Mucinous borderline ovarian tumor versus invasive well-differentiated mucinous ovarian cancer: Difference in characteristics and outcomes.
Adenocarcinoma, Mucinous
/ mortality
Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial
/ mortality
Cause of Death
Cell Differentiation
Female
Humans
Hysterectomy
Lymph Node Excision
Lymphatic Metastasis
/ pathology
Middle Aged
Neoplasm Staging
Ovarian Neoplasms
/ mortality
Ovary
/ cytology
Prognosis
Retrospective Studies
SEER Program
/ statistics & numerical data
Survival Analysis
Tumor Burden
Borderline ovarian tumor
Low malignant potential
Mucinous ovarian cancer
Ovarian cancer
Survival
Journal
Gynecologic oncology
ISSN: 1095-6859
Titre abrégé: Gynecol Oncol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0365304
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 2019
05 2019
Historique:
received:
17
12
2018
revised:
29
01
2019
accepted:
04
02
2019
pubmed:
25
2
2019
medline:
6
7
2019
entrez:
25
2
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Mucinous borderline ovarian tumor (mucinous-BOT) and invasive well-differentiated mucinous ovarian cancer (mucinous-OC) are often histopathologically misclassified. The objective of this study was to examine differences in clinico-pathological characteristics and outcomes of these two entities. This is a retrospective population-based study examining the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program from 1988 to 2000. Stage I mucinous-BOTs and stage I well-differentiated mucinous-OC were compared for patient demographics, tumor characteristics, and outcomes. Propensity score matching and multivariable analysis were used to assess cause-specific survival (CSS). A total of 2130 mucinous-BOT and 581 mucinous-OC cases were examined for analysis. On multivariable analysis, women with mucinous-OC were more likely to be older, Eastern U.S. residents, and have undergone hysterectomy or lymphadenectomy compared to those with mucinous-BOT, and the number of women diagnosed with mucinous-OC decreased over time (all, P < 0.05). Mucinous-OCs were more likely to be stage T1c and have a smaller tumor size as compared to mucinous-BOT (both, adjusted-P < 0.05). After propensity score matching, women with mucinous-OC had significantly poorer CSS compared to those with mucinous-BOT on multivariable analysis (10-year rates: 92.7% versus 97.5%, adjusted-hazard ratio [HR] 2.03, P = 0.007). Similar results were observed among subgroups for reproductive age, stage T1a disease, large tumor, and unstaged cases (all, P < 0.05). Stage I mucinous-BOT and stage I invasive well-differentiated mucinous-OC have distinct differences in clinical characteristics and patient survival. The inability to conduct centralized pathology review in our study limits our conclusions given the recognized issue of misclassification of mucinous-BOT and mucinous-OC, but further highlights the importance of making the proper histopathological diagnosis for invasive cancer when the ovarian tumor is of mucinous histology.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30797590
pii: S0090-8258(19)30106-4
doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.02.003
pmc: PMC7523227
mid: NIHMS1627588
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
230-237Subventions
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P30 CA014089
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Références
Obstet Gynecol. 2000 Jun;95(6 Pt 1):839-43
pubmed: 10831977
Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2017 May;41:15-30
pubmed: 28277307
Gynecol Oncol. 2011 Dec;123(3):517-21
pubmed: 21920591
Gynecol Oncol. 2017 Mar;144(3):496-502
pubmed: 28131526
Eur J Cancer. 2013 May;49(8):1905-14
pubmed: 23490647
Cancer. 1997 Apr 15;79(8):1581-6
pubmed: 9118042
J Clin Oncol. 2012 Dec 1;30(34):4215-22
pubmed: 23071228
Pharm Stat. 2011 Mar-Apr;10(2):150-61
pubmed: 20925139
Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2017 May;41:49-59
pubmed: 27780698
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2009 Sep;35(9):969-73
pubmed: 19324510
Cancer. 2004 Mar 1;100(5):1045-52
pubmed: 14983501
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011 May;204(5):438.e1-7
pubmed: 21349494
Ann Oncol. 2016 Apr;27 Suppl 1:i53-i57
pubmed: 27141073
BMJ. 2007 Oct 20;335(7624):806-8
pubmed: 17947786
Epidemiology. 2009 Jul;20(4):488-95
pubmed: 19525685
Gynecol Oncol. 2011 Jul;122(1):127-31
pubmed: 21492922
Am J Hum Genet. 2005 Mar;76(3):399-408
pubmed: 15645388
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2017 Aug 1;109(8):
pubmed: 28376195
Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Aug;116(2 Pt 1):269-73
pubmed: 20664385
J Gynecol Oncol. 2018 Sep;29(5):e69
pubmed: 30022633
Gynecol Oncol. 2010 Jun;117(3):491-6
pubmed: 20332054
Obstet Gynecol. 2014 May;123(5):957-65
pubmed: 24785846
Am J Pathol. 1991 Oct;139(4):777-85
pubmed: 1656759