Calculator for ovarian carcinoma subtype prediction

Modern Pathology

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 512-521

  Kalloger, Steve E ^a,b   Köbel, Martin ^c   Leung, Samuel ^a   Mehl, Erika ^a   Gao, Dongxia ^a   Marcon, Krista M ^a   Chow, Christine ^a   Clarke, Blaise A ^d   Huntsman, David G ^a   Gilks, C Blake ^a,b  

^a Genetic Pathology Evaluation Centre   (Canada)

^b VANCOUVER GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

biomarker expression; immunohistochemistry; ovarian cancer; ovarian carcinoma; subtype

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL MARKER; CYCLIN DEPENDENT KINASE INHIBITOR 2A; DICKKOPF 1 PROTEIN; HEPATOCYTE NUCLEAR FACTOR 1BETA; PROTEIN MDM2; PROTEIN P53; TREFOIL FACTOR 3; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; VIMENTIN; WT1 PROTEIN;

ADULT; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER GRADING; CANCER REGISTRY; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NONHUMAN; OVARY CARCINOMA; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN EXPRESSION; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TISSUE MICROARRAY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CANADA; CARCINOMA; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; LOGISTIC MODELS; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM STAGING; OVARIAN NEOPLASMS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TISSUE ARRAY ANALYSIS; TUMOR MARKERS, BIOLOGICAL; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79953295123     PISSN: 08933952     EISSN: 15300285     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/modpathol.2010.215     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, et al. Cancer statistics, 2009. CA Cancer J Clin 2009;59:225-249.
2. Chan J, Fuh K, Shin J, et al. The treatment and outcomes of early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer: have we made any progress? Br J Cancer 2008;98:1191-1196. (Pubitemid 351481684)
3. Gilks CB, Ionescu DN, Kalloger SE, et al. Tumor cell type can be reproducibly diagnosed and is of independent prognostic significance in patients with maximally debulked ovarian carcinoma. Hum Pathol 2008;39:1239-1251.
4. Köbel M, Kalloger SE, Baker PM, et al. Diagnosis of ovarian carcinoma cell type is highly reproducible: a Transcanadian study. Am J Surg Pathol 2010;34: 984-993.
5. Kurman RJ, Shih Ie M. The origin and pathogenesis of epithelial ovarian cancer: a proposed unifying theory. Am J Surg Pathol 2010;34:433-443.
6. Köbel M, Kalloger SE, Huntsman DG, et al. Differences in tumor type in low-stage versus high-stage ovarian carcinomas. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2010;29:203-211.
7. Gilks CB, Prat J. Ovarian carcinoma pathology and genetics: recent advances. Hum Pathol 2009;40: 1213-1223.
8. Köbel M, Kalloger SE, Boyd N, et al. Ovarian carcinoma subtypes are different diseases: implications for biomarker studies. PLoS Med 2008;5:e232.
9. Hess V, A'Hern R, Nasiri N, et al. Mucinous epithelial ovarian cancer: a separate entity requiring specific treatment. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:1040-1044. (Pubitemid 41095036)
10. Sugiyama T, Kamura T, Kigawa J, et al. Clinical characteristics of clear cell carcinoma of the ovary: a distinct histologic type with poor prognosis and resistance to platinum-based chemotherapy. Cancer 2000;88:2584-2589. (Pubitemid 30331967)
11. Gershenson DM. The heterogeneity of epithelial ovarian cancer: getting it right. Cancer 2010;116: 1400-1402.
12. Vergote I, Tropé CG, Amant F, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy or primary surgery in stage IIIC or IV ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med 2010;363:943-953.
13. Prentice LM, Klausen C, Kalloger S, et al. Kisspeptin and GPR54 immunoreactivity in a cohort of 518 patients defines favourable prognosis and clear cell subtype in ovarian carcinoma. BMC Med 2007;5:33.
14. Köbel M, Kalloger SE, Carrick J, et al. A limited panel of immunomarkers can reliably distinguish between clear cell and high-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary. Am J Surg Pathol 2009;33:14-21.
15. O'Neill CJ, McBride HA, Connolly LE, et al. High-grade ovarian serous carcinoma exhibits significantly higher p16 expression than low-grade serous carcinoma and serous borderline tumour. Histopathology 2007;50: 773-779. (Pubitemid 46683935)
16. Nenutil R, Smardova J, Pavlova S, et al. Discriminating functional and non-functional p53 in human tumours by p53 and MDM2 immunohistochemistry. J Pathol 2005;207:251-259. (Pubitemid 41556448)
17. Geyer JT, López-Garća MA, Sánchez-Estevez C, et al. Pathogenetic pathways in ovarian endometrioid adenocarcinoma: a molecular study of 29 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 2009;33:1157-1163.
18. Ji H, Isacson C, Seidman JD, et al. Cytokeratins 7 and 20, Dpc4, and MUC5AC in the distinction of metastatic mucinous carcinomas in the ovary from primary ovarian mucinous tumors: Dpc4 assists in identifying metastatic pancreatic carcinomas. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2002;21:391-400.
19. Tong GX, Chiriboga L, Hamele-Bena D, et al. Expression of PAX2 in papillary serous carcinoma of the ovary: immunohistochemical evidence of fallopian tube or secondary Mü llerian system origin? Mod Pathol 2007;20:856-863. (Pubitemid 47077268)
20. Tassi RA, Bignotti E, Falchetti M, et al. Mammaglobin B expression in human endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2008;18:1090-1096.
21. Hoshimoto K, Yamauchi N, Takazawa Y, et al. CD44 variant 6 in endometrioid carcinoma of the uterus: its expression in the adenocarcinoma component is an independent prognostic marker. Pathol Res Pract 2003;199:71-77. (Pubitemid 36519497)
22. Shah SP, Köbel M, Senz J, et al. Mutation of FOXL2 in granulosa-cell tumors of the ovary. N Engl J Med 2009;360:2719-2729.
23. Köbel M, Xu H, Bourne PA, et al. IGF2BP3 (IMP3) expression is a marker of unfavorable prognosis in ovarian carcinoma of clear cell subtype. Mod Pathol 2009;22:469-475.
24. Klaes R, Benner A, Friedrich T, et al. p16INK4a immunohistochemistry improves interobserver agreement in the diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Am J Surg Pathol 2002;26:1389-1399. (Pubitemid 35239415)
25. Köbel M, Reuss A, Bois AD, et al. The biological and clinical value of p53 expression in pelvic high-grade serous carcinomas. J Pathol 2010;222:191-198.
26. Harrell FE. Regression modeling strategies: with applications to linear models, logistic regression, and survival analysis. Springer Verlag: Heidelberg, 2001, pp 189-190.
27. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, et al. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy. Clin Chem 2003; 49:1-6. (Pubitemid 36078546)
28. Hayes DF, Thor AD, Dressler LG, et al. HER2 and response to paclitaxel in node-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2007;357:1496-1506. (Pubitemid 47572635)
29. Terry J, Torlakovic EE, Garratt J, et al. Implementation of a Canadian external quality assurance program for breast cancer biomarkers: an initiative of Canadian quality control in immunohistochemistry (cIQc) and Canadian association of pathologists (CAP) national standards committee/ immunohistochemistry. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 2009;17:375-382.
30. Hugh J, Hanson J, Cheang MC, et al. Breast cancer subtypes and response to docetaxel in node-positive breast cancer: use of an immunohistochemical definition in the BCIRG 001 trial. J Clin Oncol 2009;27: 1168-1176.
31. Harrell FE, Lee KL, Matchar DB, et al. Regression models for prognostic prediction: advantages, problems, and suggested solutions. Cancer Treat Rep 1985;69:1071-1077. (Pubitemid 15249118)