The DOI matches its Crossref record; 56 of the 56 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Optimal primary surgical treatment for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Ovarian cancer is the sixth most common cancer among women. In addition to diagnosis and staging, primary surgery is performed to achieve optimal cytoreduction (surgical efforts aimed at removing the bulk of the tumour) as the amount of residual tumour is one of the most important prognostic factors for survival of women with epithelial ovarian cancer. An optimal outcome of cytoreductive surgery remains a subject of controversy to many practising gynae-oncologists. The Gynaecologic Oncology group (GOG) currently defines 'optimal' as having residual tumour nodules each measuring 1 cm or less in maximum diameter, with complete cytoreduction (microscopic disease) being the ideal surgical outcome. Although the size of residual tumour masses after surgery has been shown to be an important prognostic factor for advanced ovarian cancer, it is unclear whether it is the surgical procedure that is directly responsible for the superior outcome that is associated with less residual disease. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of optimal primary cytoreductive surgery for women with surgically staged advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (stages III and IV).To assess the impact of various residual tumour sizes, over a range between zero and 2 cm, on overall survival. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 3) and the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Review Group Trials Register, MEDLINE and EMBASE (up to August 2010). We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings, reference lists of included studies and contacted experts in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Retrospective data on residual disease from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or prospective and retrospective observational studies which included a multivariate analysis of 100 or more adult women with surgically staged advanced epithelial ovarian cancer and who underwent primary cytoreductive surgery followed by adjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy. We only included studies that defined optimal cytoreduction as surgery leading to residual tumours with a maximum diameter of any threshold up to 2 cm. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently abstracted data and assessed risk of bias. Where possible, the data were synthesised in a meta-analysis. MAIN RESULTS: There were no RCTs or prospective non-RCTs identified that were designed to evaluate the effectiveness of surgery when performed as a primary procedure in advanced stage ovarian cancer.We found 11 retrospective studies that included a multivariate analysis that met our inclusion criteria. Analyses showed the prognostic importance of complete cytoreduction, where the residual disease was microscopic that is no visible disease, as overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were significantly prolonged in these groups of women. PFS was not reported in all of the studies but was sufficiently documented to allow firm conclusions to be drawn.When we compared suboptimal (> 1 cm) versus optimal (< 1 cm) cytoreduction the survival estimates were attenuated but remained statistically significant in favour of the lower volume disease group There was no significant difference in OS and only a borderline difference in PFS when residual disease of > 2 cm and < 2 cm were compared (hazard ratio (HR) 1.65, 95% CI 0.82 to 3.31; and HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.61, P = 0.05 for OS and PFS respectively).There was a high risk of bias due to the retrospective nature of these studies where, despite statistical adjustment for important prognostic factors, selection bias was still likely to be of particular concern.Adverse events, quality of life (QoL) and cost-effectiveness were not reported by treatment arm or to a satisfactory level in any of the studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: During primary surgery for advanced stage epithelial ovarian cancer all attempts should be made to achieve complete cytoreduction. When this is not achievable, the surgical goal should be optimal (< 1 cm) residual disease. Due to the high risk of bias in the current evidence, randomised controlled trials should be performed to determine whether it is the surgical intervention or patient-related and disease-related factors that are associated with the improved survival in these groups of women. The findings of this review that women with residual disease < 1 cm still do better than women with residual disease > 1 cm should prompt the surgical community to retain this category and consider re-defining it as 'near optimal' cytoreduction, reserving the term 'suboptimal' cytoreduction to cases where the residual disease is > 1 cm (optimal/near optimal/suboptimal instead of complete/optimal/suboptimal).
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 · Cited by 63,139
Meta-analysis in clinical trials
DerSimonian, R., & Laird, N. (1986) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2 · Cited by 39,552
Jemal, A., Siegel, R., Ward, E., Hao, Y., Xu, J., Murray, T., & Thun, M. J. (2008) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/ca.2007.0010 · Cited by 10,188
Cancer Incidence in Five Continents
(1970) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-85851-2 · Cited by 8,501
Parmar, M. K. B., Torri, V., & Stewart, L. (1998) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19981230)17:24<2815::aid-sim110>3.0.co;2-8 · Cited by 4,802
Cancer incidence, mortality and prevalence worldwide
Ferlay, J. (2004) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 3,796
Rubin, M., & Stephen, C. D. (1993) · Cited by 3,149
McGuire, W. P., Hoskins, W. J., Brady, M. F., Kucera, P. R., Partridge, E. E., Look, K. Y., Clarke-Pearson, D. L., & Davidson, M. (1996) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199601043340101 · Cited by 2,796
Intraperitoneal Cisplatin and Paclitaxel in Ovarian Cancer
Armstrong, D. K., Bundy, B., Wenzel, L., Huang, H. Q., Baergen, R., Lele, S., Copeland, L. J., Walker, J. L., & Burger, R. A. (2006) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa052985 · Cited by 2,625
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy or Primary Surgery in Stage IIIC or IV Ovarian Cancer
Vergote, I., Tropé, C. G., Amant, F., Kristensen, G. B., Ehlen, T., Johnson, N., Verheijen, R. H. M., van der Burg, M. E. L., Lacave, A. J., Panici, P. B., et al. (2010) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa0908806 · Cited by 2,537
Cited by
Treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer
Kuroki, L., & Guntupalli, S. R. (2020) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.m3773 · Cited by 873
Wright, A. A., Bohlke, K., Armstrong, D. K., Bookman, M. A., Cliby, W. A., Coleman, R. L., Dizon, D. S., Kash, J. J., Meyer, L. A., Moore, K. N., et al. (2016) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2016.68.6907 · Cited by 409
Updates and New Options in Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Treatment
Kurnit, K. C., Fleming, G. F., & Lengyel, E. (2021) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000004173 · Cited by 322
Karam, A., Ledermann, J. A., Kim, J.-W., Sehouli, J., Lu, K., Gourley, C., Katsumata, N., Burger, R. A., Nam, B.-H., Bacon, M., et al. (2017) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1093/annonc/mdx011 · Cited by 153
Metadata
- Authors
- Elattar, A., Bryant, A., Winter-Roach, B. A., Hatem, M., & Naik, R.
- Venue
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-08-10
- Volume
- 2016
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- CD007565-CD007565
- ISSN
- 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-1858
- OpenAlex
- W1807032591
- Cited by
- 403
- References
- 56
- FWCI
- 21.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Optimal primary surgical treatment for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/14651858.cd007565.pub2
- The paper
- Elattar, A., Bryant, A., Winter-Roach, B. A., Hatem, M., & Naik, R. (2011). Optimal primary surgical treatment for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd007565.pub2
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.