Comments on: Screening for ovarian cancer redux http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2008/08/screening-for-ovarian-cancer-2.html Tue, 14 Feb 2012 17:18:00 +0000 hourly 1 By: MuchaDOhttp://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2008/08/screening-for-ovarian-cancer-2.html#comment-87134 MuchaDO Thu, 28 Aug 2008 03:46:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2008/08/screening-for-ovarian-cancer-2.html#comment-87134 The article states that 1 in 3000 women will have ovarian cancer in their lifetimes. With a false positive rate of ~ 1%, 30 of 3000 women will be shown to be "positive" for a higher risk of malignant cancer. <br/>At 95% sensitivity, the one woman in 3000 will be found, but so will thirty others. What are the odds that YOU are that one? About 1/31 or 3 percent. <br/><br/>I wouldn't be particularly anxious to have my ovaries removed if my risk was only increased by 3 %. Would you? The article states that 1 in 3000 women will have ovarian cancer in their lifetimes. With a false positive rate of ~ 1%, 30 of 3000 women will be shown to be “positive” for a higher risk of malignant cancer.
At 95% sensitivity, the one woman in 3000 will be found, but so will thirty others. What are the odds that YOU are that one? About 1/31 or 3 percent.

I wouldn’t be particularly anxious to have my ovaries removed if my risk was only increased by 3 %. Would you?

]]> By: Jon Lepley, D.O.http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2008/08/screening-for-ovarian-cancer-2.html#comment-87125 Jon Lepley, D.O. Tue, 26 Aug 2008 23:15:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2008/08/screening-for-ovarian-cancer-2.html#comment-87125 This summarizes preliminary results from the ovarian cancer screening arm of the PLCO trial:<br/>http://www.nih.gov/news/pr/nov2005/nci-07a.htm<br/><br/>In this study of 28,816 women screened with a CA-125 and transvaginal US, 29 tumors were detected out of 570 women who ultimately ended up having a surgical procedure. 541 women underwent surgery who didn't have cancer. If my math is correct, a woman was almost 20X more likely to have unnecessary surgery than have cancer detected as a result of screening, and it's not known if these 29 women increased their life expectancy with earlier detection.<br/><br/>In short, i would be extremely skeptical of any screening test for ovarian cancer without randomized controlled trials. This summarizes preliminary results from the ovarian cancer screening arm of the PLCO trial:
http://www.nih.gov/news/pr/nov2005/nci-07a.htm

In this study of 28,816 women screened with a CA-125 and transvaginal US, 29 tumors were detected out of 570 women who ultimately ended up having a surgical procedure. 541 women underwent surgery who didn’t have cancer. If my math is correct, a woman was almost 20X more likely to have unnecessary surgery than have cancer detected as a result of screening, and it’s not known if these 29 women increased their life expectancy with earlier detection.

In short, i would be extremely skeptical of any screening test for ovarian cancer without randomized controlled trials.

]]> By: PharmacistMikehttp://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2008/08/screening-for-ovarian-cancer-2.html#comment-87123 PharmacistMike Tue, 26 Aug 2008 17:40:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2008/08/screening-for-ovarian-cancer-2.html#comment-87123 It would be wonderful to see a screening test for ovarian cancer but this is starting to smell like the female version of the PSA test. With no real ability for biopsies there may be a lot of ovaries removed unnecessarily. It would be wonderful to see a screening test for ovarian cancer but this is starting to smell like the female version of the PSA test. With no real ability for biopsies there may be a lot of ovaries removed unnecessarily.

]]>