Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2017 Apr 13;7(2):22.
doi: 10.3390/diagnostics7020022.

Ten Important Considerations for Ovarian Cancer Screening

Affiliations
Review

Ten Important Considerations for Ovarian Cancer Screening

Edward J Pavlik. Diagnostics (Basel). .

Abstract

The unique intricacies of ovarian cancer screening and perspectives of different screening methods are presented as ten considerations that are examined. Included in these considerations are: (1) Deciding on the number of individuals to be screened; (2) Anticipating screening group reductions due to death; (3) Deciding on the duration and frequency of screening; (4) Deciding on an appropriate follow-up period after screening; (5) Deciding on time to surgery when malignancy is suspected; (6) Deciding on how screen-detected ovarian cancers are treated and by whom; (7) Deciding on how to treat the data of enrolled participants; (8) Deciding on the most appropriate way to assign disease-specific death; (9) Deciding how to avoid biases caused by enrollments that attract participants with late-stage disease who are either symptomatic or disposed by factors that are genetic, environmental or social; and (10) Deciding whether the screening tool or a screening process is being tested. These considerations are presented in depth along with illustrations of how they impact the outcomes of ovarian cancer screening. The considerations presented provide alternative explanations of effects that have an important bearing on interpreting ovarian screening outcomes.

Keywords: cancer; considerations; ovarian; screening.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The author declares no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Age at death of screening participants.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Ovarian Malignancy Doubling.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Handford M. Where’s Waldo? Candlewick Press; Somerville, MA, USA: 2012.
    1. Daoud E., Bodor G. CA-125 concentrations in malignant and nonmalignant disease. Clin. Chem. 1991;37:1968–1974. - PubMed
    1. Nagell J.R., Jr., Miller R.W., Desimone C.P., Ueland F.R., Podzielinski I., Goodrich S.T., Elder J.W., Huang B., Kryscio R.J., Pavlik E.J. Long-term survival of women with epithelial ovarian cancer detected by ultrasonographic screening. Obstet. Gynecol. 2011;118:1212–1221. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e318238d030. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Johnson V.E. Revised standards for statistical evidence. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2013;110:19313–19317. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1313476110. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gaudart J., Huiart L., Milligan P.J., Thiebaut R., Giorgi R. Reproducibility issues in science, is p value really the only answer? Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2014;111:E1934. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1323051111. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources