Comparison of two Lynch screening strategies in endometrial cancer in a California health system.

OBJECTIVE: Compare detection of Lynch syndrome in endometrial cancer between regions of a health care system with different screening strategies. METHODS: A retrospective study of endometrial cancer (EC) cases from 2 regions of an integrated health care system (Kaiser Permanente Northern (KPNC) and Southern (KPSC) California). Within KPNC, immunohistochemistry tumor screening (IHC) was physician ordered and risk-based; within KPSC, IHC was universal and automated. Clinical risk factors associated with abnormal IHC and Lynch Syndrome (LS) were identified. RESULTS: During the study, there were 2045 endometrial cancers: 1399 in the physician-order group and 646 in the universal testing group. In the physician-order group: among women < age 60, 34% underwent IHC; 9.6% were abnormal, and 3% were possible LS after methylation testing; among women ≥60, 11% underwent IHC, 3% were abnormal and <1% were possible LS. In the universal group, 87% of women age <60 had IHC, 19.4% were abnormal, and 6% were possible LS; Among women age ≥60, 82% underwent IHC, 26% were abnormal, and 2% were possible LS. There were no differences in LS cases between the physician-order group and the universal group in either age strata (<60: 3% vs. 3.6%, p=0.62; ≥60: <1% vs. 1%, p=0.63) Factors associated with LS were younger age (odds ratio (OR) 0.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04-0.29) and lower body mass index (BMI), (OR 0.38 95% CI 0.18-0.80). CONCLUSIONS: Universal IHC screening did not result in increased LS detection in EC.

Feasibility, patient compliance and acceptability of ovarian cancer surveillance using two serum biomarkers and Risk of Ovarian Cancer Algorithm compared to standard ultrasound and CA 125 among women with BRCA mutations.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the feasibility, patient acceptability of and compliance of a new surveillance strategy for ovarian cancer surveillance in women with BRCA mutations, based on assessments of serum CA125 and HE4 every 4 months (Risk of Ovarian Cancer Algorithm (ROCA) arm), compared to Standard of Care (SOC) surveillance with CA125 blood tests and pelvic ultrasounds every 6 months. METHODS: Women were recruited 6/13/16-9/11/17 from an integrated health care system in California for this non-randomized prospective cohort study. Women were invited to participate in a novel serum biomarker surveillance strategy using ROCA or they could opt to be in the standard of care control arm with ultrasound and CA 125 every 6 months. Outcomes assessed included compliance, self-reported distress using the Impact of Event Scale (IES) and cancer anxiety using the Cancer Worry Scale. RESULTS: There were 159 women in the ROCA arm and 43 in the SOC arm. Overall, compliance was higher in the ROCA arm (83.2%) than in SOC (51.9%), p < 0.0001. Based on the IES, ROCA arm women reported less feelings about intrusion and avoidance at 12 months compared to baseline; the difference approached significance for intrusion (7.6% vs 4.1% severe, p = 0.057) and was statistically significant for avoidance (20.8% vs 9.9% severe, p = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: This pilot demonstrated that compliance was high with blood tests performed every four months for ovarian cancer surveillance. Moreover, ROCA women had lower stress scores over time than SOC women. Given the lack of clinical utility and poor compliance shown with traditional ultrasound and CA125 tests, further investigation is warranted of longitudinal biomarker surveillance for early detection of ovarian cancer.