ReviewOpen medicine (Warsaw, Poland)2024
Molecular landscape of borderline ovarian tumours: A systematic review.
Review in Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Misdiagnosis of Endometrioid Borderline Ovarian Tumors by Intraoperative Frozen Section Pathology: A Case Report and Review of the Literature.The American journal of case reports · 2026Review
- Clinicopathological Diagnosis and Prognosis of Endometrioid Borderline Ovarian Tumors: Dual Case Reports and Literature Review.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Review
- Molecular Biomarkers in Borderline Ovarian Tumors: Towards Personalized Treatment and Prognostic Assessment.Cancers · 2025Review
- Giant borderline ovarian tumours - review of the literature.Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Borderline ovarian tumours (BOTs) show intriguing characteristics distinguishing them from other ovarian tumours. The aim of the systematic review was to analyse the spectrum of molecular changes found in BOTs and discuss their significance in the context of the overall therapeutic approach. The systematic review included articles published between 2000 and 2023 in the databases: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane. After a detailed analysis of the available publications, we qualified for the systematic review: 28 publications on proto-oncogenes: BRAF, KRAS, NRAS, ERBB2, and PIK3CA, 20 publications on tumour suppressor genes: BRCA1/2, ARID1A, CHEK2, PTEN, 4 on adhesion molecules: CADM1, 8 on proteins: B-catenin, claudin-1, and 5 on glycoproteins: E-Cadherin. In addition, in the further part of the systematic review, we included eight publications on microsatellite instability and three describing loss of heterozygosity in BOT. Molecular changes found in BOTs can vary on a case-by-case basis, identifying carcinogenic mutations through molecular analysis and developing targeted therapies represent significant advancements in the diagnosis and treatment of ovarian malignancies. Molecular studies have contributed significantly to our understanding of BOT pathogenesis, but substantial research is still required to elucidate the relationship between ovarian neoplasms and extraneous disease, identify accurate prognostic indicators, and develop targeted therapeutic approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.