ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2025
Distinct endometriosis involvement confers divergent oncologic outcomes in ovarian clear cell carcinoma.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the clinicopathologic characteristics and survival outcomes of ovarian clear cell carcinoma (OCCC) patients with different endometriosis statuses.
methodsThis retrospective study included OCCC patients diagnosed between 2012 and 2021, classified into three groups based on the Sampson and Scott criteria: Without (no endometriosis), Arising (OCCC arising from endometriosis), and Coexisting (OCCC coexisting with endometriosis). Clinical and pathological characteristics were compared across groups, and survival outcomes were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier methods. Prognostic factors for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were identified through univariate and multivariate analyses.
resultsAmong 242 patients, 53.7% were in the Without group, 29.3% in the Arising group, and 16.9% in the Coexisting group. The Arising group had the highest prevalence of early FIGO stage disease (91.6%) compared to the Coexisting (75.6%, p = 0.041) and Without (67.7%, p = 0.000) groups. Lymph-node metastasis was significantly lower in the Arising group (2.8%) than in the Coexisting (19.5%, p = 0.010) and Without (10%, p = 0.011) groups. Notably, the Arising group demonstrated unique atypical endometriosis features. In univariate analysis, the presence of endometriosis (either arising from or coexisting with endometriosis) was associated with improved PFS (p = 0.004 and p = 0.009, respectively); however, multivariate analysis confirms only coexisting with endometriosis as an independent factor (HR: 0.11, 95% CI: 0.01-0.84). For OS, the Arising group demonstrated the most significant benefit, with a 5-year OS of 92.4% compared to the Coexisting group (83.9%, p = 0.293) and the Without group (62.6%, p = 0.023). Multivariate analysis identified only FIGO stage (HR: 5.89, 95% CI: 2.06-16.82) as an independent prognostic factor for OS, while endometriosis did not reach statistical significance (HR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.26-1.53).
conclusionsClassifying OCCC with endometriosis statuses reveals distinct prognostic patterns. Coexisting with endometriosis positively impacts PFS, while the Arising subgroup shows the most significant OS benefit but may be confounded with other factors.
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.