Ovarian cancer screening and mortality in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS): a randomised controlled trial
- PMID:26707054
- PMCID: PMC4779792
- DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01224-6
Ovarian cancer screening and mortality in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS): a randomised controlled trial
Erratum in
- Lancet. 2016 Mar 5;387(10022):944
- Department of Error.[No authors listed][No authors listed]Lancet. 2016 Mar 5;387(10022):944. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00228-2. Epub 2016 Jan 30.Lancet. 2016.PMID:28832000Free PMC article.No abstract available.
Abstract
Background: Ovarian cancer has a poor prognosis, with just 40% of patients surviving 5 years. We designed this trial to establish the effect of early detection by screening on ovarian cancer mortality.
Methods: In this randomised controlled trial, we recruited postmenopausal women aged 50-74 years from 13 centres in National Health Service Trusts in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. Exclusion criteria were previous bilateral oophorectomy or ovarian malignancy, increased risk of familial ovarian cancer, and active non-ovarian malignancy. The trial management system confirmed eligibility and randomly allocated participants in blocks of 32 using computer-generated random numbers to annual multimodal screening (MMS) with serum CA125 interpreted with use of the risk of ovarian cancer algorithm, annual transvaginal ultrasound screening (USS), or no screening, in a 1:1:2 ratio. The primary outcome was death due to ovarian cancer by Dec 31, 2014, comparing MMS and USS separately with no screening, ascertained by an outcomes committee masked to randomisation group. All analyses were by modified intention to screen, excluding the small number of women we discovered after randomisation to have a bilateral oophorectomy, have ovarian cancer, or had exited the registry before recruitment. Investigators and participants were aware of screening type. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numberNCT00058032.
Findings: Between June 1, 2001, and Oct 21, 2005, we randomly allocated 202,638 women: 50,640 (25·0%) to MMS, 50,639 (25·0%) to USS, and 101,359 (50·0%) to no screening. 202,546 (>99·9%) women were eligible for analysis: 50,624 (>99·9%) women in the MMS group, 50,623 (>99·9%) in the USS group, and 101,299 (>99·9%) in the no screening group. Screening ended on Dec 31, 2011, and included 345,570 MMS and 327,775 USS annual screening episodes. At a median follow-up of 11·1 years (IQR 10·0-12·0), we diagnosed ovarian cancer in 1282 (0·6%) women: 338 (0·7%) in the MMS group, 314 (0·6%) in the USS group, and 630 (0·6%) in the no screening group. Of these women, 148 (0·29%) women in the MMS group, 154 (0·30%) in the USS group, and 347 (0·34%) in the no screening group had died of ovarian cancer. The primary analysis using a Cox proportional hazards model gave a mortality reduction over years 0-14 of 15% (95% CI -3 to 30; p=0·10) with MMS and 11% (-7 to 27; p=0·21) with USS. The Royston-Parmar flexible parametric model showed that in the MMS group, this mortality effect was made up of 8% (-20 to 31) in years 0-7 and 23% (1-46) in years 7-14, and in the USS group, of 2% (-27 to 26) in years 0-7 and 21% (-2 to 42) in years 7-14. A prespecified analysis of death from ovarian cancer of MMS versus no screening with exclusion of prevalent cases showed significantly different death rates (p=0·021), with an overall average mortality reduction of 20% (-2 to 40) and a reduction of 8% (-27 to 43) in years 0-7 and 28% (-3 to 49) in years 7-14 in favour of MMS.
Interpretation: Although the mortality reduction was not significant in the primary analysis, we noted a significant mortality reduction with MMS when prevalent cases were excluded. We noted encouraging evidence of a mortality reduction in years 7-14, but further follow-up is needed before firm conclusions can be reached on the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of ovarian cancer screening.
Funding: Medical Research Council, Cancer Research UK, Department of Health, The Eve Appeal.
Copyright © 2016 Jacobs Menon et al. Open Access article published under the terms of CC BY. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
Figures




Comment in
- Whether screening for ovarian cancer saves lives is still unclear despite large trial.Kmietowicz Z.Kmietowicz Z.BMJ. 2015 Dec 18;351:h6876. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h6876.BMJ. 2015.PMID:26684480No abstract available.
- Screening to improve ovarian cancer prognosis?Verheijen RHM, Zweemer RP.Verheijen RHM, et al.Lancet. 2016 Mar 5;387(10022):921-923. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01236-2. Epub 2015 Dec 17.Lancet. 2016.PMID:26707055No abstract available.
- Ovarian cancer: Multimodal screening - keeping mortality at bay?Hutchinson L.Hutchinson L.Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2016 Mar;13(3):133. doi: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2016.10. Epub 2016 Jan 27.Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2016.PMID:26813936No abstract available.
- Ovarian Cancer Screening There May Be Light at the End of the Tunnel?Manchanda R, Cibula D.Manchanda R, et al.Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2016 May;26(4):608-9. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000706.Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2016.PMID:27101522No abstract available.
- Two large randomised trials show ovarian cancer screening has minimal impact on survival.Johnson N.Johnson N.BJOG. 2018 Apr;125(5):524-525. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.14052. Epub 2016 May 13.BJOG. 2018.PMID:27173436No abstract available.
- Ovarian cancer screening: UKCTOCS trial.Thornton JG, Bewley S.Thornton JG, et al.Lancet. 2016 Jun 25;387(10038):2601-2602. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30846-7.Lancet. 2016.PMID:27353818No abstract available.
- Ovarian cancer screening: UKCTOCS trial.Sasieni PD, Duffy SW, Cuzick J.Sasieni PD, et al.Lancet. 2016 Jun 25;387(10038):2602. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30847-9.Lancet. 2016.PMID:27353820No abstract available.
- Ovarian cancer screening: UKCTOCS trial.Hoskins P, Gotlieb W.Hoskins P, et al.Lancet. 2016 Jun 25;387(10038):2602-2603. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30848-0.Lancet. 2016.PMID:27353821No abstract available.
- Ovarian cancer screening: UKCTOCS trial - Authors' reply.Jacobs IJ, Parmar M, Skates SJ, Menon U.Jacobs IJ, et al.Lancet. 2016 Jun 25;387(10038):2603-2604. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30849-2.Lancet. 2016.PMID:27353822No abstract available.
- Large ovarian cancer screening trial shows modest mortality reduction, but does not justify population-based ovarian cancer screening.Wentzensen N.Wentzensen N.Evid Based Med. 2016 Aug;21(4):159. doi: 10.1136/ebmed-2016-110411. Epub 2016 Jul 22.Evid Based Med. 2016.PMID:27450366No abstract available.
- Ovarian cancer screening effectiveness: A realization from the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening.Pavlik EJ.Pavlik EJ.Womens Health (Lond). 2016 Sep;12(5):475-479. doi: 10.1177/1745505716666096. Epub 2016 Sep 5.Womens Health (Lond). 2016.PMID:27595999Free PMC article.
Similar articles
- Ovarian cancer population screening and mortality after long-term follow-up in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS): a randomised controlled trial.Menon U, Gentry-Maharaj A, Burnell M, Singh N, Ryan A, Karpinskyj C, Carlino G, Taylor J, Massingham SK, Raikou M, Kalsi JK, Woolas R, Manchanda R, Arora R, Casey L, Dawnay A, Dobbs S, Leeson S, Mould T, Seif MW, Sharma A, Williamson K, Liu Y, Fallowfield L, McGuire AJ, Campbell S, Skates SJ, Jacobs IJ, Parmar M.Menon U, et al.Lancet. 2021 Jun 5;397(10290):2182-2193. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00731-5. Epub 2021 May 12.Lancet. 2021.PMID:33991479Free PMC article.Clinical Trial.
- Sensitivity and specificity of multimodal and ultrasound screening for ovarian cancer, and stage distribution of detected cancers: results of the prevalence screen of the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS).Menon U, Gentry-Maharaj A, Hallett R, Ryan A, Burnell M, Sharma A, Lewis S, Davies S, Philpott S, Lopes A, Godfrey K, Oram D, Herod J, Williamson K, Seif MW, Scott I, Mould T, Woolas R, Murdoch J, Dobbs S, Amso NN, Leeson S, Cruickshank D, McGuire A, Campbell S, Fallowfield L, Singh N, Dawnay A, Skates SJ, Parmar M, Jacobs I.Menon U, et al.Lancet Oncol. 2009 Apr;10(4):327-40. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70026-9. Epub 2009 Mar 11.Lancet Oncol. 2009.PMID:19282241Clinical Trial.
- The cost-effectiveness of screening for ovarian cancer: results from the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS).Menon U, McGuire AJ, Raikou M, Ryan A, Davies SK, Burnell M, Gentry-Maharaj A, Kalsi JK, Singh N, Amso NN, Cruickshank D, Dobbs S, Godfrey K, Herod J, Leeson S, Mould T, Murdoch J, Oram D, Scott I, Seif MW, Williamson K, Woolas R, Fallowfield L, Campbell S, Skates SJ, Parmar M, Jacobs IJ.Menon U, et al.Br J Cancer. 2017 Aug 22;117(5):619-627. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2017.222. Epub 2017 Jul 25.Br J Cancer. 2017.PMID:28742794Free PMC article.
- Screening for Ovarian Cancer: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.Henderson JT, Webber EM, Sawaya GF.Henderson JT, et al.JAMA. 2018 Feb 13;319(6):595-606. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.21421.JAMA. 2018.PMID:29450530Review.
- The role of transvaginal ultrasound in screening for ovarian cancer.Campbell S, Gentry-Maharaj A.Campbell S, et al.Climacteric. 2018 Jun;21(3):221-226. doi: 10.1080/13697137.2018.1433656. Epub 2018 Mar 1.Climacteric. 2018.PMID:29490504Review.
Cited by
- Sensitive and Cost-Effective Tools in the Detection of Ovarian Cancer Biomarkers.Elhami A, Mobed A, Soleimany R, Yazdani Y, Kazemi ES, Mohammadi M, Saffarfar H.Elhami A, et al.Anal Sci Adv. 2024 Oct 24;5(9-10):e202400029. doi: 10.1002/ansa.202400029. eCollection 2024 Oct.Anal Sci Adv. 2024.PMID:39479573Free PMC article.
- Multi-Marker Longitudinal Algorithms Incorporating HE4 and CA125 in Ovarian Cancer Screening of Postmenopausal Women.Gentry-Maharaj A, Blyuss O, Ryan A, Burnell M, Karpinskyj C, Gunu R, Kalsi JK, Dawnay A, Marino IP, Manchanda R, Lu K, Yang WL, Timms JF, Parmar M, Skates SJ, Bast RC Jr, Jacobs IJ, Zaikin A, Menon U.Gentry-Maharaj A, et al.Cancers (Basel). 2020 Jul 17;12(7):1931. doi: 10.3390/cancers12071931.Cancers (Basel). 2020.PMID:32708856Free PMC article.
- Mathematical models of breast and ovarian cancers.Botesteanu DA, Lipkowitz S, Lee JM, Levy D.Botesteanu DA, et al.Wiley Interdiscip Rev Syst Biol Med. 2016 Jul;8(4):337-62. doi: 10.1002/wsbm.1343. Epub 2016 Jun 3.Wiley Interdiscip Rev Syst Biol Med. 2016.PMID:27259061Free PMC article.Review.
- Feasibility of Risk Reducing Salpingo-Oophorectomy at the Time of Abdominal Surgery for Correction of Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Urinary Incontinence.Azadi A, Bradley JA, Marchand GJ, Lorenz DJ, Doering D, Ostergard DR.Azadi A, et al.Gynecol Minim Invasive Ther. 2021 Jan 30;10(1):10-18. doi: 10.4103/GMIT.GMIT_21_20. eCollection 2021 Jan-Mar.Gynecol Minim Invasive Ther. 2021.PMID:33747767Free PMC article.
- Major clinical research advances in gynecologic cancer in 2015.Suh DH, Kim M, Kim HJ, Lee KH, Kim JW.Suh DH, et al.J Gynecol Oncol. 2016 Nov;27(6):e53. doi: 10.3802/jgo.2016.27.e53.J Gynecol Oncol. 2016.PMID:27775259Free PMC article.Review.
References
- Cancer Research UK. Ovarian cancer survival statistics. One-, five- and ten-year survival for ovarian cancer.http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/st... (accessed Nov 3, 2015)
- Jacobs I, Stabile I, Bridges J, et al. Multimodal approach to screening for ovarian cancer. Lancet. 1988;1:268–271. - PubMed
- Jacobs IJ, Skates SJ, MacDonald N, et al. Screening for ovarian cancer: a pilot randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 1999;353:1207–1210. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Associated data
Related information
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Research Materials
Miscellaneous