OBJECTIVE: Published data are conflicting on the influence of cell type on prognosis in ovarian cancer. The recent separation of low-grade serous carcinoma as a distinctive cell type of ovarian cancer with an indolent behavior, in retrospect, suggests that survival in studies that have not separated this group may be inaccurate. METHODS: An unselected series of 262 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage III ovarian carcinomas was studied. Diagnostic classification of each tumor was made with particular attention to recent refinements in cell-type classification. Survival curves were constructed according to Kaplan-Meier and compared with the log-rank test. RESULTS: The 5-year survival for 207 high-grade serous carcinomas was 40%, as compared with 71% for 18 patients with low-grade serous carcinoma (P = 0.0113). Low-grade serous carcinoma was significantly more likely to be optimally debulked (P = 0.0039) and significantly less likely to be substage IIIC (P < 0.0001). The survival for carcinosarcoma was significantly inferior to all serous carcinomas (P = 0.0322). The significance of this latter comparison was lost when carcinosarcomas were compared with only high-grade serous carcinoma (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Low-grade serous carcinoma has a significantly better prognosis than high-grade serous carcinoma and also differs with regard to substage distribution and proportion of patients optimally debulked. Because of its excellent prognosis, failure to separate low-grade serous carcinomas, notwithstanding its infrequent occurrence, can change the results of survival analyses that do not make this separation.
OBJECTIVE: Published data are conflicting on the influence of cell type on prognosis in ovarian cancer. The recent separation of low-grade serous carcinoma as a distinctive cell type of ovarian cancer with an indolent behavior, in retrospect, suggests that survival in studies that have not separated this group may be inaccurate. METHODS: An unselected series of 262 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage III ovarian carcinomas was studied. Diagnostic classification of each tumor was made with particular attention to recent refinements in cell-type classification. Survival curves were constructed according to Kaplan-Meier and compared with the log-rank test. RESULTS: The 5-year survival for 207 high-grade serous carcinomas was 40%, as compared with 71% for 18 patients with low-grade serous carcinoma (P = 0.0113). Low-grade serous carcinoma was significantly more likely to be optimally debulked (P = 0.0039) and significantly less likely to be substage IIIC (P < 0.0001). The survival for carcinosarcoma was significantly inferior to all serous carcinomas (P = 0.0322). The significance of this latter comparison was lost when carcinosarcomas were compared with only high-grade serous carcinoma (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Low-grade serous carcinoma has a significantly better prognosis than high-grade serous carcinoma and also differs with regard to substage distribution and proportion of patients optimally debulked. Because of its excellent prognosis, failure to separate low-grade serous carcinomas, notwithstanding its infrequent occurrence, can change the results of survival analyses that do not make this separation.
Authors: Lauren L Ritterhouse; Jonathan A Nowak; Kyle C Strickland; Elizabeth P Garcia; Yonghui Jia; Neal I Lindeman; Laura E Macconaill; Panagiotis A Konstantinopoulos; Ursula A Matulonis; Joyce Liu; Ross S Berkowitz; Marisa R Nucci; Christopher P Crum; Lynette M Sholl; Brooke E Howitt Journal: Mod Pathol Date: 2016-05-06 Impact factor: 7.842
Authors: Rayna K Matsuno; Mark E Sherman; Kala Visvanathan; Marc T Goodman; Brenda Y Hernandez; Charles F Lynch; Olga B Ioffe; David Horio; Charles Platz; Sean F Altekruse; Ruth M Pfeiffer; William F Anderson Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2013-02-03 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Jennifer Anne Doherty; Lauren Cole Peres; Chen Wang; Gregory P Way; Casey S Greene; Joellen M Schildkraut Journal: Curr Epidemiol Rep Date: 2017-07-10
Authors: Ivana Rizzuto; Chara Stavraka; Jayanta Chatterjee; Jane Borley; Thomas Glass Hopkins; Hani Gabra; Sadaf Ghaem-Maghami; Les Huson; Sarah P Blagden Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2015-03 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: Lijuan Yang; Bo Zhang; Guangyang Xing; Jingran Du; Bin Yang; Qianqian Yuan; Yongxiu Yang Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-10-23 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Michele Moschetta; Stergios Boussios; Elie Rassy; Eleftherios P Samartzis; Gabriel Funingana; Mario Uccello Journal: Ann Transl Med Date: 2020-12
Authors: Mohammad Ezzati; Amer Abdullah; Ahmad Shariftabrizi; June Hou; Michael Kopf; Jennifer K Stedman; Robert Samuelson; Shohreh Shahabi Journal: Int Sch Res Notices Date: 2014-10-29