PDF herunterladen
Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2024; 84(03): 226-232
DOI: 10.1055/a-2095-3391
GebFra Magazin
Aktuell diskutiert

Das Ovarialkarzinom: Score-Werte zur Definition von Risikopatientinnen

Eberhard Paul
,
Sebastian M. Jud
› Weitere Informationen
Auch verfügbar auf
    Lizenzen und Reprints

Die prophylaktische Salpingoophorektomie – bisher nur bei Trägerinnen genetischer Mutationen empfohlen – hat die Prognose des Ovarialkarzinoms spürbar verbessert. Ohne genetischen Hintergrund sollte dieser Eingriff jedoch nur unter strenger Indikationsstellung durchgeführt werden. Bei unklarer Diagnostik kann aber die Indikation zum Eingriff und die Identifizierung der Patientinnen mit dem höchsten Risiko durch die Anwendung eines Scorewert-Systems erheblich präzisiert werden.

Publikationsverlauf

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
06. März 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie (Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft, Deutsche Krebshilfe, AWMF). S3-Leitlinie Diagnostik, Therapie und Nachsorge maligner Ovarialtumoren, Langversion 5.0, AWMF-Registernummer: 032/035OL. 2021 Zugriff am 10. Februar 2023 unter: https://www.leitlinienprogramm-onkologie.de/leitlinien/ovarialkarzinom/
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 2 Matulonis UA, Sood AK, Fallowfield L. et al. Ovarian cancer. Nat Rev Dis Primers 2016; 2: 16061
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 3 Ha HI, Lee EG, Lim J. et al. Second Primary Ovarian Epithelial, Fallopian Tube, and Primary Peritoneal Cancers after Breast Cancer Diagnosis: Korea Central Cancer Registry. Cancer Res Treat 2021; 53: 541-548
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 4 Marchetti C, De Felice F, Palaia I. et al. Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy: a meta-analysis on impact on ovarian cancer risk and all cause mortality in BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 mutation carriers. BMC Womens Health 2014; 14: 150
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 5 Eleje GU, Eke AC, Ezebialu IU. et al. Risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy in women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; (08) CD012464
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 6 Beavis AL, Smith AJ, Fader AN. Lifestyle changes and the risk of developing endometrial and ovarian cancers: opportunities for prevention and management. Int J Womens Health 2016; 8: 151-167
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 7 La Vecchia C. Ovarian cancer: epidemiology and risk factors. Eur J Cancer Prev 2017; 26: 55-62
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 8 Stewart C, Ralyea C, Lockwood S. Ovarian Cancer: An Integrated Review. Semin Oncol Nurs 2019; 35: 151-156
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 9 Robert Koch-Institut, Gesellschaft der epidemiologischen Krebsregister in Deutschland e. V.. Krebs in Deutschland für 2017/2018. 13. Ausgabe Berlin: Robert Koch-Institut; 2021
    Suche in Google Scholar
  • 10 Olsen CM, Green AC, Whiteman DC. et al. Obesity and the risk of epithelial ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Cancer 2007; 43: 690-709
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 11 Green J, Reeves GK, Floud S. Million Women Study Collaborators. et al. Cohort Profile: the Million Women Study. Int J Epidemiol 2019; 48: 28-29e
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 12 Gong TT, Wu QJ, Vogtmann E. et al. Age at menarche and risk of ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis of epidemiological studies. Int J Cancer 2013; 132: 2894-2900
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 13 Cibula D, Widschwendter M, Májek O. et al. Tubal ligation and the risk of ovarian cancer: review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 2011; 17: 55-67
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 14 Jordan SJ, Green AC, Whiteman DC. Australian Cancer Study Group (ovarian cancer), Australian Ovarian Cancer Study Group. et al. Serous ovarian, fallopian tube and primary peritoneal cancers: a comparative epidemiological analysis. Int J Cancer 2008; 122: 1598-1603
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 15 Easton DF, Bishop DT, Ford D. et al. Genetic linkage analysis in familial breast and ovarian cancer: results from 214 families. The Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium. Am J Hum Genet 1993; 52: 678-701
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 16 Soerjomataram I, Louwman WJ, de Vries E. et al. Primary malignancy after primary female breast cancer in the South of the Netherlands, 1972–2001. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2005; 93: 91-95
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 17 Mellemkjaer L, Friis S, Olsen JH. et al. Risk of second cancer among women with breast cancer. Int J Cancer 2006; 118: 2285-2292
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 18 Schonfeld SJ, Berrington de Gonzalez A, Visvanathan K. et al. Declining second primary ovarian cancer after first primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2013; 31: 738-743
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 19 Kirova YM, De Rycke Y, Gambotti L. Institut Curie Breast Cancer Study Group. et al. Second malignancies after breast cancer: the impact of different treatment modalities. Br J Cancer 2008; 98: 870-874
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 20 Molina-Montes E, Requena M, Sánchez-Cantalejo E. et al. Risk of second cancers cancer after a first primary breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gynecol Oncol 2015; 136: 158-171
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 21 Metcalfe KA, Lynch HT, Ghadirian P. et al. The risk of ovarian cancer after breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. Gynecol Oncol 2005; 96: 222-226
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 22 Pal T, Permuth-Wey J, Betts JA. et al. BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations account for a large proportion of ovarian carcinoma cases. Cancer 2005; 104: 2807-2816
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 23 Zhang S, Royer R, Li S. et al. Frequencies of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations among 1,342 unselected patients with invasive ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2011; 121: 353-357
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 24 Gerlinger M, McGranahan N, Dewhurst SM. et al. Cancer: evolution within a lifetime. Annu Rev Genet 2014; 48: 215-236
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 25 Kurman RJ, Shih IeM. The Dualistic Model of Ovarian Carcinogenesis: Revisited, Revised, and Expanded. Am J Pathol 2016; 186: 733-747
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 26 Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation. Cell 2011; 144: 646-674
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 27 Louwman WJ, Voogd AC, van Dijck JA. et al. On the rising trends of incidence and prognosis for breast cancer patients diagnosed 1975–2004: a long-term population-based study in southeastern Netherlands. Cancer Causes Control 2008; 19: 97-106
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 28 Aletti GD, Gallenberg MM, Cliby WA. et al. Current management strategies for ovarian cancer. Mayo Clin Proc 2007; 82: 751-770
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 29 Lurie G, Thompson P, McDuffie KE. et al. Association of estrogen and progestin potency of oral contraceptives with ovarian carcinoma risk. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 109: 597-607
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 30 Moorman PG, Havrilesky LJ, Gierisch JM. et al. Oral contraceptives and risk of ovarian cancer and breast cancer among high-risk women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol 2013; 31: 4188-4198
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 31 Casey SC, Amedei A, Aquilano K. et al. Cancer prevention and therapy through the modulation of the tumor microenvironment. Semin Cancer Biol 2015; 35: S199-S223
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 32 Collins VP, Loeffler RK, Tivey H. Observations on growth rates of human tumors. Am J Roentgenol Radium Ther Nucl Med 1956; 76: 988-1000
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 33 Dietel M. Können Östrogene Mammakarzinome initiieren?. Frauenarzt 2006; 47: 422-445
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 34 Nakashima K, Uematsu T, Takahashi K. et al. Does breast cancer growth rate really depend on tumor subtype? Measurement of tumor doubling time using serial ultrasonography between diagnosis and surgery. Breast Cancer 2019; 26: 206-214
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 35 Manschot WA. The natural history of uveal melanomas and its therapeutic consequences. Doc Ophthalmol 1980; 50: 83-99
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 36 Paul E. [The growth dynamics of malignant melanomas. Long-term establishment of melanomas]. Fortschr Med 1989; 107: 29-38
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 37 Paul E. Zur Wachstumsdynamik maligner Melanome der Haut. In: Garbe C, Dummer R, Kaufmann R, Tilge W. Dermatologische Onkologie. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 1997: 271-280
    Suche in Google Scholar
  • 38 Pölcher M, Hauptmann S, Fotopoulou C. Kommission Ovar of the Gynecologic Oncology Study Group (AGO). et al. Should Fallopian Tubes Be Removed During Hysterectomy Procedures? – A Statement by AGO Ovar. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2015; 75: 339-341
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 39 Potz FL, Tomasch G, Polterauer S. et al. Incidental (Prophylactic) Salpingectomy at Benign Gynecologic Surgery and Cesarean Section: a Survey of Practice in Austria. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2016; 76: 1325-1329
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 40 Vitonis AF, Titus-Ernstoff L, Cramer DW. Assessing ovarian cancer risk when considering elective oophorectomy at the time of hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 117: 1042-1050
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 41 Phung MT, Lee AW, McLean K. et al. A framework for assessing interactions for risk stratification models: the example of ovarian cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2023; 115: 1420-1426
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 42 Flaum N, Crosbie EJ, Edmondson RJ. et al. Epithelial ovarian cancer risk: A review of the current genetic landscape. Clin Genet 2020; 97: 54-63
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar