OVSCORE ‑ a validated score to identify ovarian cancer patients not suitable for primary surgery

  • Authors:
    • Julia Dorn
    • Holger Bronger
    • Ronald Kates
    • Julia Slotta‑Huspenina
    • Barbara Schmalfeldt
    • Marion Kiechle
    • Eleftherios P. Diamandis
    • Antoninus Soosaipillai
    • Manfred Schmitt
    • Nadia Harbeck
  • View Affiliations

  • Published online on: October 24, 2014     https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2014.2630
  • Pages: 418-424
Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )


Abstract

Following primary debulking surgery, the presence of a residual tumor mass is one of the most important prognostic factors in ovarian cancer. In a previous study, we established the OVSCORE, an algorithm to predict surgical outcome, based on the clinical factors of nuclear grading and ascitic fluid volume, plus the cancer biomarkers, kallikrein‑related peptidases (KLKs), KLK6 and KLK13. In the present study, OVSCORE performance was tested in an independent ovarian cancer patient cohort consisting of 87 patients. The impact of KLKs, KLK5, 6, 7 and 13 and other clinical factors on patient prognosis and outcome was also evaluated. The OVSCORE proved to be a strong and statistically significant predictor of surgical success in terms of area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC AUC, 0.777), as well as positive and negative predictive value in this independent study group. KLK6 and 13 individually did not show clinical relevance in this cohort, but two other KLKs, KLK5 and KLK7, were associated with advanced FIGO stage, higher nuclear grade and positive lymph node status. In the multivariate Cox regression analysis for overall survival (OS), KLK7 had a protective impact on OS. This study confirms the role of KLKs in ovarian cancer for surgical success and survival, and validates the novel OVSCORE algorithm in an independent collective. As a key clinical application, the OVSCORE could aid gynecological oncologists in identifying those ovarian cancer patients unlikely to benefit from radical surgery who could be candidates for alternative therapeutic approaches.

Introduction

The prognosis of patients with ovarian cancer is generally poor owing to an advanced FIGO stage at diagnosis and often inefficient primary debulking surgery, the most important prognostic factors in ovarian cancer (1). The presence of a residual tumor is essentially the only factor that can be affected by the gynecological oncologist (2).

In ovarian cancer, cutting-edge therapy consists of radical debulking surgery that aims for complete tumor resection, followed by chemotherapy. Despite advancements in surgical techniques, complete debulking (no macroscopically evident residual tumor mass) is only achieved in ~30% of ovarian carcinoma patients, and radical tumor resection may cause considerable morbidity (3). High morbidity is certainly acceptable if complete debulking with its attendant survival advantage can be achieved, but it must be viewed critically for patients left with a residual intra-abdominal tumor and a resulting shorter life span (4).

Such patients would be ideal candidates for alternative therapeutic approaches, such as neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without subsequent surgery. However, identification of these patients is difficult, as no standardized selection criteria have been put forward so far. Neither radiological imaging nor a variety of analyzed protein and gene expression parameters have been shown to predict surgical success accurately (57).

As reported previously (8), in order to predict surgical success, we have developed the OVSCORE algorithm on the basis of a logistic regression model involving two clinical factors and two tumor biological factors, namely ascitic fluid volume and nuclear grading, and kallikrein-related peptidases (KLKs), KLK6 and KLK13, which are members of a serine protease family and are known to be associated with ovarian cancer progression and metastasis (9,10). In our previous trial, employing the OVSCORE, the presence of a residual tumor mass following radical surgery could be estimated, with good in-sample predictive performance [area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC AUC), 0.833] (8).

Other than being markers in the OVSCORE algorithm to predict surgical success, the majority of members of the KLK-family have been reported to be significant ovarian cancer biomarkers (9,10). For example, high KLK5 and KLK6 tumor tissue levels are associated with an advanced disease stage and significantly shorter progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) times (1114). Recently, we found that ovarian cancer patients with high KLK7 tumor tissue ELISA-levels had a two-fold lower risk of mortality or relapse compared with patients who displayed low levels (15). Finally, KLK13 expression in ovarian cancer tumor tissue has been shown to correlate with early-stage disease and favorable OS (16). These properties motivated the evaluation of the clinical impact of the biomarkers KLK5–7 and KLK13 in the present study.

The present study reports a retrospective validation of OVSCORE in an independent data set comprised of 87 patients with ovarian cancer, focusing in particular on its accuracy in predicting the presence of a residual tumor following primary surgery. Furthermore, the prognostic impact of established clinical factors and the analyzed KLK5–7 and KLK13 concentrations in tumor tissue was also analyzed in this independent collective.

Patients and methods

Patients

A total of 87 patients with ovarian cancer of International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I–IV who were treated between 1995 and 2008 at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (Munich, Germany), were enrolled in the present retrospective biomarker study. Standard surgical procedures were performed including pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy and if indicated, partial resection of the small and large intestine, peritonectomy and upper abdominal surgery. All patients provided written informed consent and the study was approved by the ethics committee of Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich. Following surgery, all patients received adjuvant treatment, including platinum-based chemotherapy (carboplatin AUC5 and Paclitaxel, 175 mg/sqm, body surface area, every three weeks), according to consensus recommendations at that time. The median age of the patients at the time of surgery was 58 years (range, 25–83 years). The median time of follow-up was 50 months (range, 1–166) for OS and 28 months (range, 1–159) for PFS. The clinical and histomorphological factors are presented in Table I. In total, 69 tumors (79.3%) were of the serous histotype, 9 (10.3%) were endometrioid, 4 (4.6%) were mucinous and 5 (5.7%) belonged to other histotypes.

Table I

Patient characteristics.

Table I

Patient characteristics.

Clinicopathological parametersn (%)
FIGO stage
 I11 (12.6)
 II4 (4.6)
 III50 (57.5)
 IV22 (25.3)
Lymph node status
 N027 (31.1)
 N+41 (47.1)
 Not known19 (21.8)
Residual tumor, mm
 038 (43.7)
 >049 (56.3)
Ascitic fluid volume, ml
 None20 (23.0)
 ≤50022 (25.3)
 >50045 (51.7)
Nuclear grading
 G13 (3.4)
 G217 (19.5)
 G367 (77.0)
Response to chemotherapy
 Progress12 (13.8)
 No change3 (3.4)
 Complete remission25 (28.7)
 Partial remission5 (5.7)
 Not known42 (48.3)
Deceased
 No25 (28.7)
 Yes59 (67.8)
 Not known3 (3.4)
Relapsed
 No17 (19.5)
 Yes62 (71.3)
 Not known8 (9.2)

[i] FIGO, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics.

Preparation of ovarian cancer tumor tissue extracts

Extracts from ovarian cancer primary tumor tissues were prepared as described previously (17). Tumor tissue samples were collected during surgery, inspected and classified by a pathologist, and then stored in liquid nitrogen. For extraction, deep-frozen specimens of 200–500 mg weight were pulverized and then resuspended in Tris-buffered saline [TBS; 0.02 M Tris-HCl and 0.125 M NaCl (pH 8.5)] containing 1% (w/v) of the non-ionic detergent Triton X-100 (Sigma Aldrich, Munich, Germany). Subsequent to extraction and ultracentrifugation at 100,000 × g for 45 min, the supernatant was collected, aliquoted and stored in liquid nitrogen until further use.

ELISA tests for the quantitation of KLK5–7 and KLK13 in ovarian cancer tumor tissue extracts

KLK5–7 and KLK13 antigen concentrations were determined in ovarian cancer tumor tissue extracts by non-commercial in-house ELISA test formats (18). For this purpose, monoclonal capture antibodies and detection antibodies to KLK5–7 and KLK13 proteins were generated by immunizing mice with recombinant human KLK5–7 and KLK13. Lower detection limits of the various KLK ELISAs were 0.05 ng/ml for KLK5, 6 and 13, and 0.2 ng/ml for KLK7. In these ELISA formats, no cross-reactivities with any other member of the human KLK family were detected. KLK antigen values were expressed as ng analyte/mg protein, which was determined in the tissue extracts by the Pierce BCA method (8).

Statistical analyses

All outcome and explanatory variables were coded in a manner consistent with our previous study (8). Outcome variables were PFS, OS and residual tumor presence (RT); RT was defined as 1 if a macroscopic residual tumor mass was visible and zero if completely absent.

Ascites volume, age, nuclear grade and nodal status were coded as binary variables: Ascites, >500 vs. ≤500 ml; age, >60 vs. ≤60 years; nuclear grade, G3 vs. G1/G2; and nodal status, 0 for N0, otherwise 1. FIGO status was coded by three binary indicators: Stage II/III/IV vs. I; stage III/IV vs. I/II; and stage IV vs. I/II/III.

For validation of the OVSCORE, ‘virtual’ fractional ranks of KLK6 and KLK13 were coded with respect to the distributions of antigens in the original data set (8), using interpolation as required.

The OVSCORE was then computed for each patient by multiplying the coded values of the factors by the logarithm of the corresponding odds coefficient (8). The procedure can be summarized by the following formula: OVSCORE = 2.57 × (A) + 1.07 × (G) + 2.14 × (rKLK6) − 2.00 × (rKLK13) − 5.41, where ‘A’ is defined as one if ascites >500 ml and zero otherwise, ‘G’ is one if grade is G3 and zero otherwise, ‘rKLK6’ is the virtual fractional rank of KLK6 and ‘rKLK13’ is the virtual fractional rank of KLK6. The fractional rank coding scheme for validation is intended to ensure that equal values of OVSCORE in the two independent cohorts correspond as closely as possible to the same tumor biological interpretation, even if the disease stage distributions in the two cohorts differ substantially.

The OVSCORE was used to construct a ROC for prediction of surgical success (RT) in the current validation sample. The ROC AUC was calculated as an out-of-sample performance indicator for validation. The out-of-sample positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) are also reported for the median and scaled cutoffs; the scaled cutoff is defined for this statistic as the fractional rank of OVSCORE equal to the percentage of patients with an RT of zero.

Spearman correlations between continuous variables and Mann-Whitney or Kruskal-Wallis tests for associations between continuous and categorical variables were computed. Impacts on PFS and OS were estimated by Cox’s proportional hazards regression model using forward selection, and then expressed as hazard ratios (HR) with respect to the defined coding.

Analyses were performed using SPSS software (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). P<0.05 was used to indicate a statistically significant difference.

Results

Validation of the OVSCORE algorithm to predict surgical success in ovarian cancer patients

Based on our previous study (8), the OVSCORE algorithm was developed to predict surgical success in ovarian cancer patients undergoing intra-abdominal debulking surgery in order to reduce the tumor size. The score, encompassing the clinical factors of ascitic fluid volume and nuclear grading, plus the cancer biomarkers KLK6 and KLK13, is designed to predict the efficiency of the intra-abdominal debulking procedure. In the present study, the predictive performance of the OVSCORE algorithm was tested in an independent set of 87 primary ovarian cancer patients. The predictive performance was comparable to that obtained in the original cohort of 142 ovarian cancer patients: AUC ROC for pilot study, 0.833; AUC ROC this study, 0.777 (Fig. 1). The corresponding out-of-sample quality measures for prediction of RT in terms of sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV for median and scaled cutoffs are summarized in Table II. Using the median cutoff, for example, one can expect that an unfavorable (positive) OVSCORE test would be correct in predicting a residual tumor in ~81% of cases; a favorable (negative) OVSCORE test would be correct in predicting surgical success in ~68% of cases.

Table II

Out-of-sample quality measures for prediction of residual tumor presence.

Table II

Out-of-sample quality measures for prediction of residual tumor presence.

OVSCORESensitivitySpecificityPPVNPV
OVSCORE with median cutoff, %71.478.981.468.20
OVSCORE with scaled cutoff, %73.565.873.565.80

a OVSCORE encompasses ascitic fluid volume, nuclear grading, KLK6 and KLK13.

{ label (or @symbol) needed for fn[@id='tfn3-ol-09-01-0418'] } PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value; KLK, kallikrein-related peptidase.

Correlations

Significant Spearman’s rank correlations (Rs) were found between KLK5 and KLK7 (Rs, ~0.6) and between KLK7 and KLK13 (Rs, ~0.3). Associations of the clinically established variables of FIGO stage, nuclear grade, nodal status and ascitic fluid volume, with cancer biomarkers KLK5–7 KLK13, serum biomarker cancer antigen (CA)-125 and the OVSCORE were quantified employing the Mann-Whitney U test (Fig. 2): KLK5, KLK7 and the OVSCORE (as well as CA-125 in serum, data not shown) were associated with advanced FIGO stage (FIGO III/IV), higher nuclear grade (G3) and positive nodal status (N+); KLK13 was associated with nodal status (data not shown), while KLK6 was not significantly associated with these clinical factors.

Assessment of prognostic impact of clinical factors, CA-125, KLK5–7 and KLK13

The impact of FIGO stage, nuclear grading, nodal status, ascitic fluid volume, residual tumor mass, CA-125, KLK5–7 and KLK13 on OS and PFS, as assessed by uni- and multivariable Cox analysis, are summarized in Table III. The clinical factors were significant univariate predictors of OS and PFS. The OVSCORE itself was significantly associated with OS and PFS in univariate analysis; KLK5–7 and KLK13 were not individually significant for either OS or PFS, whereas CA-125 was not significant for OS or PFS, the P value for OS was 0.06.

Table III

Univariate Cox regression analysis to determine the association of clinical factors and cancer biomarkers with ovarian cancer patient survival (n=84).

Table III

Univariate Cox regression analysis to determine the association of clinical factors and cancer biomarkers with ovarian cancer patient survival (n=84).

Overall survivalProgression-free survival


VariableHR95% CIP-valueHR95% CIP-value
FIGO stage3.51.4–8.90.0072.81.2–6.60.019
Nuclear grade3.21.5–6.70.0032.61.3–5.00.007
Residual tumor mass, mm34.411.2–105.9<0.0011.11.0–1.1<0.001
Residual tumor mass, mm (0 vs. >0)4.52.5–8.1<0.0013.31.9–5.8<0.001
Ascitic fluid volume, ml2.31.3–3.90.0022.21.3–3.70.003
OVSCOREa1.41.2–1.7<0.0011.31.1–1.60.001
CA-1251.41.0–1.90.0600.100

a OVSCORE encompasses ascitic fluid volume, nuclear grading, KLK6 and KLK13.

{ label (or @symbol) needed for fn[@id='tfn5-ol-09-01-0418'] } HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; FIGO, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics; KLK, kallikrein-related peptidase; CA-125, cancer antigen 125.

The multivariate Cox model for OS contained residual tumor mass, nuclear grade and KLK7 as independent factors. Adjusted for residual tumor mass and nuclear grade, KLK7 entered the model as a protective marker (HR, 0.41; Table IV). Residual tumor mass was the only independent marker in the model for PFS.

Table IV

Multivariable Cox regression analysis to determine the association of clinical factors and cancer biomarkers with ovarian cancer patient survival (n=84).

Table IV

Multivariable Cox regression analysis to determine the association of clinical factors and cancer biomarkers with ovarian cancer patient survival (n=84).

Overall survivalProgression-free survival


VariableHR95% CIP-valueHR95% CIP-value
Residual tumor mass, mm (0 vs >0)4.62.5–8.6<0.0013.311.90–5.77<0.001
Nuclear grade2.61.2–5.80.016--NS
KLK70.40.2–1.00.041--NS

[i] NS, not significant; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; FIGO, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics; KLK, kallikrein-related peptidase.

Discussion

For ovarian cancer, the major traditional prognostic factors are FIGO stage at the time of diagnosis and size of residual tumor mass following cytoreductive surgery (1). Other established clinical prognostic factors are age, performance status, type of histology, nuclear grade and presence/amount of peritoneal ascitic fluid. However, owing to the lack of suitable biomarkers, at present, ovarian cancer management does not use any prognostic or therapy response predicting factors, with regard to the course of the disease or a patient’s risk to develop disease recurrence.

In our previous study, the OVSCORE algorithm was developed to predict the surgical outcome in the primary debulking surgery of ovarian cancer patients (8). This score encompasses the clinically relevant factors of ascitic fluid volume and nuclear grading, plus two novel cancer biomarkers, the serine proteases KLK6 and KLK13.

Broad scientific interest has been focused on the KLKs, since the majority of the fifteen KLK family members are believed to contribute to ovarian cancer progression and metastasis (9,10). Four KLKs (KLK4–6 and KLK15) are linked to the poor prognosis of ovarian cancer patients, while higher KLK9 and KLK14 levels are associated with a favorable course of the disease. For certain KLKs (KLK7, 8, 10, 11 and KLK13), the clinical relevance is not yet clear, since, depending on the method of detection (mRNA or protein, ELISA or IHC) and/or FIGO stage (early or advanced), these KLKs can be associated with either a poorer or more favorable disease course.

The present study validated the clinical relevance of the multiparametric OVSCORE to predict surgical success in an independent set of ovarian cancer patients. The performance of the score in this set was found to be comparable to that in the original collective of 142 ovarian cancer patients of the pilot study (ROC AUC pilot study, 0.833; AUC ROC this study, 0.777), even though complete debulking rates as a whole were higher in the previous study.

The OVSCORE could easily be calculated prior to definitive surgery by estimating the pre-operative ascitic fluid volume by ultrasound and analyzing tumor biopsies obtained by laparoscopy or CT-guided for nuclear grading and KLK tissue analysis. Applying the presurgical OVSCORE, ovarian cancer patients for whom complete tumor resection would be difficult to achieve could be identified. Such patients could be candidates for alternative clinical approaches, such as neoadjuvant or exclusive chemotherapy.

Furthermore, the OVSCORE could also support pre-operative risk stratification: e.g., in ovarian cancer patients with substantial co-morbidity, a favorable OVSCORE would reinforce the decision for radical surgery, whereas an unfavorable OVSCORE would suggest considering alternative therapeutic approaches, for instance pre-operative chemotherapy.

Apart from validating the clinical utility of the OVSCORE, the present study evaluated the clinical impact of the various single parameters accounting for the OVSCORE algorithm. Large ascitic fluid volumes and higher nuclear grading are established clinical prognostic factors known to be associated with higher stage and inferior survival rates (1,8). As aforementioned, KLK6 is known to be an unfavorable prognostic ovarian cancer biomarker (13,14), while KLK13 expression is correlated with early-stage disease and favorable OS (16). In view of recent studies showing that elevated KLK5 and KLK7 values are associated with advanced stage, higher nuclear grade and a poor prognosis in ovarian cancer patients (11,12,1921), the clinical impact of these two additional KLKs was tested.

In Cox’s univariate analysis, the prognostic impact on OS and PFS by the established clinical factors of FIGO stage, residual tumor volume subsequent to surgery, nuclear grade and ascitic fluid volume, as well as the OVSCORE, could be confirmed, but none of the KLKs alone or CA-125 in serum showed significance.

In multivariate Cox analysis, only residual tumor mass and, for OS, nuclear grade and KLK7 were of clinical significance. Notably, in this multivariate context, KLK7 was found to be a protective marker (HR, 0.41). This result is consistent with our previous findings in an independent ovarian cancer patient cohort demonstrating that higher KLK7 protein levels, as assessed by ELISA, are associated with an improved patient outcome (15). However, there are conflicting studies with regard to KLK7, which state that it may be associated with a worse prognosis and a poor response to chemotherapy (8,19,20,2225). However, contradictory findings have already been reported for KLK7 in breast cancer. Holzscheiter et al (26) found high full-length KLK7 mRNA levels in breast cancer tissue to be a favorable prognostic marker, while Talieri et al (27) reported KLK7 expression to be associated with shorter survival. A possible explanation for this discrepancy may be the fact that in contrast to the cohort of Holzscheiter et al (26), most of the patients analyzed by Talieri et al (27) were subjected to adjuvant therapy.

The present ovarian cancer cohort was uniformly treated by adjuvant platinum-containing polychemotherapy (except if not indicated or not suitable). By contrast, only 30% of the patients included in the study by Kyriakopoulou et al (20) were treated with carboplatin and only 16% with paclitaxel. Hence, a therapeutic effect analogous to that hypothesized by Holzscheiter et al (26) is possible. Furthermore, in the patient cohort analyzed by Shan et al (19), more patients were of earlier stage, with 30% FIGO stage I/II compared with 17% FIGO stage I/II in the present cohort, and fewer succumbed; 50% compared with 68% in the present patient group.

Taken these findings as a whole, KLKs have recently emerged as novel, promising predictive factors in ovarian cancer. In particular, the present study has confirmed earlier findings showing that KLK5 is associated with advanced and more aggressive disease, and that KLK7 may be a favorable prognostic marker in ovarian cancer. The key clinical finding of this study is the validation of the previously developed OVSCORE in an independent patient cohort. The OVSCORE could aid in the identification of patients who do not benefit from currently recommended therapeutic regimens.

Acknowledgements

The OVSCORE trial was designed within the ECCO-AACR-ASCO workshop, Methods in Clinical Cancer Research in Flims, Switzerland and was supported by a grant (no. C14–12) from the Kommission für Klinische Forschung of the Medical Faculty of the Technical University of Munich, Germany.

References

1 

du Bois A, Reuss A, Pujade-Lauraine E, et al: Role of surgical outcome as prognostic factor in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: a combined exploratory analysis of 3 prospectively randomized phase 3 multicenter trials: by the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynaekologische Onkologie Studiengruppe Ovarialkarzinom (AGO-OVAR) and the Groupe d’Investigateurs Nationaux Pour les Etudes des Cancers de l’Ovaire (GINECO). Cancer. 115:1234–1244. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

2 

Buys SS, Partridge E, Black A, et al; PLCO Project Team. Effect of screening on ovarian cancer mortality: the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Randomized Controlled Trial. JAMA. 305:2295–2303. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

3 

Panici BP, Maggioni A, Hacker N, et al: Systematic aortic and pelvic lymphadenectomy versus resection of bulky nodes only in optimally debulked advanced ovarian cancer: a randomized clinical trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 97:560–566. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

4 

Crawford SC, Vasey PA, Paul J, et al: Does aggressive surgery only benefit patients with less advanced ovarian cancer? Results from an international comparison within the SCOTROC-1 Trial. J Clin Oncol. 23:8802–8811. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

5 

Borley J, Wilhelm-Benartzi C, Brown R and Ghaem-Maghami S: Does tumour biology determine surgical success in the treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer? A systematic literature review. Br J Cancer. 107:1069–1074. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

6 

Dowdy SC, Mullany SA, Brandt KR, et al: The utility of computed tomography scans in predicting suboptimal cytoreductive surgery in women with advanced ovarian carcinoma. Cancer. 101:346–352. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

7 

Axtell AE, Lee MH, Bristow RE, et al: Multi-institutional reciprocal validation study of computed tomography predictors of suboptimal primary cytoreduction in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol. 25:384–389. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

8 

Dorn J, Schmitt M, Kates R, et al: Primary tumor levels of human tissue kallikreins affect surgical success and survival in ovarian cancer patients. Clin Cancer Res. 13:1742–1748. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

9 

Dorn J, Bayani J, Yousef GM, et al: Clinical utility of kallikrein-related peptidases (KLK) in urogenital malignancies. Thromb Haemost. 110:408–422. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

10 

Dorn J, Milou V, Kulasingam V, et al: Clinical relevance of kallikrein-related peptidases in ovarian cancer. Kallikrein-Related Peptidases. Novel Cancer-Related Biomarkers. Magdolen V, Sommerhoff CP, Fritz H and Schmitt M: 2. deGruyter; Berlin: pp. 145–166. 2012

11 

Diamandis EP, Borgono CA, Scorilas A, et al: Immunofluorometric quantification of human kallikrein 5 expression in ovarian cancer cytosols and its association with unfavorable patient prognosis. Tumour Biol. 24:299–309. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar

12 

Kim H, Scorilas A, Katsaros D, et al: Human kallikrein gene 5 (KLK5) expression is an indicator of poor prognosis in ovarian cancer. Br J Cancer. 84:643–650. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

13 

Hoffman BR, Katsaros D, Scorilas A, et al: Immunofluorometric quantitation and histochemical localisation of kallikrein 6 protein in ovarian cancer tissue: a new independent unfavourable prognostic biomarker. Br J Cancer. 87:763–771. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

14 

Seiz L, Dorn J, Kotzsch M, et al: Stromal cell-associated expression of kallikrein-related peptidase 6 (KLK6) indicates poor prognosis of ovarian cancer patients. Biol Chem. 393:391–401. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

15 

Dorn J, Gkazepis A, Kotzsch M, et al: Clinical value of protein expression of kallikrein-related peptidase 7 (KLK7) in ovarian cancer. Biol Chem. 395:95–107. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar

16 

Scorilas A, Borgoño CA, Harbeck N, et al: Human kallikrein 13 protein in ovarian cancer cytosols: a new favorable prognostic marker. J Clin Oncol. 22:678–685. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

17 

Dorn J, Harbeck N, Kates R, et al: Disease processes may be reflected by correlations among tissue kallikrein proteases but not with proteolytic factors uPA and PAI-1 in primary ovarian carcinoma. Biol Chem. 387:1121–1128. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

18 

Christopoulos TK and Diamandis EP: Enzymatically amplified time-resolved fluorescence immunoassay with terbium chelates. Anal Chem. 64:342–346. 1992. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

19 

Shan SJ, Scorilas A, Katsaros D, et al: Unfavorable prognostic value of human kallikrein 7 quantified by ELISA in ovarian cancer cytosols. Clin Chem. 52:1879–1886. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

20 

Kyriakopoulou LG, Yousef GM, Scorilas A, et al: Prognostic value of quantitatively assessed KLK7 expression in ovarian cancer. Clin Biochem. 36:135–143. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

21 

Dorn J, Magdolen V, Gkazepis A, et al: Circulating biomarker tissue kallikrein-related peptidase KLK5 impacts ovarian cancer patients’ survival. Ann Oncol. 22:1783–1790. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

22 

Psyrri A, Kountourakis P, Scorilas A, et al: Human tissue kallikrein 7, a novel biomarker for advanced ovarian carcinoma using a novel in situ quantitative method of protein expression. Ann Oncol. 19:1271–1277. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

23 

Dong Y, Tan OL, Loessner D, et al: Kallikrein-related peptidase 7 promotes multicellular aggregation via the alpha(5)beta(1) integrin pathway and paclitaxel chemoresistance in serous epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Cancer Res. 70:2624–2633. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

24 

Oikonomopoulou K, Li L, Zheng Y, et al: Prediction of ovarian cancer prognosis and response to chemotherapy by a serum-based multiparametric biomarker panel. Br J Cancer. 99:1103–1113. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

25 

Borgono CA and Diamandis EP: The emerging roles of human tissue kallikreins in cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 4:876–890. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

26 

Holzscheiter L, Biermann JC, Kotzsch M, et al: Quantitative reverse transcription-PCR assay for detection of mRNA encoding full-length human tissue kallikrein 7: prognostic relevance of KLK7 mRNA expression in breast cancer. Clin Chem. 52:1070–1079. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

27 

Talieri M, Diamandis EP, Gourgiotis D, et al: Expression analysis of the human kallikrein 7 (KLK7) in breast tumours: a new potential biomarker for prognosis of breast carcinoma. Thromb Haemost. 91:180–186. 2004.

Related Articles

Journal Cover

January-2015
Volume 9 Issue 1

Print ISSN: 1792-1074
Online ISSN:1792-1082

Sign up for eToc alerts

Recommend to Library

Copy and paste a formatted citation
x
Spandidos Publications style
Dorn J, Bronger H, Kates R, Slotta‑Huspenina J, Schmalfeldt B, Kiechle M, Diamandis EP, Soosaipillai A, Schmitt M, Harbeck N, Harbeck N, et al: OVSCORE ‑ a validated score to identify ovarian cancer patients not suitable for primary surgery. Oncol Lett 9: 418-424, 2015
APA
Dorn, J., Bronger, H., Kates, R., Slotta‑Huspenina, J., Schmalfeldt, B., Kiechle, M. ... Harbeck, N. (2015). OVSCORE ‑ a validated score to identify ovarian cancer patients not suitable for primary surgery. Oncology Letters, 9, 418-424. https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2014.2630
MLA
Dorn, J., Bronger, H., Kates, R., Slotta‑Huspenina, J., Schmalfeldt, B., Kiechle, M., Diamandis, E. P., Soosaipillai, A., Schmitt, M., Harbeck, N."OVSCORE ‑ a validated score to identify ovarian cancer patients not suitable for primary surgery". Oncology Letters 9.1 (2015): 418-424.
Chicago
Dorn, J., Bronger, H., Kates, R., Slotta‑Huspenina, J., Schmalfeldt, B., Kiechle, M., Diamandis, E. P., Soosaipillai, A., Schmitt, M., Harbeck, N."OVSCORE ‑ a validated score to identify ovarian cancer patients not suitable for primary surgery". Oncology Letters 9, no. 1 (2015): 418-424. https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2014.2630