Case presentation: A 33-year-old female presented with recurrent hypoglycemia. Endogenous hyperinsulinemia was confirmed by a prolonged fast, however serial imaging was negative. Incidental finding of an ovarian mass gave rise to the suspicion of an insulin-producing ovarian tumor. Subsequent multimodality pancreatic imaging remained negative, requiring more invasive investigations. The tumor was localized by specialized arteriography using calcium stimulation to support the diagnosis of an insulinoma. However, repeated negative imaging led to further delays in definitive management, with worsening hypoglycemia. The surgery was finally performed three years after the initial presentation with successful removal of the tumor using intra-operative ultrasound.

Clinical discussion: It is important to emphasize that preoperative radiological imaging is useful to localize pancreatic lesions. However, most insulinomas could only be detected intraoperatively. The absence of suggestive radiological evidence should not deter surgeons from proceeding with definitive surgical intervention.

OBJECTIVE: To obtain profile, accuracy and concordance rates of ovarian intraoperative consultation in Dr. Soetomo Hospital Surabaya, a teaching hospital in Indonesia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Observational retrospective study, using data from archives of intraoperative consultation reports in Dr. Soetomo General Hospital Surabaya within 2012-2016 period. There were 734 cases of ovarian intraoperative consultations, all then proceed to permanent sections. Accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity rates were calculated.

RESULTS: Overall accuracy was 89.5%. Sensitivity for benign, borderline and malignant cases were 98.49%, 71.19% and 84.01%, respectively. Specificity were 90.32%, 95.11% and 98.72%, respectively.

METHODS: A nested case-control study in nonsmoking postmenopausal women (334 cases, 417 controls) was conducted within the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort. Unconditional logistic regression models were used to estimate ORs and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between HbAA, HbGA, HbAA+HbGA, and HbGA/HbAA and EOC and invasive serous EOC risk.

RESULTS: No overall associations were observed between biomarkers of acrylamide exposure analyzed in quintiles and EOC risk; however, positive associations were observed between some middle quintiles of HbGA and HbAA+HbGA. Elevated but nonstatistically significant ORs for serous EOC were observed for HbGA and HbAA+HbGA (ORQ5vsQ1, 1.91; 95% CI, 0.96-3.81 and ORQ5vsQ1, 1.90; 95% CI, 0.94-3.83, respectively); however, no linear dose-response trends were observed.

CONCLUSION: This EPIC nested case-control study failed to observe a clear association between biomarkers of acrylamide exposure and the risk of EOC or invasive serous EOC.

METHODS AND FINDINGS: Genetic instruments to proxy 12 risk factors were constructed by identifying single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that were robustly (P < 5 × 10-8) and independently associated with each respective risk factor in previously reported genome-wide association studies. These risk factors included genetic liability to 3 factors (endometriosis, polycystic ovary syndrome, type 2 diabetes) scaled to reflect a 50% higher odds liability to disease. We obtained summary statistics for the association of these SNPs with risk of overall and histotype-specific invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (22,406 cases; 40,941 controls) and low malignant potential tumours (3,103 cases; 40,941 controls) from the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium (OCAC). The OCAC dataset comprises 63 genotyping project/case-control sets with participants of European ancestry recruited from 14 countries (US, Australia, Belarus, Germany, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Canada, Poland, UK, Spain, Netherlands, and Sweden). SNPs were combined into multi-allelic inverse-variance-weighted fixed or random effects models to generate effect estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Three complementary sensitivity analyses were performed to examine violations of MR assumptions: MR-Egger regression and weighted median and mode estimators. A Bonferroni-corrected P value threshold was used to establish strong evidence (P < 0.0042) and suggestive evidence (0.0042 < P < 0.05) for associations. In MR analyses, there was strong or suggestive evidence that 2 of the 12 risk factors were associated with invasive epithelial ovarian cancer and 8 of the 12 were associated with 1 or more invasive epithelial ovarian cancer histotypes. There was strong evidence that genetic liability to endometriosis was associated with an increased risk of invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (odds ratio [OR] per 50% higher odds liability: 1.10, 95% CI 1.06-1.15; P = 6.94 × 10-7) and suggestive evidence that lifetime smoking exposure was associated with an increased risk of invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (OR per unit increase in smoking score: 1.36, 95% CI 1.04-1.78; P = 0.02). In analyses examining histotypes and low malignant potential tumours, the strongest associations found were between height and clear cell carcinoma (OR per SD increase: 1.36, 95% CI 1.15-1.61; P = 0.0003); age at natural menopause and endometrioid carcinoma (OR per year later onset: 1.09, 95% CI 1.02-1.16; P = 0.007); and genetic liability to polycystic ovary syndrome and endometrioid carcinoma (OR per 50% higher odds liability: 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.96; P = 0.002). There was little evidence for an association of genetic liability to type 2 diabetes, parity, or circulating levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D and sex hormone binding globulin with ovarian cancer or its subtypes. The primary limitations of this analysis include the modest statistical power for analyses of risk factors in relation to some less common ovarian cancer histotypes (low grade serous, mucinous, and clear cell carcinomas), the inability to directly examine the association of some ovarian cancer risk factors that did not have robust genetic variants available to serve as proxies (e.g., oral contraceptive use, hormone replacement therapy), and the assumption of linear relationships between risk factors and ovarian cancer risk.