You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 21, Issue 4
  • Large ovarian cancer screening trial shows modest mortality reduction, but does not justify population-based ovarian cancer screening

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Diagnosis
Randomised controlled trial
Large ovarian cancer screening trial shows modest mortality reduction, but does not justify population-based ovarian cancer screening
  1. Nicolas Wentzensen
  1. Correspondence to : Dr Nicolas Wentzensen, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 7-E114; Bethesda, MD 20892, USA; wentzenn{at}mail.nih.gov

https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmed-2016-110411

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Commentary on: Jacobs IJ, Menon U, Ryan A, et al. Ovarian cancer screening and mortality in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2015;387:945–56.OpenUrlPubMed

    Context

    Ovarian cancer is the most fatal gynaecological malignancy. Most cancers are detected at advanced stages when therapeutic options are limited. Epithelial ovarian cancers are heterogeneous with respect to cell of origin, molecular pathways, morphological appearance, risk factor associations and survival.1 ,2 High-grade serous carcinomas are most common and have the worst prognosis. Currently, proposed ovarian cancer screening strategies include transvaginal ultrasound and CA-125 blood testing. In a previous randomised controlled trial evaluating these strategies, no mortality benefit was observed.3

    Methods

    In the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS), around 200 000 women aged 50–74 were enrolled and randomly assigned to …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors NW developed the concept and wrote the commentary.

    • Funding Intramural Research Program of the National Cancer Institute.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles