2007•Pathology Case ReviewsRequires access

Micropapillary Serous Carcinoma

Jeffrey D. Seidman, Marisa R. Varallo

Open publisher page 4 citations

Abstract

Noninvasive micropapillary serous carcinoma of the ovary is also referred to as the micropapillary variant of serous borderline tumor and displays a characteristic pattern of papillary branching but lacks invasion. In contrast, invasive micropapillary serous carcinoma is the usual form of low-grade invasive serous carcinoma. There is a consensus that peritoneal “implants” associated with serous borderline tumors that display invasive features (“invasive implants”) have a poor prognosis with a 7-year survival of 66%, and can also be referred to as invasive carcinoma. Evidence indicates that noninvasive micropapillary serous carcinoma has a strong association with invasive implants as compared with typical serous borderline tumors (49% vs. 7%, respectively, P < 0.0001). After excluding micropapillary serous borderline tumors and those with invasive implants, the remaining patients with serous borderline tumors have a survival of virtually 100%, thereby obviating the need for the serous borderline category.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Noninvasive micropapillary serous carcinoma of the ovary is also referred to as the micropapillary variant of serous borderline tumor and displays a characteristic pattern of papillary branching but lacks invasion. In contrast, invasive micropapillary serous carcinoma is the usual form of low-grade invasive serous carcinoma. There is a consensus that peritoneal “implants” associated with serous borderline tumors that display invasive features (“invasive implants”) have a poor prognosis with a 7-year survival of 66%, and can also be referred to as invasive carcinoma. Evidence indicates that noninvasive micropapillary serous carcinoma has a strong association with invasive implants as compared with typical serous borderline tumors (49% vs. 7%, respectively, P < 0.0001). After excluding micropapillary serous borderline tumors and those with invasive implants, the remaining patients with serous borderline tumors have a survival of virtually 100%, thereby obviating the need for the serous borderline category.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 4 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Noninvasive micropapillary serous carcinoma of the ovary is also referred to as the micropapillary variant of serous borderline tumor and displays a characteristic pattern of papillary branching but lacks invasion. In contrast, invasive micropapillary serous carcinoma is the usual form of low-grade invasive serous carcinoma. There is a consensus that peritoneal “implants” associated with serous borderline tumors that display invasive features (“invasive implants”) have a poor prognosis with a 7-year survival of 66%, and can also be referred to as invasive carcinoma. Evidence indicates that noninvasive micropapillary serous carcinoma has a strong association with invasive implants as compared with typical serous borderline tumors (49% vs. 7%, respectively, P < 0.0001). After excluding micropapillary serous borderline tumors and those with invasive implants, the remaining patients with serous borderline tumors have a survival of virtually 100%, thereby obviating the need for the serous borderline category.

Key concepts: Serous fluid, Serous carcinoma, Medicine, Pathology, Serous membrane, Internal medicine, Cancer, Ovarian cancer

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Micropapillary Serous Carcinoma — Research Paper | ScholarLens