A Sharma1, U Menon. 1. Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Institute of Women's Health, University College London, 149, Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 7DN, UK. aarti.sharma@ucl.ac.uk <aarti.sharma@ucl.ac.uk>
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The role of screening in gynaecological cancers is under evaluation. With mass screening proven effective in significantly reducing cervical cancer mortality, there is an interest in developing other screening methods to detect gynaecological malignancies early. This review covers advances in cervical cancer screening, strategies being investigated in ovarian cancer screening and the lack of justification in screening for endometrial, vulval and vaginal cancers. METHODS: A Medline based literature search was performed for articles relating to screening for different gynaecological malignancies. Additional original papers cited in those identified by the initial search were also reviewed. RESULTS: Advances in cervical cancer screening include liquid-based cytology and HPV testing. Results of ongoing trials are awaited before these can be fully implemented. The results of the two large, multicentre, randomised controlled trials being conducted in the United Kingdom and United States (UKCTOCS and PLCO study, respectively) to assess impact of screening on ovarian cancer mortality will shed some light on the need to implement screening for ovarian cancer in the general population. Novel markers, serum proteomic profiles and Doppler are some of the other technologies being explored. Currently, screening for endometrial cancer is not advocated as most women present with symptoms in early disease with good survival outcomes. Vulval and vaginal cancers are too rare to justify mass screening. CONCLUSION: Methods to screen for various gynaecological malignancies need further evaluation before implementation in the general population. Results of large multicentred trials are awaited. Presently, screening for endometrial, vaginal and vulval cancers is not justified.
BACKGROUND: The role of screening in gynaecological cancers is under evaluation. With mass screening proven effective in significantly reducing cervical cancer mortality, there is an interest in developing other screening methods to detect gynaecological malignancies early. This review covers advances in cervical cancer screening, strategies being investigated in ovarian cancer screening and the lack of justification in screening for endometrial, vulval and vaginal cancers. METHODS: A Medline based literature search was performed for articles relating to screening for different gynaecological malignancies. Additional original papers cited in those identified by the initial search were also reviewed. RESULTS: Advances in cervical cancer screening include liquid-based cytology and HPV testing. Results of ongoing trials are awaited before these can be fully implemented. The results of the two large, multicentre, randomised controlled trials being conducted in the United Kingdom and United States (UKCTOCS and PLCO study, respectively) to assess impact of screening on ovarian cancer mortality will shed some light on the need to implement screening for ovarian cancer in the general population. Novel markers, serum proteomic profiles and Doppler are some of the other technologies being explored. Currently, screening for endometrial cancer is not advocated as most women present with symptoms in early disease with good survival outcomes. Vulval and vaginal cancers are too rare to justify mass screening. CONCLUSION: Methods to screen for various gynaecological malignancies need further evaluation before implementation in the general population. Results of large multicentred trials are awaited. Presently, screening for endometrial, vaginal and vulval cancers is not justified.