Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 480

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Osteopontin as a Potential Diagnostic Biomarker for Ovarian Cancer

Open access
Kim, Jae-Hoon·2002·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: Development of new biomarkers for ovarian cancer is needed for early detection and disease monitoring. Analyses involving complementary DNA (cDNA) microarray data can be used to identify up-regulated genes in cancer cells, whose products may then be further validated as potential biomarkers. OBJECTIVE: To describe validation studies of an up-regulated gene known as osteopontin, previously identified using a cDNA microarray system. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Experimental and cross-sectional studies were conducted involving ovarian cancer and healthy human ovarian surface epithelial cell lines and cultures, archival paraffin-embedded ovarian tissue collected between June 1992 and June 2001, and fresh tissue and preoperative plasma from 144 patients evaluated for a pelvic mass between June 1992 and June 2001 in gynecologic oncology services at 2 US academic institutions. Plasma samples from 107 women selected from an epidemiologic study of ovarian cancer initiated between May 1992 and March 1997 were used as healthy controls. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Relative messenger RNA expression in cancer cells and fresh ovarian tissue, measured by real-time polymerase chain reaction as 2(-DeltaDeltaCT)(a quantitative value representing the amount of osteopontin expression); osteopontin production, localized and scored in ovarian healthy and tumor tissue with immunohistochemical studies; and amount of osteopontin in patient vs control plasma, measured using an enzyme-linked immunoassay. RESULTS: The geometric mean for 2(-DeltaDeltaCT)for osteopontin expression in 5 healthy ovarian epithelial cell cultures was 4.1 compared with 270.4 in 14 ovarian cancer cell lines (P =.03). The geometric mean 2(-DeltaDeltaCT)for osteopontin expression in tissue from 2 healthy ovarian epithelial samples was 9.0 compared with 164.0 in 27 microdissected ovarian tumor tissue samples (P =.06). Immunolocalization of osteopontin showed that tissue samples from 61 patients with invasive ovarian cancer and 29 patients with borderline ovarian tumors expressed higher levels of osteopontin than tissue samples from 6 patients with benign tumors and samples of healthy ovarian epithelium from 3 patients (P =.03). Osteopontin levels in plasma were significantly higher (P<.001) in 51 patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (486.5 ng/mL) compared with those of 107 healthy controls (147.1 ng/mL), 46 patients with benign ovarian disease (254.4 ng/mL), and 47 patients with other gynecologic cancers (260.9 ng/mL). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide evidence for an association between levels of a biomarker, osteopontin, and ovarian cancer and suggest that future research assessing its clinical usefulness would be worthwhile.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.287.13.1671

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 480

Metadata

Authors
Kim, J.-H.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2002-04-03
Volume
287
Issue
13
Pages
1671
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2113002145
Cited by
480
References
0
FWCI
40.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Osteopontin as a Potential Diagnostic Biomarker for Ovarian Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.287.13.1671
The paper
Kim, J.-H. (2002). Osteopontin as a Potential Diagnostic Biomarker for Ovarian Cancer. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.287.13.1671

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.