A systematic review and meta-analysis of genetic assessment for women with ovarian cancer: how can we do better?

A systematic review and meta analysis has been undertaken in order to evaluate the effectiveness of adjuvant therapy following surgery for early ovarian cancer. Trials reported since 1990 have been of a higher quality enabling a meta analysis of adjuvant chemotherapy vs adjuvant radiotherapy and a meta analysis of adjuvant chemotherapy vs observation. There was no significant difference between radiotherapy and chemotherapy, though these comprised studies which demonstrated considerable heterogeneity. Chemotherapy did confer significant benefit over observation in terms of both overall and disease free survival. Except for women in whom adequate surgical staging has revealed well differentiated disease confined to one or both ovaries with intact capsule, platinum chemotherapy should be offered to reduce risk of recurrence.

Download Full-text

The use of bevacizumab in the modern era of targeted therapy for ovarian cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Gynecologic Oncology ◽

10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.01.028 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Shiru Liu ◽

Lawrence Kasherman ◽

Rouhi Fazelzad ◽

Lisa Wang ◽

Genevieve Bouchard-Fortier ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Ovarian Cancer ◽

Targeted Therapy ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Modern Era

Download Full-text

Recreational Physical Activity and Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: A Case-Control Study, Systematic Review, and Meta-analysis

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention ◽

10.1158/1055-9965.epi-07-0566 ◽

2007 ◽

Vol 16 (11) ◽

pp. 2321-2330 ◽

Cited By ~ 76

Author(s):

C. M. Olsen ◽

C. J. Bain ◽

S. J. Jordan ◽

C. M. Nagle ◽

A. C. Green ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Physical Activity ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Ovarian Cancer ◽

Epithelial Ovarian Cancer ◽

Case Control Study ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Case Control ◽

Recreational Physical Activity ◽

Control Study

Download Full-text

Preoperative neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio is a predictor of survival of epithelial ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Oncotarget ◽

10.18632/oncotarget.16793 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 8 (28) ◽

pp. 46414-46424 ◽

Cited By ~ 15

Author(s):

Zhuo Yang ◽

Jia-Hui Gu ◽

Cui-Shan Guo ◽

Xin-Hui Li ◽

Wen-Chao Yang

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Ovarian Cancer ◽

Epithelial Ovarian Cancer ◽

Observational Studies ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Neutrophil To Lymphocyte Ratio ◽

Lymphocyte Ratio

Download Full-text

Comparison of conventional, doppler and contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in differential diagnosis of ovarian masses: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052830 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (12) ◽

pp. e052830

Author(s):

Lizhang Xun ◽

Lamei Zhai ◽

Hui Xu

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Ovarian Cancer ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Diagnostic Value ◽

Doppler Us ◽

Contrast Enhanced ◽

Contrast Enhanced Ultrasonography ◽

Sensitivity Specificity ◽

Ovarian Masses

ObjectivesTo assess the value of conventional, Doppler and contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) (conventional ultrasonography (US), Doppler US and CEUS) for diagnosing ovarian cancer.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were conducted for studies published until October 2021.Eligibility criteriaStudies assessed the diagnostic value of conventional US, Doppler US or CEUS for detecting ovarian cancer, with no restrictions placed on published language and status.Data extraction and synthesisThe study selection and data extraction were performed by two independent authors. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio (PLR and NLR), diagnostic OR (DOR) and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were pooled using the bivariate generalised linear mixed model and random effects model.ResultsThe meta-analysis included 72 studies and involved 9296 women who presented with ovarian masses. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR and AUC for conventional US were 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87 to 0.94) and 0.87 (95% CI: 0.82 to 0.91), 6.87 (95% CI: 4.98 to 9.49) and 0.10 (95% CI: 0.07 to 0.15), 57.52 (95% CI: 36.64 to 90.28) and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.93 to 0.97), respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR and AUC for Doppler US were 0.93 (95% CI: 0.91 to 0.95) and 0.85 (95% CI: 0.80 to 0.89), 6.10 (95% CI: 4.59 to 8.11) and 0.08 (95% CI: 0.06 to 0.11), 61.76 (95% CI: 39.99 to 95.37) and 0.96 (95% CI: 0.94 to 0.97), respectively. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR and AUC for CEUS were 0.97 (95% CI: 0.92 to 0.99) and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.85 to 0.95), 11.47 (95% CI: 6.52 to 20.17) and 0.03 (95% CI: 0.01 to 0.09), 152.11 (95% CI: 77.77 to 297.51) and 0.99 (95% CI: 0.97 to 0.99), respectively. Moreover, the AUC values for conventional US (p=0.002) and Doppler US (p=0.005) were inferior to those of CEUS.ConclusionsConventional US, Doppler US and CEUS have a relatively high differential diagnostic value for differentiating between benign and malignant ovarian masses. The diagnostic performance of CEUS was superior to that of conventional US and Doppler US.

Download Full-text