to distant sites. It has therefore been reasoned that survival for this highly lethal disease could be improved by developing screening methods that detect disease when it is confined to the ovary. To date, however, no prospective randomized trial of any ovarian cancer screening test(s) has demonstrated a decrease in mortality. We believe that one of the main reasons for this is that the dogma underlying ovarian carcinogenesis is flawed. Based on studies performed in our laboratory during the last decade, we have proposed a model of ovarian carcinogenesis that takes into account the diverse nature of ovarian cancer and correlates the clinical, pathological, and molecular features of the disease. In this model, ovarian tumors are divided into 2 groups designated type I and type II. Type I tumors are slow growing, generally confined to the ovary at diagnosis, and develop from well-established precursor lesions that are termed "borderline" tumors. Type I tumors include low-grade micropapillary serous carcinoma, mucinous, endometrioid, and clear cell carcinomas. They are genetically stable and are characterized by mutations in a number of different genes including KRAS, BRAF, PTEN, and beta-catenin. Type II tumors are rapidly growing highly aggressive neoplasms for which well-defined precursor lesions have not been described. Type II tumors include high-grade serous carcinoma, malignant mixed mesodermal tumors (carcinosarcomas), and undifferentiated carcinomas. This group of tumors has a high level of genetic instability and is characterized by mutation of TP53. The model helps to explain why current screening techniques, aimed at detecting stage I disease, have not been effective. Tumors that remain confined to the ovary for a long period belong to the type I group, but they account for only 25% of the malignant tumors. Most of what is considered ovarian cancer belongs to the type II category, and these are only rarely confined to the ovary. Although the reasons for this are not entirely clear, possible explanations include rapid spread from the ovary early in carcinogenesis and development of carcinoma in extra ovarian sites, notably, the peritoneum and fallopian tube, with secondary involvement of the ovary. The latter tumors are advanced stage at their inception. Therefore, a more realistic end point for the early detection of ovarian cancer is volume and not stage of disease. The model does not replace the histopathologic classification but, by drawing attention to the molecular genetic events that play a role in tumor progression, sheds light on new approaches to early detection and treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18317228      PMCID: PMC2794425          DOI: 10.1097/PGP.0b013e318161e4f5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Gynecol Pathol        ISSN: 0277-1691            Impact factor:   2.762


  63 in total

1.  Ovarian serous borderline tumors: a critical review of the literature with emphasis on prognostic indicators.

Authors:  J D Seidman; R J Kurman
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 3.466

Review 2.  Molecular genetic defects in endometriosis.

Authors:  E J Thomas; I G Campbell
Journal:  Gynecol Obstet Invest       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 2.031

Review 3.  Common genetic changes between endometriosis and ovarian cancer.

Authors:  K Obata; H Hoshiai
Journal:  Gynecol Obstet Invest       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 2.031

4.  Loss of heterozygosity on 10q23.3 and mutation of the tumor suppressor gene PTEN in benign endometrial cyst of the ovary: possible sequence progression from benign endometrial cyst to endometrioid carcinoma and clear cell carcinoma of the ovary.

Authors:  N Sato; H Tsunoda; M Nishida; Y Morishita; Y Takimoto; T Kubo; M Noguchi
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2000-12-15       Impact factor: 12.701

5.  Allelic imbalance and mutations of the PTEN gene in ovarian cancer.

Authors:  M Saito; A Okamoto; T Kohno; S Takakura; H Shinozaki; S Isonishi; T Yasuhara; T Yoshimura; Y Ohtake; K Ochiai; J Yokota; T Tanaka
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2000-01-15       Impact factor: 7.396

Review 6.  Precursor lesions of ovarian epithelial malignancy.

Authors:  K M Feeley; M Wells
Journal:  Histopathology       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 5.087

7.  Refined diagnostic criteria for implants associated with ovarian atypical proliferative serous tumors (borderline) and micropapillary serous carcinomas.

Authors:  K A Bell; A E Smith Sehdev; R J Kurman
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 6.394

8.  Second primary or recurrence? Comparative patterns of p53 and K-ras mutations suggest that serous borderline ovarian tumors and subsequent serous carcinomas are unrelated tumors.

Authors:  B H Ortiz; M Ailawadi; C Colitti; M G Muto; M Deavers; E G Silva; R S Berkowitz; S C Mok; D M Gershenson
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2001-10-01       Impact factor: 12.701

Review 9.  Heritability and molecular genetic studies of endometriosis.

Authors:  F Z Bischoff; J L Simpson
Journal:  Hum Reprod Update       Date:  2000 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 15.610

10.  Assessment of TP53 mutation using purified tissue samples of ovarian serous carcinomas reveals a higher mutation rate than previously reported and does not correlate with drug resistance.

Authors:  R Salani; R J Kurman; R Giuntoli; G Gardner; R Bristow; T-L Wang; I-M Shih
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2007-08-10       Impact factor: 3.437

View more
  171 in total

Review 1.  Protein biomarkers of ovarian cancer: the forest and the trees.

Authors:  Brian M Nolen; Anna E Lokshin
Journal:  Future Oncol       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 3.404

2.  Expression of the Wnt antagonist DKK3 is frequently suppressed in sporadic epithelial ovarian cancer.

Authors:  An You; Emmanouil Fokas; Lin-Fang Wang; Haitao He; Beate Kleb; Dieter Niederacher; Rita Engenhart-Cabillic; Han-Xiang An
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-06-09       Impact factor: 4.553

Review 3.  Epithelial ovarian carcinoma: current evidences and future perspectives in the first-line setting.

Authors:  Antonio González-Martín; Gemma Toledo; Luis Chiva
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 3.405

4.  Targeted therapies: tailored treatment for ovarian cancer: are we there yet?

Authors:  Cristiana Sessa; Gianluca Del Conte
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 66.675

5.  A fluorescence light-up Ag nanocluster probe that discriminates single-nucleotide variants by emission color.

Authors:  Hsin-Chih Yeh; Jaswinder Sharma; Ie-Ming Shih; Dung M Vu; Jennifer S Martinez; James H Werner
Journal:  J Am Chem Soc       Date:  2012-07-10       Impact factor: 15.419

Review 6.  Origin of ovarian cancer: molecular profiling.

Authors:  Dilip Kumar Dutta; Indranil Dutta
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India       Date:  2013-06-21

7.  Type I to type II ovarian carcinoma progression: mutant Trp53 or Pik3ca confers a more aggressive tumor phenotype in a mouse model of ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Rong Wu; Suzanne J Baker; Tom C Hu; Kyle M Norman; Eric R Fearon; Kathleen R Cho
Journal:  Am J Pathol       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 4.307

8.  Validation of tissue microarray technology in ovarian cancer: results from the Nurses' Health Study.

Authors:  Jonathan L Hecht; Joanne Kotsopoulos; Margaret A Gates; Susan E Hankinson; Shelley S Tworoger
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 4.254

9.  The role of p53 as a surrogate marker for chemotherapeutical responsiveness in ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Dirk O Bauerschlag; Christian Schem; Marion T Weigel; Constantin Von Kaisenberg; Alexander Strauss; Thomas Bauknecht; Nicolai Maass; Ivo Meinhold-Heerlein
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 4.553

10.  The role of components of the chromatin modification machinery in carcinogenesis of clear cell carcinoma of the ovary (Review).

Authors:  Hiroshi Shigetomi; Akira Oonogi; Taihei Tsunemi; Yasuhito Tanase; Yoshihiko Yamada; Hirotaka Kajihara; Yoriko Yoshizawa; Naoto Furukawa; Shoji Haruta; Shozo Yoshida; Toshiyuki Sado; Hidekazu Oi; Hiroshi Kobayashi
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2011-05-16       Impact factor: 2.967

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.