The role of biomarkers in the management of epithelial ovarian cancer

References

• Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2016. CA Cancer J Clin. 2016;66(1):7–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65(2):87–108.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bast RC Jr. Molecular approaches to personalizing management of ovarian cancer. Ann Oncol. 2011;22(Suppl 8):viii5–viii15.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bast RC Jr., Hennessy B, Mills GB. The biology of ovarian cancer: new opportunities for translation. Nat Rev Cancer. 2009;9(6):415–428.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng W, Liu J, Yoshida H, et al. Lineage infidelity of epithelial ovarian cancers is controlled by HOX genes that specify regional identity in the reproductive tract. Nat Med. 2005;11(5):531–537.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diniz PM, Carvalho JP, Baracat EC, et al. Fallopian tube origin of supposed ovarian high-grade serous carcinomas. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2011;66(1):73–76.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kurman RJ, Shih IM. The dualistic model of ovarian carcinogenesis: revisited, revised, and expanded. Am J Pathol. 2016;186(4):733–747.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Romero I, Bast RC Jr. Minireview: human ovarian cancer: biology, current management, and paths to personalizing therapy. Endocrinology. 2012;153(4):1593–1602.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowtell DD, Bohm S, Ahmed AA, et al. Rethinking ovarian cancer II: reducing mortality from high-grade serous ovarian cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2015;15(11):668–679.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Havrilesky LJ, Sanders GD, Kulasingam S, et al. Development of an ovarian cancer screening decision model that incorporates disease heterogeneity: implications for potential mortality reduction. Cancer. 2011;117(3):545–553.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yin BW, Lloyd KO. Molecular cloning of the CA125 ovarian cancer antigen: identification as a new mucin, MUC16. J Biol Chem. 2001;276(29):27371–27375.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bast RC Jr., Klug TL, St John E, et al. A radioimmunoassay using a monoclonal antibody to monitor the course of epithelial ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med. 1983;309(15):883–887.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rustin GJ, Vergote I, Eisenhauer E, et al. Definitions for response and progression in ovarian cancer clinical trials incorporating RECIST 1.1 and CA 125 agreed by the Gynecological Cancer Intergroup (GCIG). Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2011;21(2):419–423.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rustin GJ, van der Burg ME, Griffin CL, et al. Early versus delayed treatment of relapsed ovarian cancer (MRC OV05/EORTC 55955): a randomised trial. Lancet. 2010;376(9747):1155–1163.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bast RC Jr. CA 125 and the detection of recurrent ovarian cancer: a reasonably accurate biomarker for a difficult disease. Cancer. 2010;116(12):2850–2853.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esselen KM, Cronin AM, Bixel K, et al. Use of CA-125 tests and computed tomographic scans for surveillance in ovarian cancer. JAMA Oncol. 2016;2(11):1427–1433.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ono K, Tanaka T, Tsunoda T, et al. Identification by cDNA microarray of genes involved in ovarian carcinogenesis. Cancer Res. 2000;60(18):5007–5011.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Welsh JB, Zarrinkar PP, Sapinoso LM, et al. Analysis of gene expression profiles in normal and neoplastic ovarian tissue samples identifies candidate molecular markers of epithelial ovarian cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001;98(3):1176–1181.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hellstrom I, Raycraft J, Hayden-Ledbetter M, et al. The HE4 (WFDC2) protein is a biomarker for ovarian carcinoma. Cancer Res. 2003;63(13):3695–3700.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore RG, Brown AK, Miller MC, et al. The use of multiple novel tumor biomarkers for the detection of ovarian carcinoma in patients with a pelvic mass. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;108(2):402–408.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chudecka-Glaz A, Rzepka-Gorska I, Wojciechowska I. Human epididymal protein 4 (HE4) is a novel biomarker and a promising prognostic factor in ovarian cancer patients. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2012;33(4):382–390.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schummer M, Drescher C, Forrest R, et al. Evaluation of ovarian cancer remission markers HE4, MMP7 and Mesothelin by comparison to the established marker CA125. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;125(1):65–69.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plotti F, Capriglione S, Terranova C, et al. Does HE4 have a role as biomarker in the recurrence of ovarian cancer?. Tumour Biol. 2012;33(6):2117–2123.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement. Ovarian cancer: screening, treatment, and follow-up. Gynecol Oncol. 1994;55(3 Pt 2):S4–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Curtin JP. Management of the adnexal mass. Gynecol Oncol. 1994;55(3 Pt 2):S42–46.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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. 2009;115(6):1234–1244.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bast RC Jr., Skates S, Lokshin A, et al. Differential diagnosis of a pelvic mass: improved algorithms and novel biomarkers. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2012;22(Suppl 1):S5–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs I, Oram D, Fairbanks J, et al. A risk of malignancy index incorporating CA 125, ultrasound and menopausal status for the accurate preoperative diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1990;97(10):922–929.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• van den Akker PA, Aalders AL, Snijders MP, et al. Evaluation of the risk of malignancy index in daily clinical management of adnexal masses. Gynecol Oncol. 2010;116(3):384–388.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raza A, Mould T, Wilson M, et al. Increasing the effectiveness of referral of ovarian masses from cancer unit to cancer center by using a higher referral value of the risk of malignancy index. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2010;20(4):552–554.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore RG, McMeekin DS, Brown AK, et al. A novel multiple marker bioassay utilizing HE4 and CA125 for the prediction of ovarian cancer in patients with a pelvic mass. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;112(1):40–46.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore RG, Miller MC, Disilvestro P, et al. Evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of the risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm in women with a pelvic mass. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118(2 Pt 1):280–288.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bandiera E, Romani C, Specchia C, et al. Serum human epididymis protein 4 and risk for ovarian malignancy algorithm as new diagnostic and prognostic tools for epithelial ovarian cancer management. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2011;20(12):2496–2506.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim YM, Whang DH, Park J, et al. Evaluation of the accuracy of serum human epididymis protein 4 in combination with CA125 for detecting ovarian cancer: a prospective case-control study in a Korean population. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2011;49(3):527–534.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molina R, Escudero JM, Auge JM, et al. HE4 a novel tumour marker for ovarian cancer: comparison with CA 125 and ROMA algorithm in patients with gynaecological diseases. Tumour Biol. 2011;32(6):1087–1095.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruggeri G, Bandiera E, Zanotti L, et al. HE4 and epithelial ovarian cancer: comparison and clinical evaluation of two immunoassays and a combination algorithm. Clin Chim Acta. 2011;412(15–16):1447–1453.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacob F, Meier M, Caduff R, et al. No benefit from combining HE4 and CA125 as ovarian tumor markers in a clinical setting. Gynecol Oncol. 2011;121(3):487–491.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montagnana M, Danese E, Ruzzenente O, et al. The ROMA (Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm) for estimating the risk of epithelial ovarian cancer in women presenting with pelvic mass: is it really useful?. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2011;49(3):521–525.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Gorp T, Cadron I, Despierre E, et al. HE4 and CA125 as a diagnostic test in ovarian cancer: prospective validation of the Risk Of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm. Br J Cancer. 2011;104(5):863–870.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang Z, Chan DW. The road from discovery to clinical diagnostics: lessons learned from the first FDA-cleared in vitro diagnostic multivariate index assay of proteomic biomarkers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2010;19(12):2995–2999.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ware Miller R, Smith A, DeSimone CP, et al. Performance of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ ovarian tumor referral guidelines with a multivariate index assay. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;117(6):1298–1306.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ueland FR, Desimone CP, Seamon LG, et al. Effectiveness of a multivariate index assay in the preoperative assessment of ovarian tumors. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;117(6):1289–1297.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muggia FM, Braly PS, Brady MF, et al. Phase III randomized study of cisplatin versus paclitaxel versus cisplatin and paclitaxel in patients with suboptimal stage III or IV ovarian cancer: a gynecologic oncology group study. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18(1):106–115.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kamazawa S, Kigawa J, Kanamori Y, et al. Multidrug resistance gene-1 is a useful predictor of Paclitaxel-based chemotherapy for patients with ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2002;86(2):171–176.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartmann LC, Lu KH, Linette GP, et al. Gene expression profiles predict early relapse in ovarian cancer after platinum-paclitaxel chemotherapy. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11(6):2149–2155.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helleman J, Jansen MP, Span PN, et al. Molecular profiling of platinum resistant ovarian cancer. Int J Cancer. 1963-1971;118(8):2006.
   Google Scholar
• Gevaert O, De Smet F, van Gorp T, et al. Expression profiling to predict the clinical behaviour of ovarian cancer fails independent evaluation. BMC Cancer. 2008;8:18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams PD, Cheon S, Havaleshko DM, et al. Concordant gene expression signatures predict clinical outcomes of cancer patients undergoing systemic therapy. Cancer Res. 2009;69(21):8302–8309.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferriss JS, Kim Y, Duska L, et al. Multi-gene expression predictors of single drug responses to adjuvant chemotherapy in ovarian carcinoma: predicting platinum resistance. Plos One. 2012;7(2):e30550.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Angioli R, Capriglione S, Aloisi A, et al. Can HE4 predict platinum response during first-line chemotherapy in ovarian cancer?. Tumour Biol. 2014;35(7):7009–7015.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benafif S, Hall M. An update on PARP inhibitors for the treatment of cancer. Onco Targets Ther. 2015;8:519–528.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konecny GE, Kristeleit RS. PARP inhibitors for BRCA1/2-mutated and sporadic ovarian cancer: current practice and future directions. Br J Cancer. 2016;115(10):1157–1173.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stover EH, Konstantinopoulos PA, Matulonis UA, et al. Biomarkers of response and resistance to DNA repair targeted therapies. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22(23):5651–5660.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Telli ML, Timms KM, Reid J, et al. Homologous Recombination Deficiency (HRD) score predicts response to platinum-containing neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22(15):3764–3773.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mirza MR, Monk BJ, Herrstedt J, et al. Niraparib maintenance therapy in platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(22):2154–2164.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bast RC Jr., Mills GB. Dissecting “PI3Kness”: the complexity of personalized therapy for ovarian cancer. Cancer Discov. 2012;2(1):16–18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanrahan AJ, Schultz N, Westfal ML, et al. Genomic complexity and AKT dependence in serous ovarian cancer. Cancer Discov. 2012;2(1):56–67.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodon J, Dienstmann R, Serra V, et al. Development of PI3K inhibitors: lessons learned from early clinical trials. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2013;10(3):143–153.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuefferd M, Couturier J, Penault-Llorca F, et al. HER2 status in ovarian carcinomas: a multicenter GINECO study of 320 patients. Plos One. 2007;2(11):e1138.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anglesio MS, Kommoss S, Tolcher MC, et al. Molecular characterization of mucinous ovarian tumours supports a stratified treatment approach with HER2 targeting in 19% of carcinomas. J Pathol. 2013;229(1):111–120.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McAlpine JN, Wiegand KC, Vang R, et al. HER2 overexpression and amplification is present in a subset of ovarian mucinous carcinomas and can be targeted with trastuzumab therapy. BMC Cancer. 2009;9:433.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langdon SP, Gabra H, Bartlett JM, et al. Functionality of the progesterone receptor in ovarian cancer and its regulation by estrogen. Clin Cancer Res. 1998;4(9):2245–2251.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gershenson DM, Bodurka DC, Coleman RL, et al. Hormonal maintenance therapy for women with low grade serous carcinoma of the ovary or peritoneum. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(10):1103-1111.
   Google Scholar
• Aletti GD, Dowdy SC, Podratz KC, et al. Relationship among surgical complexity, short-term morbidity, and overall survival in primary surgery for advanced ovarian cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197(6):676 e671–677.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Espey DK, Wu XC, Swan J, et al. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975-2004, featuring cancer in American Indians and Alaska Natives. Cancer. 2007;110(10):2119–2152.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ashworth A, Balkwill F, Bast RC, et al. Opportunities and challenges in ovarian cancer research, a perspective from the 11th Ovarian cancer action/HHMT Forum, Lake Como, March 2007. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;108(3):652–657.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rc B Jr., Urban N, Shridhar V, et al. Early detection of ovarian cancer: promise and reality. Cancer Treat Res. 2002;107:61–97.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rauh-Hain JA, Krivak TC, Del Carmen MG, et al. Ovarian cancer screening and early detection in the general population. Rev Obstet Gynecol. 2011;4(1):15–21.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Campbell S, Bhan V, Royston P, et al. Transabdominal ultrasound screening for early ovarian cancer. BMJ. 1989;299(6712):1363–1367.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bourne TH, Campbell S, Reynolds KM, et al. Screening for early familial ovarian cancer with transvaginal ultrasonography and colour blood flow imaging. Bmj. 1993;306(6884):1025–1029.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Nagell JR Jr., DePriest PD, Reedy MB, et al. The efficacy of transvaginal sonographic screening in asymptomatic women at risk for ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2000;77(3):350–356.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nunes N, Ambler G, Foo X, et al. Use of IOTA simple rules for diagnosis of ovarian cancer: meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014;44(5):503–514.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meys EM, Kaijser J, Kruitwagen RF, et al. Subjective assessment versus ultrasound models to diagnose ovarian cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Cancer. 2016;58:17–29.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Nagell JR Jr., DePriest PD, Ueland FR, et al. Ovarian cancer screening with annual transvaginal sonography: findings of 25,000 women screened. Cancer. 2007;109(9):1887–1896.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buys SS, Partridge E, Greene MH, et al. Ovarian cancer screening in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) cancer screening trial: findings from the initial screen of a randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1630-1639;193(5):2005.
   Google Scholar
• Menon U, Gentry-Maharaj A, Hallett R, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of multimodal and ultrasound screening for ovarian cancer, and stage distribution of detected cancers: results of the prevalence screen of the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS). Lancet Oncol. 2009;10(4):327–340.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sato AH, Anderson GL, Urban N, et al. Comparing adaptive and non-adaptive algorithms for cancer early detection with novel biomarkers. Cancer Biomark. 2006;2(3–4):151–162.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bast RC Jr., Feeney M, Lazarus H, et al. Reactivity of a monoclonal antibody with human ovarian carcinoma. J Clin Invest. 1981;68(5):1331–1337.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bast RC Jr., Badgwell D, Lu Z, et al. New tumor markers: CA125 and beyond. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2005;15(Suppl 3):274–281.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menon U, Ryan A, Kalsi J, et al. Risk algorithm using serial biomarker measurements doubles the number of screen-detected cancers compared with a single-threshold rule in the United Kingdom collaborative trial of ovarian cancer screening. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(18):2062–2071.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menon U, Talaat A, Jeyarajah AR, et al. Ultrasound assessment of ovarian cancer risk in postmenopausal women with CA125 elevation. Br J Cancer. 1999;80(10):1644–1647.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs IJ, Skates SJ, MacDonald N, et al. Screening for ovarian cancer: a pilot randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 1999;353(9160):1207–1210.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skates SJ, Xu FJ, Yu YH, et al. Toward an optimal algorithm for ovarian cancer screening with longitudinal tumor markers. Cancer. 2004-2010;76(10 Suppl):1995.
   Google Scholar
• Sjovall K, Nilsson B, Einhorn N. The significance of serum CA 125 elevation in malignant and nonmalignant diseases. Gynecol Oncol. 2002;85(1):175–178.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menon U, Skates SJ, Lewis S, et al. Prospective study using the risk of ovarian cancer algorithm to screen for ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(31):7919–7926.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu KH, Skates S, Hernandez MA, et al. A 2-stage ovarian cancer screening strategy using the Risk of Ovarian Cancer Algorithm (ROCA) identifies early-stage incident cancers and demonstrates high positive predictive value. Cancer. 2013;119(19):3454–3461.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs IJ, Menon U, Ryan A, et al. Ovarian cancer screening and mortality in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;387(10022):945–956.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scholler N, Fu N, Yang Y, et al. Soluble member(s) of the mesothelin/megakaryocyte potentiating factor family are detectable in sera from patients with ovarian carcinoma. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999;96(20):11531–11536.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McIntosh MW, Drescher C, Karlan B, et al. Combining CA 125 and SMR serum markers for diagnosis and early detection of ovarian carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2004;95(1):9–15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schummer M, Ng WV, Bumgarner RE, et al. Comparative hybridization of an array of 21,500 ovarian cDNAs for the discovery of genes overexpressed in ovarian carcinomas. Gene. 1999;238(2):375–385.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grisaru D, Hauspy J, Prasad M, et al. Microarray expression identification of differentially expressed genes in serous epithelial ovarian cancer compared with bulk normal ovarian tissue and ovarian surface scrapings. Oncol Rep. 2007;18(6):1347–1356.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galgano MT, Hampton GM, Frierson HF Jr. Comprehensive analysis of HE4 expression in normal and malignant human tissues. Mod Pathol. 2006;19(6):847–853.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diamandis EP, Yousef GM, Soosaipillai AR, et al. Human kallikrein 6 (zyme/protease M/neurosin): a new serum biomarker of ovarian carcinoma. Clin Biochem. 2000;33(7):579–583.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mok SC, Chao J, Skates S, et al. Prostasin, a potential serum marker for ovarian cancer: identification through microarray technology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93(19):1458–1464.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim JH, Skates SJ, Uede T, et al. Osteopontin as a potential diagnostic biomarker for ovarian cancer. Jama. 1671-1679;287(13):2002.
   Google Scholar
• Lu KH, Patterson AP, Wang L, et al. Selection of potential markers for epithelial ovarian cancer with gene expression arrays and recursive descent partition analysis. Clin Cancer Res. 2004;10(10):3291–3300.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu Y, Shen Z, Wiper DW, et al. Lysophosphatidic acid as a potential biomarker for ovarian and other gynecologic cancers. JAMA. 1998;280(8):719–723.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pitteri S, Hanash S. A systems approach to the proteomic identification of novel cancer biomarkers. Dis Markers. 2010;28(4):233–239.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanash S, Taguchi A. Application of proteomics to cancer early detection. Cancer J. 2011;17(6):423–428.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skates SJ, Horick N, Yu Y, et al. Preoperative sensitivity and specificity for early-stage ovarian cancer when combining cancer antigen CA-125II, CA 15-3, CA 72-4, and macrophage colony-stimulating factor using mixtures of multivariate normal distributions. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(20):4059–4066.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang Z, Yu Y, Xu F, et al. Combining multiple serum tumor markers improves detection of stage I epithelial ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2007;107(3):526–531.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cramer DW, Bast RC Jr., Berg CD, et al. Ovarian cancer biomarker performance in prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian cancer screening trial specimens. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2011;4(3):365–374.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Terry KL, Schock H, Fortner RT, et al. A prospective evaluation of early detection biomarkers for ovarian cancer in the European EPIC cohort. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22(18):4664–4675.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simmons AR, Gentry-Maharaj A, Skates S, et al. Validation of a multi-marker panel for early detection of ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(Suppl; abstr 5570).
   Google Scholar
• Dudas SP, Chatterjee M, Tainsky MA. Usage of cancer associated autoantibodies in the detection of disease. Cancer Biomark. 2010;6(5–6):257–270.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chatterjee M, Tainsky MA. Autoantibodies as biomarkers for ovarian cancer. Cancer Biomark. 2010;8(4–5):187–201.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson KS, Wong J, Vitonis A, et al. p53 autoantibodies as potential detection and prognostic biomarkers in serous ovarian cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2010;19(3):859–868.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsai-Turton M, Santillan A, Lu D, et al. p53 autoantibodies, cytokine levels and ovarian carcinogenesis. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;114(1):12–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahmed AA, Etemadmoghadam D, Temple J, et al. Driver mutations in TP53 are ubiquitous in high grade serous carcinoma of the ovary. J Pathol. 2010;221(1):49–56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blagosklonny MV. p53 from complexity to simplicity: mutant p53 stabilization, gain-of-function, and dominant-negative effect. Faseb J. 2000;14(13):1901–1907.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garziera M, Montico M, Bidoli E, et al. Prognostic role of serum antibody immunity to p53 oncogenic protein in ovarian cancer: a systematic review and a meta-analysis. Plos One. 2015;10(10):e0140351.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang W-L, Simmons A, Lu Z, et al. Abstract 2838: TP53 autoantibody can detect CA125 screen negative ovarian cancer cases and can be elevated prior to CA125 in preclinical ovarian cancer. Cancer Research. 2015;75(15 Supplement):2838–2838.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson KS, Cramer DW, Sibani S, et al. Autoantibody signature for the serologic detection of ovarian cancer. J Proteome Res. 2015;14(1):578–586.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karabudak AA, Hafner J, Shetty V, et al. Autoantibody biomarkers identified by proteomics methods distinguish ovarian cancer from non-ovarian cancer with various CA-125 levels. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2013;139(10):1757–1770.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy MA, O’Connell DJ, O’Kane SL, et al. Epitope presentation is an important determinant of the utility of antigens identified from protein arrays in the development of autoantibody diagnostic assays. J Proteomics. 2012;75(15):4668–4675.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang L, Yang J, Ng SK, et al. Autoantibody profiling to identify biomarkers of key pathogenic pathways in mucinous ovarian cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46(1):170–179.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gnjatic S, Ritter E, Buchler MW, et al. Seromic profiling of ovarian and pancreatic cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010;107(11):5088–5093.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gunawardana CG, Memari N, Diamandis EP. Identifying novel autoantibody signatures in ovarian cancer using high-density protein microarrays. Clin Biochem. 2009;42(4–5):426–429.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang S, Lu Z, Unruh AK, et al. Clinically relevant microRNAs in ovarian cancer. Mol Cancer Res. 2015;13(3):393–401.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prahm KP, Novotny GW, Hogdall C, et al. Current status on microRNAs as biomarkers for ovarian cancer. Apmis. 2016;124(5):337–355.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nakamura K, Sawada K, Yoshimura A, et al. Clinical relevance of circulating cell-free microRNAs in ovarian cancer. Mol Cancer. 2016;15(1):48.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pal MK, Jaiswar SP, Dwivedi VN, et al. a new and promising potential biomarker for diagnosis and prognosis of ovarian cancer. Cancer Biol Med. 2015;12(4):328–341.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Randavel C. Recherches sur la présence d’acide ribonucléique au niveau du chondriome dans divers organes de la souris blanche; technique, premières observations. C R Seances Soc Biol Fil. 1948;142(5–6):392.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Leon SA, Shapiro B, Sklaroff DM, et al. Free DNA in the serum of cancer patients and the effect of therapy. Cancer Res. 1977;37(3):646–650.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forshew T, Murtaza M, Parkinson C, et al. Noninvasive identification and monitoring of cancer mutations by targeted deep sequencing of plasma DNA. Sci Transl Med. 2012;4(136):136ra168.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murtaza M, Dawson SJ, Tsui DW, et al. Non-invasive analysis of acquired resistance to cancer therapy by sequencing of plasma DNA. Nature. 2013;497(7447):108–112.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bettegowda C, Sausen M, Leary RJ, et al. Detection of circulating tumor DNA in early- and late-stage human malignancies. Sci Transl Med. 2014;6(224):224ra224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pereira E, Camacho-Vanegas O, Anand S, et al. Personalized circulating tumor DNA biomarkers dynamically predict treatment response and survival in gynecologic cancers. Plos One. 2015;10(12):e0145754.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parkinson CA, Gale D, Piskorz AM, et al. Exploratory analysis of TP53 mutations in circulating tumour DNA as biomarkers of treatment response for patients with relapsed high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma: a retrospective study. Plos Med. 2016;13(12):e1002198.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kinde I, Bettegowda C, Wang Y, et al. Evaluation of DNA from the Papanicolaou test to detect ovarian and endometrial cancers. Sci Transl Med. 2013;5(167):167ra164.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• An T, Qin S, Xu Y, et al. Exosomes serve as tumour markers for personalized diagnostics owing to their important role in cancer metastasis. J Extracell Vesicles. 2015;4:27522.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Azmi AS, Bao B, Sarkar FH. Exosomes in cancer development, metastasis, and drug resistance: a comprehensive review. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2013;32(3–4):623–642.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kobayashi M, Salomon C, Tapia J, et al. Ovarian cancer cell invasiveness is associated with discordant exosomal sequestration of Let-7 miRNA and miR-200. J Transl Med. 2014;12:4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liang B, Peng P, Chen S, et al. Characterization and proteomic analysis of ovarian cancer-derived exosomes. J Proteomics. 2013;80:171–182.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang W, Peng P, Kuang Y, et al. Characterization of exosomes derived from ovarian cancer cells and normal ovarian epithelial cells by nanoparticle tracking analysis. Tumour Biol. 2016;37(3):4213–4221.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engell HC. Cancer cells in the circulating blood; a clinical study on the occurrence of cancer cells in the peripheral blood and in venous blood draining the tumour area at operation. Acta Chir Scand Suppl. 1955;201:1–70.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Alix-Panabieres C, Pantel K. Challenges in circulating tumour cell research. Nat Rev Cancer. 2014;14(9):623–631.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Potdar PD, Lotey NK. Role of circulating tumor cells in future diagnosis and therapy of cancer. Journal of Cancer Metastasis and Treatment. 2015;1(2):44–56.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhlmann JD, Wimberger P, Bankfalvi A, et al. ERCC1-positive circulating tumor cells in the blood of ovarian cancer patients as a predictive biomarker for platinum resistance. Clin Chem. 2014;60(10):1282–1289.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Obermayr E, Castillo-Tong DC, Pils D, et al. Molecular characterization of circulating tumor cells in patients with ovarian cancer improves their prognostic significance – a study of the OVCAD consortium. Gynecol Oncol. 2013;128(1):15–21.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim JH, Chung HH, Jeong MS, et al. One-step detection of circulating tumor cells in ovarian cancer using enhanced fluorescent silica nanoparticles. Int J Nanomedicine. 2013;8:2247–2257.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fleischer AC, Lyshchik A, Andreotti RF, et al. Advances in sonographic detection of ovarian cancer: depiction of tumor neovascularity with microbubbles. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194(2):343–348.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willmann JK, Lutz AM, Paulmurugan R, et al. Dual-targeted contrast agent for US assessment of tumor angiogenesis in vivo. Radiology. 2008;248(3):936–944.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson C, Adolphi NL, Butler KL, et al. Magnetic relaxometry with an atomic magnetometer and SQUID sensors on targeted cancer cells. J Magn Magn Mater. 2012;324(17):2613–2619.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adolphi NL, Butler KS, Lovato DM, et al. Imaging of Her2-targeted magnetic nanoparticles for breast cancer detection: comparison of SQUID-detected magnetic relaxometry and MRI. Contrast Media Mol Imaging. 2012;7(3):308–319.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McAlpine JN, El Hallani S, Lam SF, et al. Autofluorescence imaging can identify preinvasive or clinically occult lesions in fallopian tube epithelium: a promising step towards screening and early detection. Gynecol Oncol. 2011;120(3):385–392.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shahbazi-Gahrouei D, Abdolahi M. Detection of MUC1-expressing ovarian cancer by C595 monoclonal antibody-conjugated SPIONs using MR imaging. ScientificWorldJournal. 2013;2013:609151.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shahbazi-Gahrouei D, Abdolahi M. Superparamagnetic iron oxide-C595: potential MR imaging contrast agents for ovarian cancer detection. J Med Phys. 2013;38(4):198–204.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shanehsazzadeh S, Gruettner C, Lahooti A, et al. Monoclonal antibody conjugated magnetic nanoparticles could target MUC-1-positive cells in vitro but not in vivo. Contrast Media Mol I. 2015;10(3):225–236.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar