Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 264

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Microscopic Benign and Invasive Malignant Neoplasms and a Cancer-Prone Phenotype in Prophylactic Oophorectomies

Open access
Salazar, H., Godwin, A. K., Daly, M. B., Laub, P. B., Hogan, W. M., Rosenblum, N., Boente, M. P., Lynch, H. T., Hamilton, T. C.·1996·JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The occurrence of approximately 5% of common epithelial malignant tumors of the ovary can be traced to inheritance of risk. One prophylactic strategy to decrease the probability of development of disease in individuals within families where this mendelian-dominant pattern of occurrence is apparent is to remove the ovaries of individuals at risk for ovarian cancer. The procedure, when done for this purpose, is recommended soon after completion of childbearing. PURPOSE: Our goal was to compare the histologic features of the ovaries of women at increased risk for ovarian cancer to those at no known increased risk for the disease. METHODS: Ovaries removed for prophylaxis from 20 women considered to be at increased risk for developing ovarian cancer were examined histologically. During the course of this work, it seemed apparent that these ovaries contained numerous atypical features compared with the expected appearance of normal ovaries. Hence, we expanded the study to include a control group whose ovaries were removed for reasons unrelated to cancer. The study, therefore, was not blinded. The increased risk in the cancer-prone individuals was determined by family history, specifically the presence of at least one first-degree relative and one second-degree relative with ovarian and/or breast cancer and positive linkage or mutational analysis of BRCA1 in some. The difference in mean ages of patients in the control and high-risk groups was not statistically significant. The difference among both groups with respect to the number of atypical features as well as the intensity of those features was ascertained by computing probabilities using Fisher's exact test (two-sided) for rows x columns contingency tables. RESULTS: Two unanticipated microscopic or near-microscopic malignant neoplasms and other benign and borderline tumors were discovered in the ovaries of the high-risk individuals. Of substantial interest was the finding that among the ovaries of high-risk women, 85% presented two or more and 75% presented three or more of the following histologic features: surface epithelial pseudostratification; surface papillomatosis; deep cortical invaginations of the surface epithelium, frequently with multiple papillary projections within small cystic spaces (microscopic papillary cystadenomas); epithelial inclusion cysts, frequently with epithelial hyperplasia and papillary formations; cortical stromal hyperplasia and hyperthecosis; increased follicular activity; corpus luteum hyperplasia; or hilar cell hyperplasia. Two or more or three or more such changes were observed in a lesser percentage (30% or 10%, respectively) of ovaries obtained from the control individuals, with a statistically significant difference (P = .001 or P = .00007, respectively), particularly considering that a detailed determination of a family history of cancer in the control group was not possible. CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of these changes in the high-risk ovaries compared with control ovaries suggests a characteristic histologic preneoplastic phenotype defined by an increased frequency and intensity of the above-described histologic features in the high-risk ovaries. Limited access to numerous small (stage I) ovarian cancers or cancer-prone ovaries by any one pathologist may explain the failure to identify the phenotype in the past. IMPLICATIONS: We suggest that the ovaries removed from ovarian cancer-prone individuals as a preventative measure should be thoroughly examined histologically to identify or rule out microscopic or near-microscopic invasive neoplasms.

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 · 10.1093/jnci/88.24.1810

Cites

26 of 26 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 26 references

Cited by

See all 264

Metadata

Authors
Salazar, H., Godwin, A. K., Daly, M. B., Laub, P. B., Hogan, W. M., Rosenblum, N., Boente, M. P., Lynch, H. T., & Hamilton, T. C.
Venue
JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute
Published
1996-12-18
Volume
88
Issue
24
Pages
1810-1820
ISSN
  • 0027-8874 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2105
OpenAlex
W2156728001
Cited by
264
References
26
FWCI
5.21
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: Microscopic Benign and Invasive Malignant Neoplasms and a Cancer-Prone Phenotype in Prophylactic Oophorectomies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jnci/88.24.1810
The paper
Salazar, H., Godwin, A. K., Daly, M. B., Laub, P. B., Hogan, W. M., Rosenblum, N., Boente, M. P., Lynch, H. T., & Hamilton, T. C. (1996). Microscopic Benign and Invasive Malignant Neoplasms and a Cancer-Prone Phenotype in Prophylactic Oophorectomies. JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/88.24.1810

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.