Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics

, Volume 289, Issue 2, pp 241–246 | Cite as

Revisiting the pathogenesis of ovarian cancer: the central role of the fallopian tube

  • Johannes DietlEmail author



Among all gynecological malignancies, ovarian cancer is associated with the highest rate of mortality. Recent findings now propose a pivotal role for the fallopian tube during ovarian cancer pathogenesis.

New insights

Until recently, ovarian cancer was thought to derive from the ovarian surface epithelium. Nevertheless, attempts to define a precursor lesion from this tissue failed. Instead, prophylactic surgery performed on BRCA mutation carriers and subsequent histological analyses revealed a characteristic pre-neoplastic alteration at the fimbriated end of the fallopian tubes, the so-called serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma (STIC). By morphology and molecular genetics, STIC was found to resemble serous ovarian cancer. As STIC can also be detected in >60 % of BRCA-unrelated serous ovarian carcinomas, it is now considered to be the precursor of the most common ovarian cancer subtype.


Based on this hypothesis, a salpingectomy, i.e., the removal of the post-reproductive fallopian tubes may remove the actual site of tumorigenesis and thereby prevent spreading over the ovarian surface and throughout the peritoneum. Consequently, prophylactic salpingectomy might protect against serous ovarian cancer. Moreover, the procedure interrupts the connection between the uterine cavity and the lesser pelvis. Hence, it prevents the ascension of exfoliated endometrial cells which will likely reduce the incidence of endometrioid and clear cell ovarian cancers. Increasing evidence suggests that serous ovarian cancer originates from the fimbriated distal end of the fallopian tube, whereas the ovary gets only involved at a later stage.


Given the lack of suitable screening or early detection strategies for ovarian cancer, post-reproductive salpingectomy deserves serious consideration as a prophylactic intervention that will likely confer significant protection against an often deadly disease.


Ovarian cancer Pathogenesis Fallopian tube STIC Salpingectomy 



I would like to thank J. Wischhusen for critical reading of this manuscript.

Conflict of interest

I herewith declare that I have no potential conflict of interest relating to the content of this manuscript.


  1. 1.
    Dietl J, Marzusch K (1993) Ovarian surface epithelium and human ovarian cancer: a review. Gynecol Obstet Invest 35:129–135PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vaughan S, Coward JI, Bast RC et al (2011) Rethinking ovarian cancer: recommendations for improving outcomes. Nat Rev Cancer 11:719–725PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Häusler S, Keller A, Chandran AP et al (2010) A new approach for ovarian cancer screening -characterization of miRNA profiles in peripheral blood. Br J Cancer 103:693–700PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Seidman JD, Cho KR, Ronnett BM, Kurman RJ (2011) Surface epithelial tumors of the ovary. In: Kurman RJ, Ellenson LH, Ronnett BM (eds) Blaustein’s pathology of the female genital tract, 6th edn. pp 679–784Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    le Shih M, Kurman RJ (2004) Ovarian tumorigenesis: a proposed model based on morphological and molecular genetic analysis. Am J Pathol 164:1511–1518PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Blaustein A (1984) Peritoneal mesothelium and ovarian surface cells – shared characteristics. Int J Gynecol Pathol 3:361–375PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Marquez RT, Baggerly KA, Patterson AP et al (2005) Patterns of gene expression in different histotypes of epithelial ovarian cancer correlate with those in normal fallopian tube, endometrium, and colon. Clin Cancer Res 11:6116–6126PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    McLaughlin JR, Risch HA, Lubinski J et al (2007) Reproductive risk factors for ovarian cancer in carriers of BRCA1 oder BRCA2 mutations: a case–control study. Lancet Oncol 8:26–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fathalla MF (1971) Incessant ovulation – a factor in ovarian neoplasia? Lancet 2:163PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Johnson PA, Gilles JR (2013) The hen as a model of ovarian cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 13:432–436PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kuhn E, Kurman RJ, le Shih M (2012) Ovarian cancer is an imported disease: fact or fiction? Curr Obstet Gynecol Rep 1:1–9PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Auersperg N (2011) The origin of ovarian carcinomas: a unifying hypothesis. Int J Gynecol Pathol 30:12–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Flesken-Nikitin A, Hwang C-I, Cheng C-Y et al (2013) Ovarian surface epithelium at the junction area contains cancer-prone stem cell niche. Nature 495:241–245PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Boyd C, McCluggage WG (2012) Low-grade ovarian serous neoplasms (low-grade serous carcinoma and serous borderline tumor) associated with high-grade serous carcinoma or undifferentiated carcinoma: report of a series of cases of an unusual phenomenon. Am J Surg Pathol 36:368–375PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dubeau L (2008) The cell of origin of ovarian epithelial tumors. Lancet Oncol 9:1191–1197PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Piek JM, van Diest PJ, Zweemer RP et al (2001) Dysplastic changes in prophylactically removed fallopian tubes of women predisposed to developing ovarian cancer. J Pathol 195:451–456PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Przybycin CG, Kurman RJ, Ronnett BM et al (2010) Are all pelvic (non uterina) serous carcinomas of tubal origin? Am J Surg Pathol 34:1407–1416PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Piek JM, Verheijen RM, Kenemans P et al (2003) BRCA1/2-related ovarian cancers are of tubal origin: a hypothesis. Gynecol Oncol 90:491PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kindelberger DM, Lee Y, Miron A et al (2007) Intraepithelial carcinoma of the fimbria and pelvic serous carcinoma: evidence for a causal relationship. Am J Surg Pathol 31:161–169PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kuhn E, Kurman RJ, Vang R et al (2012) TP53 mutations in serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma and concurrent pelvic high-grade serous carcinoma – evidence supporting the clonal relationship of the two lesions. J Pathol 226:421–426PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fleming JS, Beaugie CR, Hariv I et al (2006) Incessant ovulation, inflammation and epithelial ovarian carcinogenesis: revisiting old hypothesis. Mol Cell Endocrinol 247:4–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    La Vecchia C (2006) Oral contraceptives and ovarian cancer: an update, 1998-2004. Eur J Cancer Prev 15:117–124PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Murdoch WJ (2005) Carcinogenic potential of ovulatory genotoxicity. Biol Reprod 73:586–590PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Veras E, Mao TL, Ayhan A et al (2009) Cystic and adenofibromatous clear cell carcinomas of the ovary: distinctive tumors that differ in their pathogenesis and behaviour: a clinicopathologic analysis of 122 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 33:844–853PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wiegand KC, Shah SP, Al-Agha OM et al (2010) ARID1A mutations in endometriosis-associated ovarian carcinomas. N Engl J Med 363:1532–1543PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yamamoto S, Tsuda H, Takano M et al (2011) PIK3CA mutation is an early event in the development of endometriosis-associated ovarian clear cell adenocarcinomas. J Pathol 225:189–194PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hull ML, Escareno CR, Godsland JM et al (2008) Endometrial–peritoneal interactions during endometriotic lesion establishment. Am J Pathol 173:700–715PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sieh W, Salvador S, McGuire V et al (2013) Tubal ligation and risk of ovarian cancer subtypes: a pooled analysis of case–control studies. Int J Epidemiol 42:579–589PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Vang R, Shih le-M, Kurman RJ (2013) Fallopian tube precursors of ovarian low- and high-grade serous neplasms. Histopathology 62:44–58PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Dietl J, Wischhusen J (2011) The forgotten fallopian tube. Nat Rev Cancer 11:227PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Dietl J, Wischhusen J, Häusler FS (2011) The post-reproductive fallopian tube: better removed? Hum Reprod 26:2918–2924PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Crum CP, McKeon FD, Xian W (2011) BRCA, the oviduct and the space and time continium of pelvic serous carcinogenesis. Int J Gynecol Cancer 22:S29–S34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lorusso D, Di Rocco R, Mancini M, Raspagliesi F (2013) High-grade serous tumor arising from fallopian tube in a BRCA mutation carrier after prophylactic oophorectomy. Case Rep Oncol 6:21–24PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Greene MH, Mai PL, Schwartz PE (2011) Does bilateral salpingectomy with ovarian retention warrant consideration as a temporary bridge to risk-reducing bilateral oophorectomy in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers? Am J Obstet Gynecol 204:19e-1–6Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Anderson CK, Wallace S, Guiahi M et al (2013) Risk-reducing salpingectomy as preventative strategy for pelvic serous cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 23:417–421PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kwon JS, Tinker A, Pansegrau G et al (2013) Prophylactic salpingectomy and delayed oophorectomy as an alternative for BRCA mutation carriers. Obstet Gynecol 121:14–24PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Parker WH, Broder MS, Chang E et al (2009) Ovarian conservation at the time of hysterectomy and long-term health outcomes in the nurses’ health study. Obstet Gynecol 113:1027–1037PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Morelli M, Venturella R, Mocciaro R et al (2013) Prophylactic salpingectomy in premenopausal low-risk women for ovarian cancer: primum non nocere. Gynecol Oncol 129:448–451PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gao FF, Bhargara R, Yang H, et al. Clinicopathologic study of serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma with invasive carcinoma: is serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma a reliable feature for determining the organ of origin? Hum Pathol. 2013 (Epub ahead of print)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Westgren M (2012) Prevention of ovarian cancer – let’s do something. AOGS 91:1009–1010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Erickson BK, Conner MG, Landon CN: The role of the fallopian tube in the origin of ovarian cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013 (Epub ahead of print)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Collins JM, Domchek SM, Huntsman DG, Mitchell G (2011) The tubal hypothesis of ovarian cancer: caution needed. Lancet Oncol 12:1089–1091PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynaecologyUniversity of Würzburg, School of MedicineWürzburgGermany

Personalised recommendations