Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Jul 30:15:1643590.
doi: 10.3389/fonc.2025.1643590. eCollection 2025.

Demographics, risk factors associated with malignant progression, and pregnancy outcomes of hydatidiform mole: A retrospective cohort study in Shanghai, China

Tingting Zhu #  1   2   3 , Guohua Zhu #  1   2   3 , Jiahui Ma  2   3   4 , Xiaojuan Yu  2   3   4 , Tingting Chen  2   3   5 , Xiang Tao  2   3   5 , Li Sun  2   3   6 , Xin Lu  1   2   3 , Yan Du  2   3   4
Affiliations

Demographics, risk factors associated with malignant progression, and pregnancy outcomes of hydatidiform mole: A retrospective cohort study in Shanghai, China

Tingting Zhu et al. Front Oncol. .

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to clarify the demographics, evaluate risk factors associated with malignant progression, and assess pregnancy outcomes among patients with hydatidiform mole (HM) using a large, retrospective cohort study in Shanghai.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study included patients with pathologically confirmed HM from 2019 to 2023. Descriptive analyses were performed to describe the demographic characteristics, progression to postmolar gestational trophoblastic neoplasia (pGTN), and reproductive outcomes of patients. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to evaluate risk factors and develop predictive models for pGTN.

Results: Of 506 patients with HM, the average age and gestational age at diagnosis were approximately 33 years and 10 weeks, respectively. During follow-up, 42 patients (8.3%) progressed to pGTN, all achieved complete response after treatment. Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that significant risk factors for progression to pGTN included pathological type and maximum diameter of lesions by ultrasound pre-evacuation (p < 0.05 for both). A predictive model incorporating age, β-hCG ratio (before/after evacuation), and ultrasound characteristics (uterine/lesion ratio) demonstrated optimal performance and goodness of fit. Among the 304 patients who intended to conceive, 254 had documented reproductive outcomes (follow-up rate: 83.6%). Of these, 163 patients (64.2%) achieved successful re-pregnancy, including 131 (80.4%) livebirths.

Conclusion: Our study provides a comprehensive update on the demographics, risk factors associated with progression to pGTN, and reproductive outcomes of patients with HM in Shanghai. The clinical application of the predictive model needs to be further verified in a longitudinal setting.

Keywords: demographics; hydatidiform mole; postmolar gestational trophoblastic neoplasia; pregnancy outcome; risk factor.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart of the study population. CHM, complete hydatidiform mole; GTD, gestational trophoblastic disease; GTN, gestational trophoblastic neoplasia; HM, hydatidiform mole; PHM, partial hydatidiform mole; pGTN, postmolar gestational trophoblastic neoplasia.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Area under the ROC curve (AUC) of Model 1-4.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Re-pregnancy rate. (A) Patients with fertility intention and follow-up information (n=254); (B) Spontaneous remission group (n=285) vs. pGTN group (n=19), including loss of follow-up (censored).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Florea A, Caba L, Grigore AM, Balahura AM, Păun N, Uscoiu G, et al. Hydatidiform mole-between chromosomal abnormality, uniparental disomy and monogenic variants: A narrative review. Life (Basel). (2023) 13:2314. doi: 10.3390/life13122314, PMID: - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Colgan TJ, Chang MC, Nanji S, Kolomietz E. A reappraisal of the incidence of placental hydatidiform mole using selective molecular genotyping. Int J Gynecol Cancer. (2016) 26:1345–50. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000754, PMID: - DOI - PubMed
    1. Eysbouts YK, Bulten J, Ottevanger PB, Thomas CM, Ten Kate-Booij MJ, van Herwaarden AE, et al. Trends in incidence for gestational trophoblastic disease over the last 20 years in a population-based study. Gynecologic Oncol. (2016) 140:70–5. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.11.014, PMID: - DOI - PubMed
    1. Joneborg U, Folkvaljon Y, Papadogiannakis N, Lambe M, Marions L. Temporal trends in incidence and outcome of hydatidiform mole: a retrospective cohort study. Acta Oncologica. (2018) 57:1094–9. doi: 10.1080/0284186X.2018.1438653, PMID: - DOI - PubMed
    1. Seckl MJ, Sebire NJ, Berkowitz RS. Gestational trophoblastic disease. Lancet. (2010) 376:717–29. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60280-2, PMID: - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources