PURPOSE: Longitudinal algorithms incorporate change over time in biomarker levels to individualize screening decision rules. Compared with a single-threshold (ST) rule, smaller deviations from baseline biomarker levels are required to signal disease. We demonstrated improvement in ovarian cancer early detection by using a longitudinal algorithm to monitor annual CA125 levels. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated serial preclinical serum CA125 values measured annually in 44 incident ovarian cancer cases identified from participants in the PLCO (Prostate Lung Colorectal and Ovarian) Cancer Screening Trial to determine how frequently and to what extent the parametric empirical Bayes (PEB) longitudinal screening algorithm identifies ovarian cancer earlier than an ST rule. RESULTS: The PEB algorithm detected ovarian cancer earlier than an ST rule in a substantial proportion of cases. At 99% specificity, which corresponded to the ST-rule CA125 cutoff ≥ 35 U/mL that was used in the PLCO trial, 20% of cases were identified earlier by using the PEB algorithm. Among these cases, the PEB signaled abnormal CA125 values, on average, 10 months earlier and at a CA125 concentration 42% lower (20 U/mL) than the ST-rule cutoff. The proportion of cases detected earlier by the PEB algorithm and the earliness of detection increased as the specificity of the screening rule was reduced. CONCLUSION: The PEB longitudinal algorithm identifies ovarian cancer earlier and at lower biomarker concentrations than an ST screening algorithm adjusted to the same specificity. Longitudinal biomarker assessment by using the PEB algorithm may have application for screening other solid tumors in which biomarkers are available.
PURPOSE:Longitudinal algorithms incorporate change over time in biomarker levels to individualize screening decision rules. Compared with a single-threshold (ST) rule, smaller deviations from baseline biomarker levels are required to signal disease. We demonstrated improvement in ovarian cancer early detection by using a longitudinal algorithm to monitor annual CA125 levels. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated serial preclinical serum CA125 values measured annually in 44 incident ovarian cancer cases identified from participants in the PLCO (Prostate Lung Colorectal and Ovarian) Cancer Screening Trial to determine how frequently and to what extent the parametric empirical Bayes (PEB) longitudinal screening algorithm identifies ovarian cancer earlier than an ST rule. RESULTS: The PEB algorithm detected ovarian cancer earlier than an ST rule in a substantial proportion of cases. At 99% specificity, which corresponded to the ST-rule CA125 cutoff ≥ 35 U/mL that was used in the PLCO trial, 20% of cases were identified earlier by using the PEB algorithm. Among these cases, the PEB signaled abnormal CA125 values, on average, 10 months earlier and at a CA125 concentration 42% lower (20 U/mL) than the ST-rule cutoff. The proportion of cases detected earlier by the PEB algorithm and the earliness of detection increased as the specificity of the screening rule was reduced. CONCLUSION: The PEB longitudinal algorithm identifies ovarian cancer earlier and at lower biomarker concentrations than an ST screening algorithm adjusted to the same specificity. Longitudinal biomarker assessment by using the PEB algorithm may have application for screening other solid tumors in which biomarkers are available.
Authors: D K Pauler; U Menon; M McIntosh; H L Symecko; S J Skates; I J Jacobs Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2001-05 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Usha Menon; Steven J Skates; Sara Lewis; Adam N Rosenthal; Barnaby Rufford; Karen Sibley; Nicola Macdonald; Anne Dawnay; Arjun Jeyarajah; Robert C Bast; David Oram; Ian J Jacobs Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-11-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Sheri D Schully; Danielle M Carrick; Leah E Mechanic; Sudhir Srivastava; Garnet L Anderson; John A Baron; Christine D Berg; Jennifer Cullen; Eleftherios P Diamandis; V Paul Doria-Rose; Katrina A B Goddard; Susan E Hankinson; Lawrence H Kushi; Eric B Larson; Lisa M McShane; Richard L Schilsky; Steven Shak; Steven J Skates; Nicole Urban; Barnett S Kramer; Muin J Khoury; David F Ransohoff Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2015-02-16 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Beth Y Karlan; Jason Thorpe; Kate Watabayashi; Charles W Drescher; Melanie Palomares; Mary B Daly; Pam Paley; Paula Hillard; M Robyn Andersen; Garnet Anderson; Ronny Drapkin; Nicole Urban Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2014-05-01 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Kathryn L Terry; Helena Schock; Renée T Fortner; Anika Hüsing; Raina N Fichorova; Hidemi S Yamamoto; Allison F Vitonis; Theron Johnson; Kim Overvad; Anne Tjønneland; Marie-Christine Boutron-Ruault; Sylvie Mesrine; Gianluca Severi; Laure Dossus; Sabina Rinaldi; Heiner Boeing; Vassiliki Benetou; Pagona Lagiou; Antonia Trichopoulou; Vittorio Krogh; Elisabetta Kuhn; Salvatore Panico; H Bas Bueno-de-Mesquita; N Charlotte Onland-Moret; Petra H Peeters; Inger Torhild Gram; Elisabete Weiderpass; Eric J Duell; Maria-Jose Sanchez; Eva Ardanaz; Nerea Etxezarreta; Carmen Navarro; Annika Idahl; Eva Lundin; Karin Jirström; Jonas Manjer; Nicholas J Wareham; Kay-Tee Khaw; Karl Smith Byrne; Ruth C Travis; Marc J Gunter; Melissa A Merritt; Elio Riboli; Daniel W Cramer; Rudolf Kaaks Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2016-04-08 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Paul F Pinsky; Kelly Yu; Barnett S Kramer; Amanda Black; Saundra S Buys; Edward Partridge; John Gohagan; Christine D Berg; Philip C Prorok Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2016-09-09 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Oleg Blyuss; Matthew Burnell; Andy Ryan; Aleksandra Gentry-Maharaj; Inés P Mariño; Jatinderpal Kalsi; Ranjit Manchanda; John F Timms; Mahesh Parmar; Steven J Skates; Ian Jacobs; Alexey Zaikin; Usha Menon Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2018-07-03 Impact factor: 12.531