scholarly journals Nomogram Models for Predicting Risk and Prognosis of Newly Diagnosed Ovarian Cancer Patients with Liver Metastases - A Large Population-Based Real-World Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (24) ◽  
pp. 7255-7265
Author(s):  
Gui-Min Hou ◽  
Chuang Jiang ◽  
Jin-peng Du ◽  
Chang Liu ◽  
Xiang-zheng Chen ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ying Zhu ◽  
Yifang Zhang ◽  
Lingyun Zhai ◽  
Zhigang Zhang ◽  
Jianwei Zhou

Abstract Background: Ovarian cancer is a heterogeneous and aggressive malignant tumor, and the liver is one of the most common metastases target visceral organs of ovarian cancer. We aim to analysis the incidence and prognostic relevance of histological subtypes for patients with liver metastases in newly diagnosed ovarian cancer. Methods: In the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, we identified the ovarian cancer patients from 2010 to 2016. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine whether histological types were associated with the presence of liver metastases at diagnosis. The Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox regression was performed to identify covariates associated with survival using the histological types. Results: Among 25293 ovarian cancer patients, 1749 cases presented with liver metastases. The incidence proportions were highest among ovarian carcinosarcoma patients (OR=17.76, 95% CI=9.26-34.09), and liver metastasis specificity was the highest in the clear cell type (70.69% of the metastatic subset). The median cancer-specific survival (CSS) for non-metastatic ovarian cancer patients was 77 months, but the ovarian cancer with only liver metastasis was 21 months. The mucinous (5 months; vs nonepithelial subtype, HR=0.26; 95% CI, 0.14-0.49) subtype experienced the shortest median survival among all histologic types. Conclusion: This population-based study provides that liver was one of the most common distant visceral organs for ovarian cancer metastasis, and the incidence proportions of liver metastasis were highest for carcinosarcomas subtype, and the mucinous ovarian cancer with liver metastasis being associated with the poorest survival.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ying Zhu ◽  
Yifang Zhang ◽  
Lingyun Zhai ◽  
Zhigang Zhang ◽  
Jianwei Zhou

Abstract Background: Ovarian cancer is a heterogeneous and aggressive malignant tumor, and the liver is one of the most common metastases target visceral organs of ovarian cancer. We aim to analysis the incidence and prognostic relevance of histological subtypes for patients with liver metastases in newly diagnosed ovarian cancer. Methods: In the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, we identified the ovarian cancer patients from 2010 to 2016. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine whether histological types were associated with the presence of liver metastases at diagnosis. The Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox regression was performed to identify covariates associated with survival using the histological types.Results: Among 25293 ovarian cancer patients, 1749 cases presented with liver metastases. The incidence proportions were highest among ovarian carcinosarcoma patients (OR=17.76, 95% CI=9.26-34.09), and liver metastasis specificity was the highest in the clear cell type (70.69% of the metastatic subset). The median cancer-specific survival (CSS) for non-metastatic ovarian cancer patients was 77 months, but the ovarian cancer with only liver metastasis was 21 months. The mucinous (5 months; vs nonepithelial subtype, HR=0.26; 95% CI, 0.14-0.49) subtype experienced the shortest median survival among all histologic types.Conclusion: This population-based study provides that liver was one of the most common distant visceral organs for ovarian cancer metastasis, and the incidence proportions of liver metastasis were highest for carcinosarcomas subtype, and the mucinous ovarian cancer with liver metastasis being associated with the poorest survival.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haiyun Zhao ◽  
Fei Xu ◽  
Jiajia Li ◽  
Mengdong Ni ◽  
Xiaohua Wu

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. 7044-7053
Author(s):  
Yufei Yuan ◽  
Ruoran Wang ◽  
Fanfan Guo ◽  
Yidan Zhang ◽  
Hongyan Wang ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document