Abstract
Background: Although significant advancements have been made in the diagnostic and therapeutic methods of gynecological oncology, ovarian cancer continues to pose a significant challenge. The measurement of CA-125 levels is commonly considered the preferred approach for assessing the necessity of surgical intervention, hence guaranteeing a conclusive diagnosis. The objective of this study is to conduct a comparative analysis of existing literature about the effectiveness of serum CA-125 levels in distinguishing between endometriosis-associated ovarian cancer (EAOC) from ovarian endometrioma. Material and methods: The researchers conducted separate searches in the PubMed and Web of Science databases to identify peer-reviewed papers that examined the serum or plasma CA-125 marker. The search was conducted from the start of both databases until April 4th, 2024. Results: After conducting a literature search, a total of 114 studies were identified for review. Out of these, three studies satisfied the inclusion criteria and were consequently included. The results of the pooled analysis indicate that there is no statistically significant difference between the groups (336.3 ± 667.6 vs 530.6 ± 548.9, respectively; standard deviation = 0.51; 95% confidence interval: −0.63 to 1.64; p = 0.39). Conclusion: Unfortunately, the biomarker CA-125, which is commonly selected, has exhibited restricted effectiveness in distinguishing between EAOC and endometriomas. The existing body of literature on this topic indicates a significant dearth of research regarding the use of CA-125 as a means of differentiating between EAOC and endometriomas. Enhanced diagnostic techniques are necessary for the detection and characterization of ovarian tumors, encompassing those originating from endometriosis.
Full text
1,068 characters
· extracted from
oa-doi-fallback
· click to expand
Making sure you're not a bot!
Loading...
You are seeing this because the administrator of this website has set up Anubis to protect the server against the scourge of AI companies aggressively scraping websites. This can and does cause downtime for the websites, which makes their resources inaccessible for everyone.
Anubis is a compromise. Anubis uses a Proof-of-Work scheme in the vein of Hashcash, a proposed proof-of-work scheme for reducing email spam. The idea is that at individual scales the additional load is ignorable, but at mass scraper levels it adds up and makes scraping much more expensive.
Ultimately, this is a placeholder solution so that more time can be spent on fingerprinting and identifying headless browsers (EG: via how they do font rendering) so that the challenge proof of work page doesn't need to be presented to users that are much more likely to be legitimate.
Please note that Anubis requires the use of modern JavaScript features that plugins like JShelter will disable. Please disable JShelter or other such plugins for this domain.
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below.
Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure
cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can
have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy
(via DOI)
is the canonical version.