Netupitant and palonosetron (NEPA): a winning team in the race for the optimal treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting?

ovarian serous borderline tumors. Cancer 1999; 85: 905–911. 17. Papadimitriou DS, Martin-Hirsch P, Kitchener HC et al. Recurrent borderline tumors after conservative treatment management in women wishing to retain their fertility. Eur J Gynecol Oncol 1999; 20: 94–97. 18. Heintz AP, Odicino F, Maisonneuve P et al. Carcinoma of the ovary. FIGO 6th Annual Report on the Results and Treatment in Gynecological Cancer. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2006; 95S: 161–192. 19. Park JY, Kim DY, Kim JH et al. Micropapillary pattern in serous borderline ovarian tumors: does it matter? Gynecol Oncol 2011; 123: 511–516. 20. Avril S, Hahn E, Specht K et al. Histopathologic features of ovarian borderline tumors are not predictive of clinical outcome. Gynecol Oncol 2012; 127: 516–524. 21. Khunamornpong S, Settakorn J, Sukpan K et al. Mucinous tumor of low malignant potential (‘borderline’ or ‘atypical proliferative’ tumor) of the ovary: a study of 171 cases with the assessment of intraepithelial carcinoma and microinvasion. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2011; 30: 218–230. 22. Uzan C, Nikpayam M, Ribassin-Majed L et al. Influence of histological subtypes on the risk of an invasive recurrence in a large series of stage I borderline ovarian tumor including 191 conservative treatments. Ann Oncol 2014; 25: 1312–1319. 23. Lee KR, Castrillon DH, Nucci MR. Pathologic findings in eight cases of ovarian serous borderline tumors, three with foci of serous carcinoma, that preceded death or morbidity from invasive carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2001; 20: 329–334. 24. Trillsch F, Mahner S, Woelber L et al. Age-dependent differences in borderline ovarian tumours (BOT) regarding clinical characteristics and outcome: results from a subanalysis of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynaekologische Onkologie (AGO) ROBOT Study. Ann Oncol 2014; 25: 1320–1327.