Intraoperative Rupture of the Ovarian Capsule in Early-Stage Ovarian Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of intraoperative ovarian capsule rupture on progression-free survival and overall survival in women who are undergoing surgery for early-stage ovarian cancer. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE using PubMed, EMBASE (Elsevier), ClinicalTrials.gov, and Scopus (Elsevier) were searched from inception until August 11, 2020. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: High-quality studies reporting survival outcomes comparing ovarian capsule rupture to no capsule rupture among patients with early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer who underwent surgical management were abstracted. Study quality was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and studies with scores of at least 7 points were included. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: The data were extracted independently by multiple observers. Random-effects models were used to pool associations and to analyze the association between ovarian capsule rupture and oncologic outcomes. Seventeen studies met all the criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Twelve thousand seven hundred fifty-six (62.6%) patients did not have capsule rupture and had disease confined to the ovary on final pathology; 5,532 (33.7%) patients had intraoperative capsule rupture of an otherwise early-stage ovarian cancer. Patients with intraoperative capsule rupture had worse progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 1.92, 95% CI 1.34-2.76, P<.001), with moderate heterogeneity (I2=41%, P=.07) when compared with those without capsule rupture. Pooled results from these studies showed a worse overall survival (HR 1.48, 95% CI 1.15-1.91, P=.003), with moderate heterogeneity (I2=53%, P=.02) when compared with patients without intraoperative capsule rupture. This remained significant in a series of sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis of high-quality observational studies shows that intraoperative ovarian capsule rupture results in decreased progression-free survival and overall survival in women with early-stage ovarian cancer who are undergoing initial surgical management. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42021216561.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".