| Literature DB >> 33937140 |
Mariam Anjum Ifthikar1, Anupama Rajanbabu1, Indu R Nair2, Vinita Murali3, Anjaly S Nair4.
Abstract
Background Borderline ovarian tumors (BOTs) are an intermediate form of neoplasia, between benign and malignant. The aim of this retrospective analysis is to evaluate the clinicopathological characteristic profile of BOTs and to determine the predictors of recurrence in BOTs. Methods A retrospective review of all patients diagnosed, treated, and followed up for BOTs between 2010 and 2017 at Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Kerala, India, was conducted. Clinicopathological details and details of management, outcome, and survival were retrieved, and data were analyzed descriptively and for survival. Results A total of 103 patients were identified. During the median follow-up of 46.0 months, 15 (14.6%) patients developed recurrent disease, 6 (5.82%) had recurrence with progression to invasive carcinoma, and 9 had recurrent disease with borderline or benign histology. Mucinous tumors were found to have more recurrences than serous BOT (17.8 vs. 12.3%). Disease-related deaths (5/103 [4.9%]) were observed only in patients with progression to invasive carcinoma. Univariate analysis indicated that staging surgery was the most important prognostic factor that affected the disease-free survival ([DFS] 103 vs. 97 vs. 71 months, respectively, for complete staging vs. fertility-preserving staging vs. conservative surgery; p < 0.05). Conclusions Conservative surgery was associated with a higher risk of recurrence. Fertility-preserving staging surgery is an acceptable option in younger patients. The overall survival is not affected by the mode of surgery. MedIntel Services Pvt Ltd. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).Entities:
Keywords: borderline ovarian tumors; implants; low malignant potential; predictors; progression to invasive carcinoma; recurrence; reproductive outcome
Year: 2021 PMID: 33937140 PMCID: PMC8075629 DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1721192
Source DB: PubMed Journal: South Asian J Cancer ISSN: 2278-330X
Demographic details of the study population
| Patient characteristics | |
|---|---|
| Median (years) (range) | 41 (14–80) |
|
Parity,
| |
| Nulliparous | 35 (34) |
| Muciparous | 68 (66) |
| Evaluation for infertility | 13 (12.6) |
|
Menopausal state,
| |
| Premenopausal | 64 (64) |
| Postmenopausal | 36 (36) |
|
Stage,
| |
| IA | 72 (69.9) |
| IB | 7 (6.8) |
| IC | 16 (15.5) |
| II | 4 (3.9) |
| IIIB | 1 (1) |
| IIIC | 3 (2.9) |
Histopathological classification in the study population (n = 103)
| Serous | Mucinous | Endometrioid | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of cases (
| 57 (55.3) | 45 (43.7) | 1 (1) |
| Median age | 38 | 44 | 47 |
|
Bilateral,
| 14 (29.5) | 2 (4.5) | 0 |
| Invasive implant | 3 | 4 | 0 |
| Micropapillary | 8 | 0 | 0 |
| Microinvasion | 6 | 7 | 0 |
| Intraepithelial carcinoma | 2 | 4 | 0 |
Clinicopathological characteristics in relation to borderline ovarian tumor recurrences
| Clinicopathological characteristics |
Total cases (
| Recurrence (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abbreviation: MIS, minimally invasive surgery. | |||
| Age (years) | |||
| <40 | 45 | 9 (20) | 0.168 |
| >40 | 58 | 6 (10.3) | |
| Stage | |||
| IA, B | 79 | 9 (11.4) | 0.154 |
| IC | 16 | 5 (31.2) | |
| IIB | 4 | 1 (25) | |
| III above | 4 | 0 | |
| Histology | |||
| Serous | 57 | 7 (12.3) | 0.676 |
| Mucinous | 45 | 8 (17.8) | |
| Endometrioid | 1 | 0 | |
| Operating surgeon | |||
| Nononcosurgeon | 44 | 7 (15.9) | 0.783 |
| Oncosurgeon | 59 | 8 (13.6) | |
| Surgery approach | |||
| Open | 77 | 9 (11.7) | 0.099 |
| MIS | 26 | 6 (23.122) | |
| Surgical intervention | |||
| Conservative surgery | 32 | 9 (28.1) | 0.007 |
| Staging surgery | 53 | 3 (5.7) | |
| Fertility-preserving surgery | 18 | 3 (16.7) | |
Fig. 1Kaplan–Meier plot: survival probability by the type of surgery with conservative surgery (c), comprehensive staging (s), and fertility-sparing surgery (sf) statistically significant.
Fig. 2Kaplan–Meier plot: overall survival of the surgical intervention group.
Published studies comparing recurrence percentage with other study analysis
| Recurrence |
Total,
|
|---|---|
| Walter H Gotieb et al (1998) | 82 (4.87) |
| Zanetta G et al (2001) | 339 (12.3) |
| Lazarou A et al (2014) | 151 (16.8) |
| Present study | 103 (14.6) |