Meeuwissen Paul A M, Seynaeve Caroline, Brekelmans Cecile T M, Meijers-Heijboer Hanne J, Klijn Jan G M, Burger Curt W
Family Cancer Clinic, The Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erasmus University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Room H585, Dr Molewaterplein 40, 3000 CC Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Gynecol Oncol. 2005 May;97(2):476-82. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2005.01.024.
Women at high risk of ovarian cancer are currently offered two options: either surveillance or prophylactic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. The efficacy and outcome of surveillance remain unclear.
We performed a retrospective study. Between 1994 and 2000, we screened 383 high-risk women, of which 152 were BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Surveillance consisted of annual gynecological examination, transvaginal ultrasound, and serum CA125 measurement. Exploratory or prophylactic surgery was performed in selected cases.
There were no screen-detected primary ovarian cancers. Abnormal results at surveillance were observed in 74 (19.3%) of women; in 47 (63.5%), the abnormalities disappeared spontaneously. Exploratory surgery was performed in 20 (27.0%) women in whom one malignancy was found (metastatic breast cancer in the ovary). A rising CA125 value prompted further (non-surgical) evaluation in three women with a history of breast cancer: recurrent breast cancer was diagnosed in two women; in the third, a chondrosarcoma was found. 133 women opted for prophylactic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, whereby two unexpected malignancies were found (fallopian tube cancer and metastatic breast cancer). One interval primary ovarian cancer occurred, presenting as papillary serous carcinoma of the peritoneum 14 months after prophylactic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Complications of prophylactic surgery were encountered in 15 (11.5%) women.
Ovarian cancer surveillance has limited sensitivity, and a high number of false positive findings. This can lead to unnecessary surgical interventions, possibly resulting in surgery-related complications. It is important to inform high-risk women of these limitations. For now, prophylactic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy remains the optimal risk-reducing strategy for women at high risk.
目前,卵巢癌高危女性有两种选择:监测或预防性双侧输卵管卵巢切除术。监测的有效性和结果仍不明确。
我们进行了一项回顾性研究。1994年至2000年间,我们对383名高危女性进行了筛查,其中152名是BRCA1/2突变携带者。监测包括每年一次的妇科检查、经阴道超声检查和血清CA125检测。在选定的病例中进行了探索性或预防性手术。
未筛查出原发性卵巢癌。74名(19.3%)女性在监测中出现异常结果;其中47名(63.5%)的异常结果自行消失。20名(27.0%)女性接受了探索性手术,其中1名发现有恶性肿瘤(卵巢转移性乳腺癌)。3名有乳腺癌病史的女性CA125值升高促使进一步(非手术)评估:2名女性被诊断为复发性乳腺癌;第3名女性发现患有软骨肉瘤。133名女性选择了预防性双侧输卵管卵巢切除术,其中发现了2例意外恶性肿瘤(输卵管癌和转移性乳腺癌)。1例间隔期原发性卵巢癌发生,在预防性双侧输卵管卵巢切除术后14个月表现为腹膜乳头状浆液性癌。15名(11.5%)女性出现了预防性手术并发症。
卵巢癌监测的敏感性有限,假阳性结果数量较多。这可能导致不必要的手术干预,可能引发与手术相关的并发症。告知高危女性这些局限性很重要。目前,预防性双侧输卵管卵巢切除术仍然是高危女性降低风险的最佳策略。