2009
DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605292
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Role of CT scan-based and clinical evaluation in the preoperative prediction of optimal cytoreduction in advanced ovarian cancer: a prospective trial

Abstract: BACKGROUND: In advanced ovarian cancer, maximal efforts have to be attemptedto achieve optimal cytoreduction, as this represents the keystone in the therapeutic management. This large, prospective study aims at investigating the role of computed tomography (CT) scan in predicting the feasibility of optimal cytoreduction in ovarian cancer. METHODS: A total of 195 consecutive patients with clinical/radiographic suspicion of advanced ovarian/peritoneal cancer were enrolled at the Gynecologic Oncology Unit, Cathol… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

4
38
1
2

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 85 publications
(45 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
4
38
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Age of patients ranged from 40 to 74years. This was in accordance with studies done by G Ferrandina et al 30 where the median age was 59 years (range: 31-85) and Gerestein C et al 35 where the median age of patients was 62.4 years (range 15.9-83.6 years). On staging laparotomy, we observed that 74.5% patients presented to us at an advanced stage (Stage III and IV).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 80%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Age of patients ranged from 40 to 74years. This was in accordance with studies done by G Ferrandina et al 30 where the median age was 59 years (range: 31-85) and Gerestein C et al 35 where the median age of patients was 62.4 years (range 15.9-83.6 years). On staging laparotomy, we observed that 74.5% patients presented to us at an advanced stage (Stage III and IV).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 80%
“…This was similar to studies done by Bristow et al and G Ferrandina et al where accuracy was 80.5% and 78.5% respectively. 14,30 The sensitivity and specificity were also comparable -60% and 88.8% in our study to 71.4% and 90% (Bristow et al).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 62%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Although this prediction model showed promising performance characteristics, two subsequent studies used patients from other institutions to externally validate the model and noted that accuracy dropped to 48% 21 -65%. 23 Similarly, the accuracy of two prediction models for patients with <1cm of residual disease developed by investigators from Italy 26 demonstrated a drop in AUC from 0.78 and 0.81 to 0.56-0.59 and 0.55-0.60 respectively when assessed in an independent patient cohort by investigators in the Netherlands. 27 In the current study, patients from 73 institutions participating in GOG-182 reflected a diversity of surgical skill levels while providing standardization of adjuvant therapy.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Two studies were prospective, whereas the other 9 studies had a retrospective design. 23,24 Description of the variables and outcome was well performed. Analysis was of low quality in 3 studies; in these studies, no clear description of model-building strategy was given.…”
Section: Study Qualitymentioning
confidence: 99%