Cancer stem cells markers in ovarian cancer: Clinical and therapeutic significance (Review)
Królewska-Daszczyńska P., Wendlocha D., Smycz-Kubańska M., Stępień S., Mielczarek-Palacz A.
Narrative Review, published in Oncol Lett (2022) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Narrative Review
- Journal
- Oncol Lett (2022)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 36406181
- PMCID
- PMC9667454
- DOI
- 10.3892/ol.2022.13585
- Citations
- 18
Abstract (original English)
Ovarian cancer is a gynecological neoplasm that can be found in women, which, due to diagnostic difficulties, is often detected at advanced stages when treatment becomes a significant problem. Moreover, in a number of cases there is a cancer recurrence and resistance to standard chemotherapy treatment. It has been suggested that cancer stem cells (CSCs) that were not eradicated during therapy may be responsible for this. For this reason, effective therapeutic methods eliminating CSCs are being studied, such as therapy targeting CSCs markers. In addition, numerous studies have also drawn attention to the usefulness of CSCs markers in predicting disease progression and assessing patient's prognosis as well as their importance in the development of treatment resistance. The present review presented research on selected CSCs markers, which may be of significant prognostic and therapeutic importance in ovarian cancer.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.
Evidence level
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.