| Literature DB >> 30962726 |
Mohamed Laban1, Eman A Ibrahim2, Alaa S Hassanin3, Magda A Nasreldin4, Amal Mansour5, Waleed M Khalaf3, Ahmed M Bahaa Eldin3, Sherif H Hussain3, Mohammed S Elsafty1, Ahmad S Hasanien6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the association of Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) infection with primary tubal and high-grade serous ovarian cancers.Entities:
Keywords: Chlamydia; DNA; PCR; PFTC; ovarian cancer; tubal cancer
Year: 2019 PMID: 30962726 PMCID: PMC6434919 DOI: 10.2147/IJWH.S188938
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Womens Health ISSN: 1179-1411
Demographic data, Chlamydia PCR DNA expression, and statistical analysis of the studied cases
| Variant | Ovarian carcinoma N=30 | Tubal adenocarcinoma N=25 | Control cases N=12 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years), mean ± SD | 54±8 | 59±5 | 58±12 |
| 0.06 | |||
| Positive Chlamydia PCR DNA Expression | 4 (13.3%) | 21 (84%) | 2 (16.7%) |
| Negative Chlamydia PCR DNA Expression | 26 (86.7%) | 4 (16%) | 10 (83.3%) |
| < | |||
| < | |||
| < | |||
| 0.7 (0.77) | |||
Notes: P: ANOVA test, insignificant; P1: comparing the three groups, significant; P2: comparing ovarian vs tubal carcinoma, significant; P3: comparing tubal cancer vs control, significant; P4: comparing ovarian carcinoma vs control, insignificant. Bold values indicate statistical significance.
Comparison between the three groups regarding PCR quantitative values
| Number | Mean | SD | SE | 95% CI for mean | Min | Max | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower bound | Upper bound | |||||||
| Ovarian | 30 | 13.54 | 71.48 | 13.05 | −13.15 | 40.23 | 0 | 391.77 |
| Tubal | 25 | 256.69 | 479.84 | 95.97 | 58.63 | 454.76 | 0 | 1,478.84 |
| Control | 12 | 0.28 | 0.64 | 0.19 | −0.13 | 0.68 | 0 | 1.72 |
| < | ||||||||
| < | ||||||||
| < | ||||||||
| 0.88 | ||||||||
Notes: P1: Kruskal–Wallis test, significant; P2: Mann–Whitney U test comparing ovarian vs tubal carcinoma, significant; P3: Mann–Whitney U test comparing tubal carcinoma vs control, significant; P4: Mann–Whitney U test comparing ovarian carcinoma vs control, insignificant. Bold values indicate statistical significance.
Abbreviations: SE, standard mean of error; Min, minimum; Max, maximum.
Figure 1ROC curve analysis to calculate the best cutoff value to differentiate tubal carcinoma group vs ovarian carcinoma and control groups.
Notes: Area under the curve =0.8, P=0.01 at a cutoff value of 15.1 with sensitivity =80%, specificity =93.7%, and accuracy =88.46%; positive predictive value =77.42; negative predictive value =94.7%. The arrow points to the best cutoff value.
Abbreviation: ROC, receiver operating characteristic.