Background.
Treatment of borderline ovarian tumors (BOTs) remains contentious, and there is no consensus regarding therapy for BOTs with invasive implants (BOTi). The benefits of platinum‐based adjuvant treatment were evaluated in patients with BOTi at primary diagnosis.
Methods.
The PubMed database was systematically searched for articles using the following terms: ((borderline) OR (low malignant potential) AND (ovarian)) AND ((tumor) OR (cancer)) AND (invasive implants) AND ((follow‐up) OR (survival) OR (treatment) OR (chemotherapy) OR (adjuvant treatment) OR (surgery) OR (surgical treatment)).
Results.
We identified 27 articles including 3,124 patients, 181 with invasive implants. All studies provided information regarding mortality or recurrence rates. Central pathological examination was performed in 19 studies. Eight studies included more than 75% stage I patients; 7 included only advanced‐stage patients, and 14 included only serous BOT. The pooled recurrence estimates for both treatment groups (adjuvant treatment: 44.0%, upfront surgery: 21.3%) did not differ significantly (p = .114). A meta‐analysis of the 6 studies providing separate mortality data for both treatment groups favored surgical treatment only, but this difference did not reach statistical significance (.05 < p < .1; odds ratio: 0.33; 95% confidence interval: 0.09–1.71; p = .086). We were unable to pool the results of the included studies because not all studies registered events in both treatment groups. Egger's regression indicated low asymmetry of the studies (p = .39), and no heterogeneity was found (I2 = 0%).
Conclusion.
We did not find evidence supporting platinum‐based adjuvant therapy for BOT with invasive implants.
Background:
The early detection of diabetes, and subsequent lifestyle intervention, may reduce the burden of diabetes and its complications. Several studies have identified a link between sudomotor dysfunction, insulin resistance, and pre-diabetes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of a new non-invasive device EZSCAN evaluating sudomotor function to detect pre-diabetes in a German population at risk for diabetes.
Methods and findings:
200 German subjects at risk for diabetes (mean age 56?14 years, BMI 28.4?5.4?kg/m2) were measured for anthropometric data on inflammatory parameters, including high sensitivity C reactive protein (hs-CRP). The subjects also underwent an oral glucose tolerance test with measurements of plasma glucose, insulin, proinsulin, C-peptide and free fatty acids during 2?h following glucose challenge. Indexes for sensitivity to insulin were calculated: SI using minimal model, HOMA-IR and Matsuda index. Based on the measurement of electrochemical sweat conductance, subjects were classified as no risk, moderate risk or high risk. According to this risk model classification, a significant difference was observed between OGTT-1?h (p=0.004), AUC glucose (p=0.011), AUC C-peptide (p<0.001), HOMA-IR (p=0.009), Matsuda (p=0.002), SI (p<0.001) and hs-CRP (p=0.025) after adjustment for age. Among the 54 subjects with impaired fasting glucose or impaired glucose tolerance according to WHO classification, 37 had a moderate risk and 15 a high risk according to the EZSCAN risk model classification. Among the 12 subjects with newly diagnosed diabetes, 2 had a moderate risk and 10 a high risk according to the risk model classification. No adverse event was reported during or after the study.
Conclusions:
These results, in accordance with a previous study performed in India, show that EZSCAN could be developed as a screening tool for diabetes risk, and could help to improve diabetes screening strategies. Results obtained from an at-risk population would have to be confirmed in a larger population.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.