ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Real-world data on the clinical impact of molecular tumor boards in high- and low-grade serous ovarian cancer.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The clinical impact of molecular tumor boards (MTBs) in epithelial ovarian cancer remains insufficiently characterized, particularly with regard to rare histologic subtypes. We evaluated the real-world implementation and therapeutic relevance of MTB recommendations in high-grade (HGSOC) and low-grade serous ovarian cancer (LGSOC). Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 69 patients with HGSOC or LGSOC who underwent comprehensive molecular profiling and were presented at the interdisciplinary MTB of the University Hospital LMU Munich between November 2017 and June 2023. Molecular alterations, actionability, MTB recommendations, and clinical implementation were assessed. Results: At least one molecular alteration was detected in 50/69 patients (0.71). Actionable alterations were identified in 8/69 cases (0.12), including 4/58 HGSOC (0.07) and 4/11 LGSOC patients (0.36). MTB recommendations resulted in targeted treatment suggestions in eight patients. In three patients, treatment recommendations were clinically implemented, with a median treatment duration of 246 days (range 72-254). Non-implementation was primarily attributable to rapid clinical deterioration. LGSOC patients showed a markedly higher proportion of actionable alterations and MTB-driven therapeutic options compared with HGSOC. Conclusion: In this real-world cohort, actionable mutations in serous ovarian cancer were infrequent, particularly in HGSOC. Clinical benefit was limited by molecular targetability but also by timing and patient deterioration in late-line settings. Our findings suggest that MTB referral may be most valuable in the recurrent/refractory setting for HGSOC, whereas earlier molecular testing, potentially at first relapse, could be considered in LGSOC.
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.