MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4223975396 · doi:10.3390/cancers14081954

CA-125 Levels Are Predictive of Survival in Low-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer—A Multicenter Analysis

2022· article· en· W4223975396 on OpenAlexafffund
Christoph Wohlmuth, Vladimir Djedovic, Susanne K. Kjær, Allan Jensen, Rosalind Glasspool, Patricia Roxburgh, Anna DeFazio, Sharon E. Johnatty, Penelope M. Webb, Francesmary Modugno, Diether Lambrechts, Joellen M. Schildkraut, Andrew Berchuck, Liv Cecilie Vestrheim Thomsen, Line Bjørge, Estrid Høgdall, Claus Høgdall, Ellen L. Goode, Stacey J. Winham, Keitaro Matsuo, Beth Y. Karlan, Jenny Lester, Marc T. Goodman, Pamela J. Thompson, Tanja Pejović, Marjorie J. Riggan, Katherine Lajkosz, Alicia Tone, Taymaa May

Bibliographic record

VenueCancers · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of OttawaPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
FundersMedical Research and Materiel CommandCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMedical Research CouncilPeter MacCallum FoundationCancer AustraliaNational Health and Medical Research CouncilNorges ForskningsrådMinnesota Ovarian Cancer AllianceCancer Research UKFred C. and Katherine B. Andersen FoundationNational Cancer InstituteHelse VestOvarian Cancer AustraliaWellcome TrustMayo Foundation for Medical Education and ResearchNational Institutes of HealthOvarian Cancer Research FundRoswell Park Cancer InstituteGénome QuébecMinistry of Health, Labour and WelfareMcGill UniversityEuropean CommissionU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsSerous ovarian cancerOvarian cancerSerous fluidMedicineOncologyInternal medicineMulticenter studyCancerRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Studies on low-grade serous ovarian cancer (LGSC) are limited by a low number of cases. The aim of this study was to define the prognostic significance of age, stage, and CA-125 levels on survival in a multi-institutional cohort of women with pathologically confirmed LGSC. Methods: Women with LGSC were identified from the collaborative Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium (OCAC). Cases of newly diagnosed primary LGSC were included if peri-operative CA-125 levels were available. Age at diagnosis, FIGO stage, pre- and post-treatment CA-125 levels, residual disease, adjuvant chemotherapy, disease recurrence, and vital status were collected by the participating institutions. Progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated. Multivariable (MVA) Cox proportional hazard models were used and hazard ratios (HR) calculated. Results: A total of 176 women with LGSC were included in this study; 82% had stage III/IV disease. The median PFS was 2.3 years and the median OS was 6.4 years. Age at diagnosis was not significantly associated with worse PFS (p = 0.23) or OS (p = 0.3) (HR per year: 0.99; 95%CI, 0.96–1.01 and 0.98; 95%CI 0.95–1.01). FIGO stage III/IV was independently associated with PFS (HR 4.26, 95%CI 1.43–12.73) and OS (HR 1.69, 95%CI 0.56–5.05). Elevated CA-125 (≥35 U/mL) at diagnosis was not significantly associated with worse PFS (p = 0.87) or OS (p = 0.78) in MVA. Elevated CA-125 (≥35 U/mL) after completion of primary treatment was independently associated with worse PFS (HR 2.81, 95%CI 1.36–5.81) and OS (HR 6.62, 95%CI 2.45–17.92). In the MVA, residual disease was independently associated with PFS (0.022), but not OS (0.85). Conclusion: Advanced LGSC was associated with poor long-term prognosis. FIGO stage and abnormal post-treatment CA-125 level are key prognostic factors inversely associated with PFS and OS. Highlights: 1. Through a multi-center collaborative effort, data from 176 women with low-grade serous ovarian cancer were analyzed. 2. Although low-grade serous ovarian cancer is often considered indolent, the progression-free and overall survival are poor. 3. Elevated post-treatment CA-125 levels are independently associated with poor survival.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancersSame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207