Literature DB >> 29450531

Screening for Ovarian Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

David C Grossman1, Susan J Curry2, Douglas K Owens3,4, Michael J Barry5, Karina W Davidson6, Chyke A Doubeni7, John W Epling8, Alex R Kemper9, Alex H Krist10,11, Ann E Kurth12, C Seth Landefeld13, Carol M Mangione14, Maureen G Phipps15, Michael Silverstein16, Melissa A Simon17, Chien-Wen Tseng18,19.   

Abstract

Importance: With approximately 14 000 deaths per year, ovarian cancer is the fifth most common cause of cancer death among US women and the leading cause of death from gynecologic cancer. More than 95% of ovarian cancer deaths occur among women 45 years and older. Objective: To update the 2012 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for ovarian cancer. Evidence Review: The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for ovarian cancer in asymptomatic women not known to be at high risk for ovarian cancer (ie, high risk includes women with certain hereditary cancer syndromes that increase their risk for ovarian cancer). Outcomes of interest included ovarian cancer mortality, quality of life, false-positive rate, surgery and surgical complication rates, and psychological effects of screening. Findings: The USPSTF found adequate evidence that screening for ovarian cancer does not reduce ovarian cancer mortality. The USPSTF found adequate evidence that the harms from screening for ovarian cancer are at least moderate and may be substantial in some cases, and include unnecessary surgery for women who do not have cancer. Given the lack of mortality benefit of screening, and the moderate to substantial harms that could result from false-positive screening test results and subsequent surgery, the USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that the harms of screening for ovarian cancer outweigh the benefit, and the net balance of the benefit and harms of screening is negative. Conclusions and Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends against screening for ovarian cancer in asymptomatic women. (D recommendation) This recommendation applies to asymptomatic women who are not known to have a high-risk hereditary cancer syndrome.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29450531     DOI: 10.1001/jama.2017.21926

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  50 in total

1.  Complementary Longitudinal Serum Biomarkers to CA125 for Early Detection of Ovarian Cancer.

Authors:  Archana R Simmons; Evangelia Ourania Fourkala; Aleksandra Gentry-Maharaj; Andy Ryan; Margie N Sutton; Keith Baggerly; Hui Zheng; Karen H Lu; Ian Jacobs; Steven Skates; Usha Menon; Robert C Bast
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2019-04-09

2.  Prediction of DNA Repair Inhibitor Response in Short-Term Patient-Derived Ovarian Cancer Organoids.

Authors:  Sarah J Hill; Brennan Decker; Emma A Roberts; Neil S Horowitz; Michael G Muto; Michael J Worley; Colleen M Feltmate; Marisa R Nucci; Elizabeth M Swisher; Huy Nguyen; Chunyu Yang; Ryuji Morizane; Bose S Kochupurakkal; Khanh T Do; Panagiotis A Konstantinopoulos; Joyce F Liu; Joseph V Bonventre; Ursula A Matulonis; Geoffrey I Shapiro; Ross S Berkowitz; Christopher P Crum; Alan D D'Andrea
Journal:  Cancer Discov       Date:  2018-09-13       Impact factor: 39.397

3. 

Authors:  Geneviève Chaput; M Elisabeth Del Giudice; Ed Kucharski
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2021-01       Impact factor: 3.275

4.  Cancer screening in Canada: What's in, what's out, what's coming.

Authors:  Genevieve Chaput; M Elisabeth Del Giudice; Ed Kucharski
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2021-01       Impact factor: 3.275

5.  Contribution of Geographic Location to Disparities in Ovarian Cancer Treatment.

Authors:  Carolina Villanueva; Jenny Chang; Scott M Bartell; Argyrios Ziogas; Robert Bristow; Verónica M Vieira
Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw       Date:  2019-11-01       Impact factor: 11.908

6.  Watching for Disease: the Changing Paradigm of Disease Screening in the Age of Consumer Health Devices.

Authors:  Anubodh S Varshney; Christopher Madias; Rahul Kakkar; David T Martin
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2020-01-15       Impact factor: 5.128

7.  Geographic Co-Occurrence of Mesothelioma and Ovarian Cancer Incidence.

Authors:  S Jane Henley; Lucy A Peipins; Sun Hee Rim; Theodore C Larson; Jacqueline W Miller
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2019-07-16       Impact factor: 2.681

8.  Ultra-Sensitive TP53 Sequencing for Cancer Detection Reveals Progressive Clonal Selection in Normal Tissue over a Century of Human Lifespan.

Authors:  Jesse J Salk; Kaitlyn Loubet-Senear; Elisabeth Maritschnegg; Charles C Valentine; Lindsey N Williams; Jacob E Higgins; Reinhard Horvat; Adriaan Vanderstichele; Daniela Nachmanson; Kathryn T Baker; Mary J Emond; Emily Loter; Maria Tretiakova; Thierry Soussi; Lawrence A Loeb; Robert Zeillinger; Paul Speiser; Rosa Ana Risques
Journal:  Cell Rep       Date:  2019-07-02       Impact factor: 9.423

9.  CCL2 secreted from cancer-associated mesothelial cells promotes peritoneal metastasis of ovarian cancer cells through the P38-MAPK pathway.

Authors:  Hiroaki Yasui; Hiroaki Kajiyama; Satoshi Tamauchi; Shiro Suzuki; Yang Peng; Nobuhisa Yoshikawa; Mai Sugiyama; Kae Nakamura; Fumitaka Kikkawa
Journal:  Clin Exp Metastasis       Date:  2019-09-21       Impact factor: 5.150

10.  Methylomic Analysis of Ovarian Cancers Identifies Tumor-Specific Alterations Readily Detectable in Early Precursor Lesions.

Authors:  Thomas R Pisanic; Leslie M Cope; Shiou-Fu Lin; Ting-Tai Yen; Pornpat Athamanolap; Ryoichi Asaka; Kentaro Nakayama; Amanda N Fader; Tza-Huei Wang; Ie-Ming Shih; Tian-Li Wang
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2018-08-14       Impact factor: 12.531

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.