Primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube and epithelial ovarian carcinoma: a case-control analysis.

M. S. Dunn, K. Manahan, J. P. Geisler
{"title":"Primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube and epithelial ovarian carcinoma: a case-control analysis.","authors":"M. S. Dunn, K. Manahan, J. P. Geisler","doi":"10.1097/01.OGX.0000340773.18375.7B","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE\nTo determine whether differences exist in clinicopathologic variables or survival between women with primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube (PCFT) and with epithelial ovarian carcinoma (EOC).\n\n\nSTUDY DESIGN\nUniversity of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics (UIHC) tumor board records were analyzed from January 1, 1991, to April 30, 2001. No cases were knowingly excluded. Each case of PCFT was matched with 2 cases of EOC. Controls were the next 2 cases of EOC diagnosed at UIHC after each case of PFTC, with priority given to stage of disease, then histologic grade, followed by histology, with 1 year the limit for obtaining the closest match.\n\n\nRESULTS\nTwenty-eight cases of PCFT were found. These were matched with 56 cases of EOC. The mean age at diagnosis was significantly older for women with PCFT (67 years) vs. women with EOC (60 years) (p = 0.005). The was no difference in prediagnosis hormonal contraceptive use (p=0.38), body mass index (p = 0.5) or rate of positive nodes (p = 0.19). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed no difference in survival between PCFT and EOC (p = 0.5).\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nThere is no significant difference in clinical parameters or survival between patients with PCFT or EOC when matched for stage, grade and histology.","PeriodicalId":192418,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of reproductive medicine","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of reproductive medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/01.OGX.0000340773.18375.7B","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To determine whether differences exist in clinicopathologic variables or survival between women with primary carcinoma of the fallopian tube (PCFT) and with epithelial ovarian carcinoma (EOC). STUDY DESIGN University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics (UIHC) tumor board records were analyzed from January 1, 1991, to April 30, 2001. No cases were knowingly excluded. Each case of PCFT was matched with 2 cases of EOC. Controls were the next 2 cases of EOC diagnosed at UIHC after each case of PFTC, with priority given to stage of disease, then histologic grade, followed by histology, with 1 year the limit for obtaining the closest match. RESULTS Twenty-eight cases of PCFT were found. These were matched with 56 cases of EOC. The mean age at diagnosis was significantly older for women with PCFT (67 years) vs. women with EOC (60 years) (p = 0.005). The was no difference in prediagnosis hormonal contraceptive use (p=0.38), body mass index (p = 0.5) or rate of positive nodes (p = 0.19). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed no difference in survival between PCFT and EOC (p = 0.5). CONCLUSION There is no significant difference in clinical parameters or survival between patients with PCFT or EOC when matched for stage, grade and histology.
原发性输卵管癌与上皮性卵巢癌:病例对照分析。
目的探讨原发性输卵管癌(PCFT)与上皮性卵巢癌(EOC)的临床病理指标及生存率是否存在差异。研究设计:对1991年1月1日至2001年4月30日爱荷华大学医院和诊所(UIHC)肿瘤委员会的记录进行分析。没有病例被故意排除在外。每例PCFT伴2例EOC。对照组为每例PFTC病例后在UIHC诊断的2例EOC,优先考虑疾病分期,然后是组织学分级,最后是组织学分级,获得最接近匹配的限制为1年。结果共发现PCFT病例28例。这些与56例EOC相匹配。确诊时PCFT女性的平均年龄(67岁)明显高于EOC女性(60岁)(p = 0.005)。在诊断前使用激素避孕药(p=0.38)、体重指数(p= 0.5)或阳性淋巴结率(p= 0.19)方面无差异。Kaplan-Meier分析显示PCFT和EOC的生存率无差异(p = 0.5)。结论PCFT与EOC患者在分期、分级及组织学匹配时,临床参数及生存率无显著差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信