{"database":"biostudies-literature","file_versions":[],"scores":null,"additional":{"omics_type":["Unknown"],"volume":["5(12)"],"submitter":["Kobel M"],"pubmed_abstract":["<h4>Background</h4>Although it has long been appreciated that ovarian carcinoma subtypes (serous, clear cell, endometrioid, and mucinous) are associated with different natural histories, most ovarian carcinoma biomarker studies and current treatment protocols for women with this disease are not subtype specific. With the emergence of high-throughput molecular techniques, distinct pathogenetic pathways have been identified in these subtypes. We examined variation in biomarker expression rates between subtypes, and how this influences correlations between biomarker expression and stage at diagnosis or prognosis.<h4>Methods and findings</h4>In this retrospective study we assessed the protein expression of 21 candidate tissue-based biomarkers (CA125, CRABP-II, EpCam, ER, F-Spondin, HE4, IGF2, "],"journal":["PLoS medicine"],"pagination":["e232"],"full_dataset_link":["https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC2592352"],"repository":["biostudies-literature"],"pubmed_title":["Ovarian carcinoma subtypes are different diseases: implications for biomarker studies."],"pmcid":["PMC2592352"],"pubmed_authors":["Kobel M","Mehl E","Gilks CB","Rajput A","Santos J","Prentice LM","Boyd N","Huntsman D","Palmer C","Ionescu DN","Miller D","Bowen NJ","Kalloger SE","Swenerton K","McKinney S","Leung S"],"additional_accession":[]},"is_claimable":false,"name":"Ovarian carcinoma subtypes are different diseases: implications for biomarker studies.","description":"<h4>Background</h4>Although it has long been appreciated that ovarian carcinoma subtypes (serous, clear cell, endometrioid, and mucinous) are associated with different natural histories, most ovarian carcinoma biomarker studies and current treatment protocols for women with this disease are not subtype specific. With the emergence of high-throughput molecular techniques, distinct pathogenetic pathways have been identified in these subtypes. We examined variation in biomarker expression rates between subtypes, and how this influences correlations between biomarker expression and stage at diagnosis or prognosis.<h4>Methods and findings</h4>In this retrospective study we assessed the protein expression of 21 candidate tissue-based biomarkers (CA125, CRABP-II, EpCam, ER, F-Spondin, HE4, IGF2, ","dates":{"release":"2008-01-01T00:00:00Z","publication":"2008 Dec","modification":"2025-04-26T21:05:21.921Z","creation":"2019-03-27T00:19:35Z"},"accession":"S-EPMC2592352","cross_references":{"pubmed":["19053170"],"doi":["10.1371/journal.pmed.0050232"]}}