227
1.
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. (2018) Cancer statistics, 2018. CA Cancer J Clin 68(1): 7-30.
228
2.
Nagase S, Ohta T, Takahashi F, et al. (2019) Annual report of the committee on gynecologic oncology,
229
the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology: Annual patients report for 2015 and annual treatment
230
report for 2010. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 45(2): 289-298.
231
3.
232
233
Wright JD, Shah M, Mathew L, et al. (2009) Fertility preservation in young women with epithelial ovarian
cancer. Cancer 115(18): 4118-4126.
4.
Satoh T, Tsuda H, Kanato K, et al. (2015) A non-randomized confirmatory study regarding selection of
234
fertility-sparing surgery for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer: Japan Clinical Oncology Group Study
235
(JCOG1203). Jpn J Clin Oncol 45(6): 595-599.
236
5.
Akeson M, Zetterqvist BM, Dahllof K, et al. (2008) Population-based cohort follow-up study of all
237
patients operated for borderline ovarian tumor in western Sweden during an 11-year period. Int J Gynecol
238
Cancer 18(3): 453-459.
239
6.
240
241
patients with primary borderline ovarian tumor (BOT). J Ovarian Res 6(1): 48.
7.
242
243
Hauptmann S, Friedrich K, Redline R, et al. (2017) Ovarian borderline tumors in the 2014 WHO
classification: evolving concepts and diagnostic criteria. Virchows Arch 470(2): 125-142.
8.
244
245
Trillsch F, Ruetzel JD, Herwig U, et al. (2013) Surgical management and perioperative morbidity of
Ureyen I, Karalok A, Tasci T, et al. (2016) The Factors Predicting Recurrence in Patients With Serous
Borderline Ovarian Tumor. Int J Gynecol Cancer 26(1): 66-72.
9.
Fang C, Zhao L, Chen X, et al. (2018) The impact of clinicopathologic and surgical factors on relapse
246
and pregnancy in young patients (</=40 years old) with borderline ovarian tumors. BMC Cancer 18(1):
247
1147.
248
10.
Baird DT, Collins J, Egozcue J, et al. (2005) Fertility and ageing. Hum Reprod Update 11(3): 261-276.
249
11.
Massi D, Susini T, Savino L, et al. (1996) Epithelial ovarian tumors in the reproductive age group: age is
250
251
not an independent prognostic factor. Cancer 77(6): 1131-1136.
12.
Bozas G, Dimopoulos MA, Kastritis E, et al. (2006) Young age is associated with favorable characteristics
252
but is not an independent prognostic factor in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer: a single institution
253
experience. Oncology 70(4): 265-272.
254
255
13.
Chan JK, Urban R, Cheung MK, et al. (2006) Ovarian cancer in younger vs older women: a populationbased analysis. Br J Cancer 95(10): 1314-1320.
10
256
14.
257
258
O'Malley CD, Cress RD, Campleman SL, et al. (2003) Survival of Californian women with epithelial
ovarian cancer, 1994-1996: a population-based study. Gynecol Oncol 91(3): 608-615.
15.
Meinhold-Heerlein I, Fotopoulou C, Harter P, et al. (2015) Statement by the Kommission Ovar of the
259
AGO: The New FIGO and WHO Classifications of Ovarian, Fallopian Tube and Primary Peritoneal
260
Cancer. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 75(10): 1021-1027.
261
16.
262
263
peritoneum. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 124(1): 1-5.
17.
264
265
18.
19.
20.
Fuh KC, Shin JY, Kapp DS, et al. (2015) Survival differences of Asian and Caucasian epithelial ovarian
cancer patients in the United States. Gynecol Oncol 136(3): 491-497.
21.
272
273
Matz M, Coleman MP, Carreira H, et al. (2017) Worldwide comparison of ovarian cancer survival:
Histological group and stage at diagnosis (CONCORD-2). Gynecol Oncol 144(2): 396-404.
270
271
Peres LC, Cushing-Haugen KL, Kobel M, et al. (2019) Invasive Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Survival by
Histotype and Disease Stage. J Natl Cancer Inst 111(1): 60-68.
268
269
Zeppernick F, Meinhold-Heerlein I. (2014) The new FIGO staging system for ovarian, fallopian tube, and
primary peritoneal cancer. Arch Gynecol Obstet 290(5): 839-842.
266
267
Prat J, Oncology FCoG. (2014) Staging classification for cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, and
Duska LR, Chang YC, Flynn CE, et al. (1999) Epithelial ovarian carcinoma in the reproductive age group.
Cancer 85(12): 2623-2629.
22.
Davidson W, Madan R, O'Neil M, et al. (2016) Utility of peritoneal washing cytology in staging and
274
prognosis of ovarian and fallopian tube neoplasms: a 10-year retrospective analysis. Ann Diagn Pathol
275
22: 54-57.
276
23.
Kajiyama H, Suzuki S, Yoshihara M, et al. (2018) The possible existence of occult metastasis in patients
277
with ovarian clear-cell carcinoma who underwent complete resection without any residual tumours.
278
Oncotarget 9(5): 6298-6307.
279
24.
280
281
carcinoma in younger vs. older patients: analysis in Japanese women. J Gynecol Oncol 25(2): 118-123.
25.
282
283
Trillsch F, Woelber L, Eulenburg C, et al. (2013) Treatment reality in elderly patients with advanced
ovarian cancer: a prospective analysis of the OVCAD consortium. J Ovarian Res 6(1): 42.
26.
284
285
Yoshikawa N, Kajiyama H, Mizuno M, et al. (2014) Clinicopathologic features of epithelial ovarian
Sabatier R, Calderon B, Jr., Lambaudie E, et al. (2015) Prognostic factors for ovarian epithelial cancer in
the elderly: a case-control study. Int J Gynecol Cancer 25(5): 815-822.
27.
Chan JK, Loizzi V, Magistris A, et al. (2004) Differences in prognostic molecular markers between
11
286
women over and under 45 years of age with advanced ovarian cancer. Clin Cancer Res 10(24): 8538-
287
8543.
288
28.
289
290
factors for untreated ovarian cancer? A prospective study. Am J Clin Oncol 24(3): 215-221.
29.
291
292
Nagai N, Oshita T, Fujii T, et al. (2001) Are DNA ploidy and epidermal growth factor receptor prognostic
Kajiyama H. (2014) Fertility sparing surgery in patients with early stage epithelial ovarian cancer:
implication of survival analysis and lymphadenectomy. J Gynecol Oncol 25(4): 270-271.
30.
Kajiyama H, Shibata K, Mizuno M, et al. (2011) Long-term survival of young women receiving fertility-
293
sparing surgery for ovarian cancer in comparison with those undergoing radical surgery. Br J Cancer
294
105(9): 1288-1294.
295
296
12
297
Table 1. Patient characteristics
Patients
583
Age, years
Median (Range)
34 (12–40)
Age
≤ 30
198
(34.0)
31–40
385
(66.0)
1986–1999
168
(28.8)
2000–2017
415
(71.2)
441
(75.6)
II
48
(8.2)
III
80
(13.7)
IV
14
(2.4)
Positive
110
(18.9)
Negative
347
(59.5)
NA
126
(21.6)
Serous
123
(21.1)
Mucinous
274
(47.0)
Endometrioid
78
(13.4)
Clear cell
95
(16.3)
Others
13
(2.2)
EOC
325
(55.7)
BOT
258
(44.3)
Period
Stage
Ascitic fluid cytology
Histology
EOC or BOT
13
CA125
≤ 35 U/mL
189
(32.4)
> 35 U/mL
368
(63.1)
NA
26
(4.5)
≤ 37 U/mL
277
(47.5)
> 37 U/mL
209
(35.8)
NA
97
(16.6)
Conservative
326
(55.9)
Radical
242
(41.5)
Others
15
(2.6)
Taxane plus platinum
187
(32.1)
Platinum without taxane
91
(15.6)
No
305
(52.3)
CA19-9
Surgical procedure
Adjuvant chemotherapy
EOC, epithelial ovarian cancer; BOT, borderline ovarian
tumor; NA, not available.
298
14
299
Table 2. Clinicopathologic characteristics stratified by age
group A (age ≤ 30, n = 198)
group B (age: 31–40, n = 385)
P value
Period
< 0.05
1986–1999
70
(35.4)
98
(25.5)
2000–2017
128
(64.6)
287
(74.5)
Stage
< 0.001
170
(85.9)
271
(70.4)
II
(3.0)
42
(10.9)
III
16
(8.1)
64
(16.6)
IV
(3.0)
(2.1)
Ascitic fluid cytology
0.061
Positive
27
(13.6)
83
(21.6)
Negative
125
(63.1)
222
(57.7)
NA
46
(23.2)
80
(20.8)
Histology
< 0.001
Serous
40
(20.2)
83
(21.6)
Mucinous
137
(69.2)
137
(35.6)
Endometrioid
10
(5.1)
68
(17.7)
Clear cell
(2.5)
90
(23.4)
Others
(3.0)
(1.8)
EOC or BOT
< 0.001
EOC
66
(33.3)
259
(67.3)
BOT
132
(66.7)
126
(32.7)
CA125
< 0.05
≤ 35 U/mL
78
(39.4)
111
(28.8)
> 35 U/mL
106
(53.5)
262
(68.1)
NA
14
(7.1)
12
(3.1)
CA19-9
0.287
15
≤ 37 U/mL
88
(44.4)
189
(49.1)
> 37 U/mL
66
(33.3)
143
(37.1)
NA
44
(22.2)
53
(13.8)
Surgical procedure
< 0.001
Conservative
166
(83.8)
160
(41.6)
Radical
30
(15.2)
212
(55.1)
Others
(1.0)
13
(3.4)
Adjuvant chemotherapy
< 0.001
Taxane plus platinum
33
(16.7)
154
(40.0)
Platinum without taxane
32
(16.2)
59
(15.3)
No
133
(67.2)
172
(44.7)
EOC, epithelial ovarian cancer; BOT, borderline ovarian tumor; NA, not available.
300
16
301
Table 3. Uni- and multivariate analyses of clinicopathologic parameters in relation to overall survival of patients
302
with EOC or BOT
Univariate
Multivariate
HR (95% CI)
P value
HR (95% CI)
P value
Age
≤ 30
31–40
2.069 (1.259–3.584)
< 0.05
2.059 (1.128–3.904)
< 0.05
Period
1986–1999
2000–2017
0.942 (0.601–1.508)
0.798
1.149 (0.513–2.495)
0.729
Stage
II
4.626 (2.340–8.762)
< 0.001
3.713 (1.741–7.609)
< 0.05
III
9.758 (5.910–16.334)
< 0.001
7.233 (3.849-13.814)
< 0.001
IV
19.944 (9.096–40.472)
< 0.001
12.737 (5.089–30.140)
< 0.001
Ascitic fluid cytology
Positive
Negative or NA
0.220 (0.144–0.336)
< 0.001
0.554 (0.341–0.900)
< 0.05
Histology
Serous
Mucinous
0.423 (0.239–0.749)
< 0.05
2.164 (1.044–4.483)
< 0.05
Endometrioid
0.587 (0.280–1.228)
0.144
0.435 (0.191–0.993)
< 0.05
Clear cell
1.287 (0.730–2.268)
0.383
1.310 (0.722–2.377)
0.374
Others
2.439 (0.928–6.407)
0.101
2.835 (0.988–8.133)
0.076
EOC or BOT
EOC
BOT
0.045 (0.012–0.126)
< 0.001
0.065 (0.015–0.186)
CA125
≤ 35 U/mL
17
< 0.001
> 35 U/mL or NA
4.646 (2.387–10.452)
< 0.001
1.906 (0.854–4.735)
0.119
CA19-9
≤ 37 U/mL
> 37 U/mL or NA
1.359 (0.880–2.126)
0.172
1.407 (0.856–2.337)
0.178
Surgical procedure
Conservative
Radical or others
3.051 (1.930–4.982)
< 0.001
0.633 (0.365–1.129)
0.120
Adjuvant chemotherapy
Taxane plus platinum
Platinum without taxane
1.097 (0.664–1.781)
0.710
1.924 (0.849–4.113)
0.114
No
0.226 (0.123–0.394)
< 0.001
1.134 (0.509–2.414)
0.750
HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval EOC, epithelial ovarian cancer; BOT, borderline ovarian tumor; NA,
not available.
303
18
304
Table 4. Uni- and multivariate analyses of clinicopathologic parameters in relation to overall survival of patients
305
with EOC
Univariate
Multivariate
HR
P value
HR
P value
Age
≤ 30
31–40
1.124 (0.674–1.984)
0.669
2.008 (1.077–3.895)
< 0.05
Period
1986–1999
2000–2017
1.086 (0.688–1.752)
0.728
1.175 (0.512–2.599)
0.697
Stage
II
2.859 (1.432–5.490)
< 0.05
3.789 (1.766–7.841)
< 0.05
III
6.729 (4.011–11.480)
< 0.001
7.273 (3.799–14.212)
< 0.001
IV
10.650 (4.818–21.890)
< 0.001
12.627 (4.998–30.239)
< 0.001
Ascitic fluid cytology
Positive
Negative or NA
0.332 (0.215–0.512)
< 0.001
0.605 (0.364–1.004)
0.052
Histology
Serous
Mucinous
0.439 (0.242–0.795)
< 0.05
1.871 (0.874–4.004)
0.109
Endometrioid
0.276 (0.132–0.578)
< 0.001
0.409 (0.179–0.935)
< 0.05
Clear cell
0.557 (0.316–0.982)
< 0.05
1.259 (0.693–2.288)
0.449
Others
1.670 (0.635–4.391)
0.326
2.725 (0.944–7.865)
0.088
CA125
≤ 35 U/mL
> 35 U/mL or NA
3.259 (1.671–7.340)
< 0.05
1.690 (0.743–4.259)
CA19-9
≤ 37 U/mL
19
0.218
> 37 U/mL or NA
1.371 (0.882–2.163)
0.162
1.467 (0.887–2.455)
0.136
Surgical procedure
Conservative
Radical or others
1.559 (0.973–2.593)
0.066
0.635 (0.361–1.151)
0.132
Adjuvant chemotherapy
Taxane plus platinum
Platinum without taxane
1.239 (0.747–2.019)
0.398
1.932 (0.837–4.185)
0.119
No
0.593 (0.316–1.052)
0.075
1.235 (0.539–2.686)
0.607
HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval EOC, epithelial ovarian cancer; NA, not available.
306
20
307
Figure legends
308
Figure 1. Estimated overall survival of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer and borderline ovarian tumor
309
stratified by age (group A, age ≤ 30; group B, age 31–40).
310
311
21
312
Figure 2. Estimated disease-free survival of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer and borderline ovarian tumor
313
stratified by age (group A, age ≤ 30; group B, age 31–40).
314
315
22
...
論文の公開元へ
