4.6 Article

Prognostic factors of patients with yolk sac tumors of the ovary

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY
Volume 184, Issue 6, Pages 1182-1188

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1067/mob.2001.113323

Keywords

prognostic factors; yolk sac tumors of the ovary; p53; chemosensitivity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to evaluate the prognostic factors in yolk sac tumors of the ovary. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective review or 47 patients with yolk sac tumors of the ovary from 1979 to 1997. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients had pure yolk sac tumors and 25 had germ cell tumors with yolk sac tissue as a component of the disease. The 5-year survival rate in stages I, II, III, and IV was 95%, 75%, 30%, and 25%, respectively. Patients with stage I disease had a more favorable prognosis than those with stage III and IV disease (P <.001). All patients who did not respond to chemotherapy died of this disease within 36 months of the first treatment. Chemotherapy regimens that included cisplatin gave better results than those without cisplatin (P <.05). The difference in prognosis was significant in cases in which the size of residual tumor was <2 cm in diameter (P <.01) and in cases in which ascites was either absent or <100 mt in volume (P <.05). Coexistence of other components of ovarian germ cell tumors in histologic specimens, preoperative serum a-fetoprotein level, fertility-sparing surgery, dissection of intrapelvic nodes, and p53 status had no significant correlation with the prognosis in this study. CONCLUSIONS: Staging and tumor-reductive surgery strongly affected the prognosis of this disease. Tumor-reductive surgery is advisable when ascites is minimal. Cisplatin-based chemotherapy after surgery was superior to chemotherapy without cisplatin; however, p53 status seemed to have no impact on chemosensitivity in yolk sac tumors of the ovary.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available