Clinical trials of population screening
Two large, well-conducted randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of population screening for ovarian cancer reported no statistically significant mortality benefit at approximately 11-12 years follow-up using a priori analyses.
From 1993 to 2001, the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial (PLCO) enrolled over 70,000 women in the United States aged 55 to 74 years, who were randomised 1:1 to either a no-screening control group or to screening. The screening tests were CA125 (single threshold) plus TVUS annually for 4 years, followed by annual CA125 (single threshold) only for up to a further 2 years. No statistically significant mortality benefit or stage shift was associated with screening after a median of 12.4 years follow up,12 but 14.8 false positive surgeries were conducted per screen-detected cancer. Extended follow-up to a median of 14.7 years also found no mortality benefit.13 Post hoc analysis found no mortality or stage shift benefits with screening for the more aggressive Type II cancers.14
From 2001-2005, the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS) enrolled over 200,000 post-menopausal women aged 50-74 years, who were randomised 2:1:1 to no screening or to one of two annual screening strategies: TVUS alone or ROCA triage. The latter involved CA125 evaluation using the Risk of Ovarian Cancer Algorithm (ROCA), with the results determining whether or not women received additional testing, which could be either repeat CA125 (Level I) or CA125 and TVUS (Level II).
After a median follow up of 11.1 years, a stage shift was observed in the ROCA triage screening group, with significantly more diagnoses made at Stages I and II compared with the control group.15 No mortality benefit, however, was associated with screening when analysed using the pre-specified Cox proportional hazard model using data up to 2014.
When analysed post hoc with the weighted log-rank test used in the PLCO trial, which accounts for the expected delay in mortality outcomes, a significant mortality benefit was noted for both screening groups compared with the no-screening group. However, the validity of the post hoc analyses of UKCTOCS has been challenged.16-19 The lead investigator of this trial has commented that ‘for the time being, in the absence of unequivocal evidence of a mortality benefit, large-scale population-based ovarian cancer screening programmes are not justified’.20
When classifying borderline tumours as false positives, the rate of false-positive surgeries per screen-detected cancer was 14.8 for TVUS (which is higher than the generally accepted rate of 9 per screen-detected ovarian cancer) and 2.9 for ROCA triage.15 ROCA triage was also more sensitive than TVUS but, at 74- 84%, remained below what might be acceptable for a screening test.15 No analyses by tumour type have yet been reported for this trial. Longer term follow-up of UKCTOCS is expected after further censorship in 2018 and 2024, with reporting in 2020.
Longer term follow-up of UKCTOCS is expected after further censorship in 2018 and 2024, with reporting in 2020.
2021 evidence update: Long-term follow-up of the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS)
The median follow-up was 16.3 years. Within the ROCA triage screening group there was a 47.2% increase in stage I and 24.5% decrease in stage IV ovarian cancers detected compared to no screening. There was no evidence of a change in stage distribution in the TVUS group compared with the no screening group. No significant reduction in mortality was observed in either the ROCA triage or TVUS groups compared with no screening. The authors concluded that given screening did not significantly reduce ovarian cancer deaths, general population screening could not be recommended. The importance of having disease-specific mortality as the primary outcome in ovarian cancer screening trials was emphasised.
Reference: Menon U, Gentry-Maharaj A, Burnell M, Singh N, Ryan A, Karpinskyj C, et al. Ovarian cancer population screening and mortality after long-term follow-up in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS): a randomised controlled trial. The Lancet. 2021 May; 387(10290): 2182-2193.
References
- eviQ. Risk management for a female BRCA1 mutation carrier https://www.eviq.org.au/cancer-genetics/adult/risk-management/3814-brca1-or-brca2-risk-management-female
- eviQ. Risk management for a female BRCA2 mutation carrier https://www.eviq.org.au/cancer-genetics/adult/risk-management/3814-brca1-or-brca2-risk-management-female
- Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Cancer data in Australia. AIHW. Cat. no. CAN 122. Canberra. 2018 [accessed January 2019].
- Anuradha S, Webb PM, Blomfield P, Brand AH, Friedlander M, Leung Y, et al. Survival of Australian women with invasive epithelial ovarian cancer: a population-based study. Med J Aust. 2014;201(5):283-8.
- Wilson JMG, Jungner G. Principles and practice of screening for disease. World Health Organisation. Public Health Paper Number 34. Geneva. 1968
- Australian Health Ministers' Advisory Council. Population based screening framework. AHMAC. Community Care and Population Health Principal Committee: Standing Committee on Screening. Australian Government Department of Health. 2016. Available from: http://www.cancerscreening.gov.au/internet/screening/publishing.nsf/Content/16AE0B0524753EE9CA257CEE0000B5D7/$File/Final%20Population%20Based%20Screening%20Framework%202016.pdf
- National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine. Ovarian Cancers: Evolving Paradigms in Research and Care. NASEM. Washington (DC), National Academies Press (US). 2016
- Koshiyama M, Matsumura N, Konishi I. Recent concepts of ovarian carcinogenesis: type I and type II. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:934261.
- Cohen JG, White M, Cruz A, Farias-Eisner R. In 2014, can we do better than CA125 in the early detection of ovarian cancer? World journal of biological chemistry. 2014;5(3):286-300.
- Lowry KP, Lee SI. Imaging and Screening of Ovarian Cancer. Radiol Clin North Am. 2017;55(6):1251-9.
- van Nagell JR, Jr., Hoff JT. Transvaginal ultrasonography in ovarian cancer screening: current perspectives. Int J Women Health. 2014;6:25-33.
- Buys SS, Partridge E, Black A, Johnson CC, Lamerato L, Isaacs C, et al. Effect of screening on ovarian cancer mortality: the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Randomized Controlled Trial. Jama. 2011;305(22):2295-303.
- Pinsky PF, Yu K, Kramer BS, Black A, Buys SS, Partridge E, et al. Extended mortality results for ovarian cancer screening in the PLCO trial with median 15years follow-up. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;143(2):270-5.
- Temkin SM, Miller EA, Samimi G, Berg CD, Pinsky P, Minasian L. Outcomes from ovarian cancer screening in the PLCO trial: Histologic heterogeneity impacts detection, overdiagnosis and survival. Eur J Cancer. 2017;87:182-8.
- Jacobs IJ, Menon U, Ryan A, Gentry-Maharaj A, Burnell M, Kalsi JK, et al. Ovarian cancer screening and mortality in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;387(10022):945-56.
- Henderson JT, Webber EM, Sawaya GF. Screening for Ovarian Cancer: An Updated Evidence Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US). 2017;AHRQ Publication No. 17-05231-EF-1(July).
- Narod SA, Sopik V, Giannakeas V. Should we screen for ovarian cancer? A commentary on the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS) randomized trial. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;141(2):191-4.
- Sasieni PD, Duffy SW, Cuzick J. Ovarian cancer screening: UKCTOCS trial. Lancet. 2016;387(10038):2602.
- Thornton JG, Bewley S. Ovarian cancer screening: UKCTOCS trial. Lancet. 2016;387(10038):2601-2.
- Jacobs I. Steady, relentless progress towards effective, safe screening for early detection of cancer of the ovary. BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology. 2017.
- Alsop K, Fereday S, Meldrum C, deFazio A, Emmanuel C, George J, et al. BRCA mutation frequency and patterns of treatment response in BRCA mutation-positive women with ovarian cancer: a report from the Australian Ovarian Cancer Study Group.[Erratum appears in J Clin Oncol. 2012 Nov 20;30(33):4180]. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(21):2654-63.
- Vicus D, Finch A, Cass I, Rosen B, Murphy J, Fan I, et al. Prevalence of BRCA1 and BRCA2 germ line mutations among women with carcinoma of the fallopian tube. Gynecol Oncol. 2010;118(3):299-302.
- Arts-de Jong M, de Bock GH, van Asperen CJ, Mourits MJ, de Hullu JA, Kets CM. Germline BRCA1/2 mutation testing is indicated in every patient with epithelial ovarian cancer: A systematic review. Eur J Cancer. 2016;61:137-45.
- Kuchenbaecker KB, Hopper JL, Barnes DR, Phillips KA, Mooij TM, Roos-Blom MJ, et al. Risks of Breast, Ovarian, and Contralateral Breast Cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers. Jama. 2017;317(23):2402-16.
- Bahar AY, Taylor PJ, Andrews L, Proos A, Burnett L, Tucker K, et al. The frequency of founder mutations in the BRCA1, BRCA2, and APC genes in Australian Ashkenazi Jews: implications for the generality of U.S. population data. Cancer. 2001;92(2):440-5.
- Risch HA, McLaughlin JR, Cole DE, Rosen B, Bradley L, Fan I, et al. Population BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation frequencies and cancer penetrances: a kin-cohort study in Ontario, Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98(23):1694-706.
- Janavicius R. Founder BRCA1/2 mutations in the Europe: implications for hereditary breast-ovarian cancer prevention and control. The EPMA journal. 2010;1(3):397-412.
- Lynch HT, Casey MJ, Snyder CL, Bewtra C, Lynch JF, Butts M, et al. Hereditary ovarian carcinoma: heterogeneity, molecular genetics, pathology, and management. Mol Oncol. 2009;3(2):97-137.
- Skates SJ, Greene MH, Buys SS, Mai PL, Brown P, Piedmonte M, et al. Early Detection of Ovarian Cancer using the Risk of Ovarian Cancer Algorithm with Frequent CA125 Testing in Women at Increased Familial Risk - Combined Results from Two Screening Trials. Clin Cancer Res. 2017;23(14):3628-37.
- Rosenthal AN, Fraser L, Manchanda R, Badman P, Philpott S, Mozersky J, et al. Results of annual screening in phase I of the United Kingdom familial ovarian cancer screening study highlight the need for strict adherence to screening schedule. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(1):49-57.
- Rosenthal AN, Fraser LSM, Philpott S, Manchanda R, Burnell M, Badman P, et al. Evidence of Stage Shift in Women Diagnosed With Ovarian Cancer During Phase II of the United Kingdom Familial Ovarian Cancer Screening Study. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(13):1411-20.
- British Columbia (2014) Genital Tract Cancers in Females: Ovarian, Fallopian Tube, and Primary Peritoneal Cancers. BCguidelines.ca. Available online.
- Morgan, RJ, Jr., Alvarez, RD, Armstrong, DK, Burger, RA, Castells, M, Chen, LM, et al. (2012). Ovarian cancer, version 3.2012. Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. 10(11):1339-1349.
- SIGN (2013). Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). Management of epithelial ovarian cancer. Edinburgh: SIGN; 2013. (SIGN publication no. 135). [November 2013]. Available from URL: http://www.sign.ac.uk
- UCLH Cancer Collaborative. The ALDO project - Avoiding Late Diagnosis of Ovarian Cancer. https://www.uclh.nhs.uk/OurServices/ServiceA-Z/Cancer/NCV/Pages/TheALDOproject.aspx
- Lai T, Kessel B, Ahn HJ, Terada KY. Ovarian cancer screening in menopausal females with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer. J. 2016;27(4):e41.