Survival and biomarker analysis for ovarian mucinous carcinoma according to invasive patterns: retrospective analysis and review literature

Abstract Background In ovarian mucinous carcinoma, invasive pattern is the important factor but there were less reposts to investigate it. The aim of this study was to examine the association between prognosis and invasive patterns of ovarian mucinous carcinoma and to investigate the biomarkers of the diagnosis and prognosis immunochemically. Patients with ovarian mucinous carcinoma at our institution between 1984 and 2018 were identified. A pathological review was conducted using the 2020 World Health Organization criteria. The prognosis of infiltrative invasion and expansile invasion of ovarian mucinous carcinoma were retrospectively compared. In addition, immunohistochemical staining was conducted for all cases, and the immunohistochemical differences between the two invasive patterns were compared. Results After the pathological review, 25 cases with infiltrative invasion and 24 cases with expansile invasion were included. Ovarian mucinous carcinoma with infiltrative invasion showed significantly worse progression-free survival (PFS, p < 0.01) and overall survival (OS, p < 0.01) than those with expansile invasion. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that the pattern of infiltrative invasion was a worse prognostic factor for PFS (hazard ratio 9.01, p < 0.01) and OS (hazard ratio 17.56, p < 0.01). Immunohistochemically, cytokeratin (CK) 5/6 (p = 0.01), cluster of differentiation (CD) 24 (p = 0.02), and epithelial growth factor receptor (EGFR) (p < 0.01) were statistically related to infiltrative invasion. The PFS (p = 0.04) and OS (p = 0.02) of cases with EGFR-positive OMC were worse than those with negative OMC. Conclusions Infiltrative invasion was observed to be a prognostic factor showing worse outcomes for ovarian mucinous carcinoma compared to expansile infiltration. CK5/6, CD24, and EGFR might be biomarkers of the diagnosis

Relation between Birth Weight and Intraoperative Hemorrhage during Cesarean Section in Pregnancy with Placenta Previa

<div><p>Background</p><p>Placenta previa, one of the most severe obstetric complications, carries an increased risk of intraoperative massive hemorrhage. Several risk factors for intraoperative hemorrhage have been identified to date. However, the correlation between birth weight and intraoperative hemorrhage has not been investigated. Here we estimate the correlation between birth weight and the occurrence of intraoperative massive hemorrhage in placenta previa.</p><p>Materials and Methods</p><p>We included all 256 singleton pregnancies delivered via cesarean section at our hospital because of placenta previa between 2003 and 2015. We calculated not only measured birth weights but also standard deviation values according to the Japanese standard growth curve to adjust for differences in gestational age. We assessed the correlation between birth weight and the occurrence of intraoperative massive hemorrhage (>1500 mL blood loss). Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed to determine the cutoff value of intraoperative massive hemorrhage.</p><p>Results</p><p>Of 256 pregnant women with placenta previa, 96 (38%) developed intraoperative massive hemorrhage. Receiver-operating characteristic curves revealed that the area under the curve of the combination variables between the standard deviation of birth weight and intraoperative massive hemorrhage was 0.71. The cutoff value with a sensitivity of 81.3% and specificity of 55.6% was −0.33 standard deviation. The multivariate analysis revealed that a standard deviation of >−0.33 (odds ratio, 5.88; 95% confidence interval, 3.04–12.00), need for hemostatic procedures (odds ratio, 3.31; 95% confidence interval, 1.79–6.25), and placental adhesion (odds ratio, 12.68; 95% confidence interval, 2.85–92.13) were independent risk of intraoperative massive hemorrhage.</p><p>Conclusion</p><p>In patients with placenta previa, a birth weight >−0.33 standard deviation was a significant risk indicator of massive hemorrhage during cesarean section. Based on this result, further studies are required to investigate whether fetal weight estimated by ultrasonography can predict hemorrhage during cesarean section in patients with placental previa.</p></div

Patient characteristics.

<p>Patient characteristics.</p

Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of birth weight for massive intraoperative hemorrhage (≧1500 ml).

<p>Areas under the curve of the combination between massive hemorrhage and SD of birth weight or measured value of birth weight are 0.71 and 0.64, respectively. Abbreviation: SD = standard deviation</p

Patient characteristics by birth weight (cutoff value, −0.33 SD).

<p>Patient characteristics by birth weight (cutoff value, −0.33 SD).</p

Marginal sinus placenta previa is a different entity in placenta previa: A retrospective study using magnetic resonance imaging

Objective: The current definition of placenta previa does not include whether the placental edge is parenchyma or marginal sinus defined as placenta previa in which the placental marginal sinus just reached the internal os and/or in which the placental parenchyma might be located at > 2 cm from internal os. Materials and Methods: Cases with placenta previa were identified through the review of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) from among 210 cases at our institution between 2007 and 2016. The clinical outcomes of patients with marginal sinus placenta previa (Group A) were compared with patients with low-lying placenta and marginal placenta (Group B) and patients with partial placenta and total placenta previa (Group C), respectively. This study was a retrospective analysis. Results: Twenty-seven (12.7%) cases were included in Group A. The patients in Group B and Group C were 72 and 108 cases, respectively. First, Group A more frequently underwent emergency cesarean section than Group B (p = 0.02). There was no statistical significance with other maternal history, post–or pre-operative hemorrhage, and/or additional treatment for hemorrhage between the two groups. Additionally, Group A delivered at a later gestational age (p < 0.01); were less frequently complicated with antenatal bleeding (p < 0.01); underwent emergency cesarean section (p < 0.01), allogenic blood transfusion (p < 0.01), and uterine artery embolization (p < 0.01) for postpartum hemorrhage less often; and had less perioperative hemorrhage (p < 0.01) than Group C. Conclusions: Marginal sinus placenta previa may be a mild type of placenta previa. This new classification could be useful in the management of placenta previa. Keywords: Placenta previa, Magnetic resonance imaging, Marginal sinus placenta previa, Hemorrhag