Lacey James V, Greene Mark H, Buys Saundra S, Reding Douglas, Riley Thomas L, Berg Christine D, Fagerstrom Richard M, Hartge Patricia
Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA.
Obstet Gynecol. 2006 Nov;108(5):1176-84. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000239105.39149.d8.
To evaluate positive predictive values of CA 125 or transvaginal ultrasonography screening for ovarian cancer according to family history of breast or ovarian cancer.
In the screening arm of a randomized controlled trial of screening compared with usual care, 28,460 women with family history data received baseline and annual CA 125 and transvaginal ultrasonography examinations. We analyzed CA 125 and transvaginal ultrasonography results from the first four rounds of screening. We classified women as average (n=22,687), moderate (n=2,572), or high (n=2,163) risk based on family history, or high risk due to a personal history of breast cancer (n=1,038). Cancers were identified by active follow-up of women with abnormal screening results and annual questionnaires. We calculated positive predictive values for screening combinations.
Similar proportions (4.8-5.0%) of women in each group had abnormal screening results. Higher-risk women were more likely than lower-risk women to undergo biopsy after a positive screen. Screening identified 43 invasive ovarian cancers. The positive predictive values for abnormal screening results were 0.7% in average-risk, 1.3% in moderate-risk, and 1.6% in high-risk groups; one ovarian cancer occurred among the breast cancer survivors. The positive predictive values for postbaseline abnormal screening results were also higher in the higher-risk groups. The positive predictive values did not significantly differ across risk groups.
Probabilities of abnormal annual CA 125 and transvaginal ultrasonography screens were similar across groups based on family history of breast or ovarian cancer. However, ovarian cancer was more likely to be diagnosed after an abnormal screening result among women at higher family history-based risk than among women at lower risk.
I.
根据乳腺癌或卵巢癌家族史评估CA 125或经阴道超声筛查卵巢癌的阳性预测值。
在一项将筛查与常规护理进行比较的随机对照试验的筛查组中,28460名有家族史数据的女性接受了基线及每年一次的CA 125和经阴道超声检查。我们分析了前四轮筛查的CA 125和经阴道超声检查结果。根据家族史,我们将女性分为低风险(n = 22687)、中度风险(n = 2572)或高风险(n = 2163)组,或因个人乳腺癌病史而属于高风险组(n = 1038)。通过对筛查结果异常的女性进行积极随访和年度问卷调查来确定癌症。我们计算了筛查组合的阳性预测值。
每组中相似比例(4.8 - 5.0%)的女性筛查结果异常。高风险女性在筛查结果为阳性后比低风险女性更有可能接受活检。筛查发现了43例浸润性卵巢癌。筛查结果异常的阳性预测值在低风险组为0.7%,中度风险组为1.3%,高风险组为1.6%;在乳腺癌幸存者中发生了1例卵巢癌。基线后筛查结果异常的阳性预测值在高风险组中也更高。不同风险组之间的阳性预测值没有显著差异。
基于乳腺癌或卵巢癌家族史分组,每年CA 125和经阴道超声筛查结果异常的概率相似。然而,与低风险女性相比,基于家族史风险较高的女性在筛查结果异常后更有可能被诊断出卵巢癌。
I级