Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,367

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 181 of the 181 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Rethinking ovarian cancer II: reducing mortality from high-grade serous ovarian cancer

Open access
Bowtell, David D., Böhm, Steffen, Ahmed, Ahmed A., Aspuria, Paul-Joseph, Bast, Robert C., Beral, Valerie, Berek, Jonathan S., Birrer, Michael J., Blagden, Sarah, Bookman, Michael A., Brenton, James D., Chiappinelli, Katherine B., Martins, Filipe Correia, Coukos, George, Drapkin, Ronny, Edmondson, Richard, Fotopoulou, Christina, Gabra, Hani, Galon, Jérôme, Gourley, Charlie, Heong, Valerie, Huntsman, David G., Iwanicki, Marcin, Karlan, Beth Y., Kaye, Allyson, Lengyel, Ernst, Levine, Douglas A., Lu, Karen H., McNeish, Iain A., Menon, Usha, Narod, Steven A., Nelson, Brad H., Nephew, Kenneth P., Pharoah, Paul, Powell, Daniel J., Ramos, Pilar, Romero, Iris L., Scott, Clare L., Sood, Anil K., Stronach, Euan A., Balkwill, Frances R.·2015·Nature Reviews Cancer

Abstract

High-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) accounts for 70–80% of ovarian cancer deaths, and overall survival has not changed significantly for several decades. In this Opinion article, we outline a set of research priorities that we believe will reduce incidence and improve outcomes for women with this disease. This 'roadmap' for HGSOC was determined after extensive discussions at an Ovarian Cancer Action meeting in January 2015.

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 · 10.1038/nrc4019

Cites

181 of 181 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 181 references

Cited by

See all 1,367

Metadata

Authors
Bowtell, D. D., Böhm, S., Ahmed, A. A., Aspuria, P.-J., Bast, R. C., Beral, V., Berek, J. S., Birrer, M. J., Blagden, S., Bookman, M. A., Brenton, J. D., Chiappinelli, K. B., Martins, F. C., Coukos, G., Drapkin, R., Edmondson, R., Fotopoulou, C., Gabra, H., Galon, J., Gourley, C., Heong, V., Huntsman, D. G., Iwanicki, M., Karlan, B. Y., Kaye, A., Lengyel, E., Levine, D. A., Lu, K. H., McNeish, I. A., Menon, U., Narod, S. A., Nelson, B. H., Nephew, K. P., Pharoah, P., Powell, D. J., Ramos, P., Romero, I. L., Scott, C. L., Sood, A. K., Stronach, E. A., & Balkwill, F. R.
Venue
Nature Reviews Cancer
Published
2015-10-23
Volume
15
Issue
11
Pages
668-679
ISSN
  • 1474-175X (ISSN-L)
  • 1474-1768
OpenAlex
W2111900617
Cited by
1,367
References
181
FWCI
13.23
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: Rethinking ovarian cancer II: reducing mortality from high-grade serous ovarian cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/nrc4019
The paper
Bowtell, D. D., Böhm, S., Ahmed, A. A., Aspuria, P.-J., Bast, R. C., Beral, V., Berek, J. S., Birrer, M. J., Blagden, S., Bookman, M. A., Brenton, J. D., Chiappinelli, K. B., Martins, F. C., Coukos, G., Drapkin, R., Edmondson, R., Fotopoulou, C., Gabra, H., Galon, J., . . . Balkwill, F. R. (2015). Rethinking ovarian cancer II: reducing mortality from high-grade serous ovarian cancer. Nature Reviews Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc4019

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.