• 1
    Baak JP, Delemarre JF, Langley FA, Talerman A. Grading ovarian tumors. Evaluation of decision making by different pathologists. Anal Quant Histol. 1986; 8: 349-353.
  • 2
    Bertelsen K, Holund B, Anderson E. Reproducibility and prognostic value of histologic type and grade in early epithelial ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 1993; 3: 72-79.
  • 3
    Shimizu Y, Kamoi S, Amada S, Akiyama F, Silverberg SG. Toward the development of a universal grading system for ovarian epithelial carcinoma: testing of a proposed system in a series of 461 patients with uniform treatment and follow-up. Cancer. 1998; 82: 893-901.
  • 4
    Winter WE III, Maxwell GL, Tian C, et al. Prognostic factors for stage III epithelial ovarian cancer: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25: 3621-3627.
  • 5
    Malpica A, Deavers MT, Lu K, et al. Grading ovarian serous carcinoma using a 2-tier system. Am J Surg Pathol. 2004; 28: 496-504.
  • 6
    Malpica A, Deavers MT, Tornos C, et al. Interobserver and intraobserver variability of a 2-tier system for grading ovarian serous carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2007; 31: 1168-1174.
  • 7
    Gershenson DM, Sun CC, Lu KH, et al. Clinical behavior of stage II-IV low-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary. Obstet Gynecol. 2006; 2: 361-368.
  • 8
    Ozols RF, Bundy BN, Greer BE, et al. Phase III trial of carboplatin and paclitaxel compared with cisplatin and paclitaxel in patients with optimally resected stage III ovarian cancer: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol. 2003; 17: 3194-3200.
  • 9
    Odicino F, Pecorelli S, Zigliani L, Creasman WT. History of the FIGO cancer staging system. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2008; 101: 205-210.
  • 10
    Fink A. How to Manage, Analyze, and Interpret Survey Data. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2002.
  • 11
    Collett D. Modeling Survival Data in Medical Research. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Chapman & Hall/CRC; 2003.
  • 12
    Stalsberg H, Abeler V, Blom GP, Bostad L, Skarland E, Westqaard G. Observer variation in histologic classification of malignant and borderline ovarian tumors. Hum Pathol. 1988; 19: 1030-1035.
  • 13
    Ishioka S, Sagae S, Terasawa K, et al. Comparison of the usefulness between a new universal grading system for epithelial ovarian cancer and the FIGO grading system. Gynecol Oncol. 2003; 89: 447-452.
  • 14
    Seidman JD, Horkayne-Szakaly I, Cosin JA, et al. Testing of 2 binary grading systems for FIGO stage III serous carcinoma of the ovary and peritoneum. Gynecol Oncol. 2005; 103: 703-708.
  • 15
    Bonome T, Lee JY, Park DC, et al. Expression profiling of serous low malignant potential, low-grade, and high-grade tumors of the ovary. Cancer Res. 2005; 65: 10602-10612.
  • 16
    Jazaeri AA, Lu K, Schmandt R, et al. Molecular determinants of tumor differentiation in papillary serous ovarian carcinoma. Mol Carcinog. 2003; 36: 53-59.
  • 17
    Meinhold-Heerlein I, Bauerschlag D, Hilpert F, et al. Molecular and prognostic distinction between serous ovarian carcinomas of varying grade and malignant potential. Oncogene. 2005; 24: 1053-1065.
  • 18
    Sieben NL, Macropoulos P, Roemen GM, et al. In ovarian neoplasms, BRAF, but not KRAS, mutations and restricted to low-grade serous tumours. J Pathol. 2004; 202: 336-340.
  • 19
    Singer G, Oldt R III, Cohen Y, et al. Mutations in BRAF and KRAS characterize the development of low-grade ovarian serous carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003; 95: 484-486.
  • 20
    Singer G, Shih IeM, Truskinovsky A, Umudum H, Kurman RJ. Mutational analysis of K-ras segregates ovarian serous carcinomas into 2 types: invasive MPSC (low-grade tumor) and conventional serous carcinoma (high-grade tumor). Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2003; 22: 37-41.
  • 21
    Vang R, Shih IeM, Salani R, Sugar E, Ayhan A, Kurman R. Subdividing ovarian and peritoneal serous carcinoma into moderately differentiated and poorly differentiated does not have biologic validity based on molecular genetic and in vitro drug resistance data. Am J Surg Pathol. 2008; 32: 1667-1674.
  • 22
    O'Neill CJ, Deavers MT, Malpica A, Foster H, McCluggage WG. An immunohistochemical comparison between low-grade and high-grade ovarian serous carcinomas: significantly higher expression of p53, MIB1, BCL2, HER-2/neu, and C-KIT in high-grade neoplasms. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005; 29: 1034-1041.
  • 23
    Singer G, Storh R, Cope L, et al. Patterns of p53 mutations separate ovarian serous borderline tumors and low- and high-grade carcinomas and provide support for a new model of ovarian carcinogenesis: a mutational analysis with immunohistochemical correlation. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005; 29: 218-224.
  • 24
    Wong KK, Lu KH, Malpica A, et al. Significantly greater expression of ER, PR and ECAD in advanced-stage low-grade ovarian serous carcinoma as revealed by immunohistochemical analysis. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2007; 26: 404-409.