Outcomes from ovarian cancer screening in the PLCO trial: Histologic heterogeneity impacts detection, overdiagnosis and survival

• Published in: European journal of cancer (1990) Vol. 87; pp. 182 - 188
• Main Authors: Temkin, Sarah M., Miller, Eric A., Samimi, Goli, Berg, Christine D., Pinsky, Paul, Minasian, Lori
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Elsevier Ltd 01.12.2017; Elsevier Science Ltd
• Subjects: Aged; Biomarkers, Tumor - blood; CA-125; CA-125 Antigen - blood; Cancer; Cancer screening; Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial; Colorectal cancer; Early Detection of Cancer - methods; Female; Humans; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Lung cancer; Medical diagnosis; Medical Overuse; Medical screening; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Staging; Neoplasms, Glandular and Epithelial - blood; Neoplasms, Glandular and Epithelial - diagnostic imaging; Neoplasms, Glandular and Epithelial - mortality; Neoplasms, Glandular and Epithelial - pathology; Ovarian cancer; Ovarian Neoplasms - blood; Ovarian Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging; Ovarian Neoplasms - mortality; Ovarian Neoplasms - pathology; Overdiagnosis; Predictive Value of Tests; Prostate; Prostate cancer; Reproducibility of Results; Survival; Time Factors; Tumors; Ultrasonography; Ultrasound; United States; United States; CA-125; Overdiagnosis; Ovarian cancer; Cancer screening
• ISSN: 0959-8049; 1879-0852
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2017.10.015

A mortality benefit from screening for ovarian cancer has never been demonstrated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the screening outcomes for different histologic subtypes of ovarian cancers. Women in the screening arm of the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Screening Trial underwent CA-125 and transvaginal ultrasound annually for 3–5 years. We compared screening test characteristics (including overdiagnosis) and outcomes by tumour type (type II versus other) and study arm (screening versus usual care). Of 78,215 women randomised, 496 women were diagnosed with ovarian cancer. Of the tumours that were characterised (n = 413; 83%), 74% (n = 305) were type II versus 26% other (n = 108). Among screened patients, 70% of tumours were type II compared to 78% in usual care (p = 0.09). Within the screening arm, 29% of type II tumours were screen detected compared to 54% of the others (p < 0.01). The sensitivity of screening was 65% for type II tumours versus 86% for other types (p = 0.02). 15% of type II screen-detected tumours were stage I/II, compared to 81% of other tumours (p < 0.01). The overdiagnosis rate was lower for type II compared to other tumours (28.2% versus 72.2%; p < 0.01). Ovarian cancer–specific survival was worse for type II tumours compared to others (p < 0.01). Survival was similar for type II (p = 0.74) or other types (p = 0.32) regardless of study arm. Test characteristics of screening for ovarian cancer differed for type II tumours compared to other ovarian tumours. Type II tumours were less likely to be screen diagnosed, early stage at diagnosis or overdiagnosed. •Test characteristics of screening for ovarian cancer with CA-125 and ultrasound differed for the detection of type II tumours.•Screening led to overdiagnosis of less aggressive tumours.•Survival from ovarian cancer was similar in screened an unscreened patients when stratified by tumour type.