Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics

, Volume 300, Issue 1, pp 175–182 | Cite as

Prognostic factors and oncological outcomes of ovarian yolk sac tumors: a retrospective multicentric analysis of 99 cases

  • Gokhan BoyrazEmail author
  • Yasin Durmus
  • Irfan Cicin
  • Oguzhan Kuru
  • Esra Bostanci
  • Gunsu Kimyon Comert
  • Hanifi Sahin
  • Hulya Ayik
  • Isin Ureyen
  • Alper Karalok
  • Mehmet Mutlu Meydanli
  • Mehmet Coskun Salman
  • Nejat Ozgul
  • Anil Onan
  • Tayup Simsek
  • Kunter Yuce
  • Taner Turan
Gynecologic Oncology



To investigate the clinico-pathological prognostic factors and treatment outcomes in patients with ovarian yolk sac tumors (YST).


A multicenter, retrospective department database review was performed to identify patients with ovarian YST who underwent surgery between 2000 and 2017 at seven Gynecologic Oncology Centers in Turkey.


The study group consisted of 99 consecutive patients with a mean age of 23.9 years. While 52 patients had early stage (stage I–II) disease, the remaining 47 patients had advanced stage (stage III–IV) disease. The uterus was preserved in 74 (74.8%) of the cases. The absence of gross residual disease following surgery was achieved in 76.8% of the cases. Of the 54 patients with lymph node dissection (LND), lymph node metastasis was detected in 10 (18.5%) patients. Of the 99 patients, only 3 patients did not receive adjuvant therapy, and most of the patients (91.9%) received BEP (bleomycin, etoposide, cisplatin) chemotherapy. Disease recurred in 21 (21.2%) patients. The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in the entire cohort were 79.2% and 81.3%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, only residual disease following initial surgery was found to be significantly associated with DFS and OS in patients with ovarian YST (p = 0.026 and p = 0.001, respectively).


Our results demonstrate the significance of achieving no visible residual disease in patients with ovarian YST. Fertility-sparing approach for patients with no visible residual disease affected neither DFS nor OS. Although high lymphatic involvement rate was detected, the benefit of LND could not be demonstrated.


Ovarian cancer Yolk sac tumors Germ cell tumors Endodermal sinus tumors Residual disease 


Author contributions

GB: project development, data collection, manuscript writing. YD: project development, data management, manuscript writing. IC: manuscript writing, manuscript editing. OK: data collection, manuscript writing. EB: data collection. GKC: manuscript writing, manuscript editing. HS: data collection. HA: data collection. IU: manuscript writing, data management. AK: manuscript writing, data management. MMM: manuscript writing, data management. MCS: project development, data management, manuscript writing. NO: project development, data management, manuscript writing. AO: project development, data management, manuscript writing. TS: manuscript writing, manuscript editing. KY: manuscript writing, manuscript editing. TT: project development, data collection, manuscript writing, manuscript editing.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

There are no potential conflicts of interest to declare and no relevant sources of funding for this study.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.


  1. 1.
    Sagae S, Kudo R (2000) Surgery for germ cell tumors. Semin Surg Oncol 19(1):76–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tewari K, Cappuccini F, Disaia PJ, Berman ML, Manetta A, Kohler MF (2000) Malignant germ cell tumors of the ovary. Obstet Gynecol 95(1):128–133Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Smith HO, Berwick M, Verschraegen CF, Wiggins C, Lansing L, Muller CY et al (2006) Incidence and survival rates for female malignant germ cell tumors. Obstet Gynecol 107(5):1075–1085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fujita M, Inoue M, Tanizawa O, Minagawa J, Yamada T, Tani T (1993) Retrospective review of 41 patients with endodermal sinus tumor of the ovary. Int J Gynecol Cancer 3(5):329–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kurman RJ, Norris HJ (1976) Endodermal sinus tumor of the ovary: a clinical and pathologic analysis of 71 cases. Cancer 38(6):2404–2419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    de la Motte Rouge T, Pautier P, Genestie C, Rey A, Gouy S, Leary A et al (2016) Prognostic significance of an early decline in serum alpha-fetoprotein during chemotherapy for ovarian yolk sac tumors. Gynecol Oncol 142(3):452–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dällenbach P, Bonnefoi H, Pelte MF, Vlastos G (2006) Yolk sac tumours of the ovary: an update. Eur J Surg Oncol 32(10):1063–1075CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lai CH, Chang TC, Hsueh S, Wu TI, Chao A, Chou HH et al (2005) Outcome and prognostic factors in ovarian germ cell malignancies. Gynecol Oncol 96(3):784–791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Murugaesu N, Schmid P, Dancey G, Agarwal R, Holden L, McNeish I et al (2006) Malignant ovarian germ cell tumors: identification of novel prognostic markers and long-term outcome after multimodality treatment. J Clin Oncol 24(30):4862–4866CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nawa A, Obata N, Kikkawa F, Kawai M, Nagasaka T, Goto S et al (2001) Prognostic factors of patients with yolk sac tumors of the ovary. Am J Obstet Gynecol 184(6):1182–1188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kawai M, Kano T, Furuhashi Y, Mizuno K, Nakashima N, Hattori SE et al (1991) Prognostic factors in yolk sac tumors of the ovary. A clinicopathologic analysis of 29 cases. Cancer 67(1):184–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cicin I, Saip P, Guney N, Eralp Y, Ayan I, Kebudi R et al (2009) Yolk sac tumours of the ovary: evaluation of clinicopathological features and prognostic factors. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 146(2):210–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nasioudis D, Chapman-Davis E, Frey MK, Caputo TA, Holcomb K (2017) Management and prognosis of ovarian yolk sac tumors; an analysis of the National Cancer Data Base. Gynecol Oncol 147(2):296–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mitchell PL, Al-Nasiri N, A’Hern R, Fisher C, Horwich A, Pinkerton CR (1999) Treatment of nondysgerminomatous ovarian germ cell tumors: an analysis of 69 cases. Cancer 85(10):2232–2244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gershenson DM, Miller AM, Champion VL, Monahan PO, Zhao Q, Cella D et al (2007) Reproductive and sexual function after platinum-based chemotherapy in long-term ovarian germ cell tumor survivors: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. J Clin Oncol 25(19):2792–2797CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ayhan A, Taskiran C, Bozdag G, Altinbas S, Altinbas A, Yuce K et al (2005) Endodermal sinus tumor of the ovary: the Hacettepe University experience. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 123(2):230–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mahdi H, Swensen RE, Hanna R, Kumar S, Ali-Fehmi R, Semaan A et al (2011) Prognostic impact of lymphadenectomy in clinically early stage malignant germ cell tumour of the ovary. Br J Cancer 105(4):493–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    de La Motte Rouge T, Pautier P, Rey A, Duvillard P, Kerbrat P, Troalen F et al (2011) Prognostic factors in women treated for ovarian yolk sac tumour: a retrospective analysis of 84 cases. Eur J Cancer 47(2):175–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wang X, Ma Z, Li Y (2016) Ovarian yolk sac tumor: the experience of a regional cancer center. Int J Gynecol Cancer 26(5):884–891CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Morgan RJ Jr, Armstrong DK, Alvarez RD, Bakkum-Gamez JN, Behbakht K, Chen LM et al (2016) Ovarian cancer, version 1.2016, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 14(9):1134–1163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gershenson DM (1993) Update on malignant ovarian germ cell tumors. Cancer 71(4 Suppl):1581–1590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mangili G, Sigismondi C, Gadducci A, Cormio G, Scollo P, Tateo S et al (2011) Outcome and risk factors for recurrence in malignant ovarian germ cell tumors: a MITO-9 retrospective study. Int J Gynecol Cancer 21(8):1414–1421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Colombo N, Peiretti M, Garbi A, Carinelli S, Marini C, Sessa C (2012) Non-epithelial ovarian cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 23(Suppl 7):vii20–vii26Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Faure Conter C, Xia C, Gershenson D, Hurteau J, Covens A, Pashankar F et al (2018) Ovarian yolk sac tumors; does age matter? Int J Gynecol Cancer 28(1):77–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Gynecologic OncologyEtlik Zubeyde Hanim Women’s Health Teaching and Research HospitalAnkaraTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Medical OncologyTrakya University HospitalEdirneTurkey
  3. 3.Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of MedicineHacettepe UniversityAnkaraTurkey
  4. 4.Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Faculty of MedicineGazi UniversityAnkaraTurkey
  5. 5.Department of Gynecologic OncologyZekai Tahir Burak Women’s Health, Education and Research HospitalAnkaraTurkey
  6. 6.Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Faculty of MedicineAkdeniz UniversityAntalyaTurkey
  7. 7.Antalya Education and Research Hospital Faculty of MedicineUniversity of Health Sciences (Antalya)AntalyaTurkey

Personalised recommendations