Action Points
- Explain that two new ovarian cancer symptom indices offered little advantage over the current Goff Index.
- Point out that for all three indices, sensitivity was lower for data obtained from the general practitioner's notes and highest for those interviewed over the telephone, ant that the specificity was largely unchanged
"This sobering news follows hard on the heels of a large U.S. randomized trial finding no benefit, and indeed some harm, to women who were screened annually with a transvaginal ultrasound exam and a CA-125 blood test compared with a usual care control group," they wrote, referring to the NIH-sponsored Prostate, Lung, Colon, and Ovary (PLCO) screening program (JAMA 2011; 305:2295-2303).
They said one question the ovarian cancer community needs to answer is where it should focus its efforts: On the time between when a tumor is large enough to cause mild symptoms and when it is large enough to cause symptoms that prompt women to call a physician, or on a better understanding of disease etiology, leading to better prevention and therapy.
"These other research directions remain critical as the search continues for better ways to find ovarian cancer early," they said.
Primary source: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
Source reference: Lim AWW, et al. "Predictive value of symptoms for ovarian cancer: Comparison of symptoms reported by questionnaire, interview, and general practitioner notes" J Natl Cancer Inst 2012; 104: 1-11. Additional source: Journal of the National Cancer Institute Source reference: Hartge P, Speyer JL. "Finding Ovarian Cancer" J Natl Cancer Inst 2012; DOI: 10.1093/jnci/drj518. |
|
Related Article(s): |
