Insights from UKCTOCS for design, conduct and analyses of large randomised controlled trials.

Abstract: Randomised controlled trials are challenging to deliver. There is a constant need to review and refine recruitment and implementation strategies if they are to be completed on time and within budget. We present the strategies adopted in the United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening, one of the largest individually randomised controlled trials in the world. The trial recruited over 202,000 women (2001-5) and delivered over 670,000 annual screens (2001-11) and over 3 million women-years of follow-up (2001-20). Key to the successful completion were the involvement of senior investigators in the day-to-day running of the trial, proactive trial management and willingness to innovate and use technology. Our underlying ethos was that trial participants should always be at the centre of all our processes. We ensured that they were able to contact either the site or the coordinating centre teams for clarifications about their results, for follow-up and for rescheduling of appointments. To facilitate this, we shared personal identifiers (with consent) with both teams and had dedicated reception staff at both site and coordinating centre. Key aspects were a comprehensive online trial management system which included an electronic data capture system (resulting in an almost paperless trial), biobanking, monitoring and project management modules. The automation of algorithms (to ascertain eligibility and classify results and ensuing actions) and processes (scheduling of appointments, printing of letters, etc.) ensured the protocol was closely followed and timelines were met. Significant engagement with participants ensured retention and low rates of complaints. Our solutions to the design, conduct and analyses issues we faced are highly relevant, given the renewed focus on trials for early detection of cancer. Future work: There is a pressing need to increase the evidence base to support decision making about all aspects of trial methodology. Trial registration: ISRCTN-22488978; ClinicalTrials.gov-NCT00058032. Funding: This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme as award number 16/46/01. The long-term follow-up UKCTOCS (2015 20) was supported by National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR HTA grant 16/46/01), Cancer Research UK, and The Eve Appeal. UKCTOCS (2001-14) was funded by the MRC (G9901012 and G0801228), Cancer Research UK (C1479/A2884), and the UK Department of Health, with additional support from The Eve Appeal. Researchers at UCL were supported by the NIHR UCL Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre and by the MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL core funding (MC_UU_00004/09, MC_UU_00004/08, MC_UU_00004/07). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the UK Department of Health and Social Care.

Randomised controlled trials help us decide whether new health-care approaches are better than those in current use. To successfully complete these on time and within budget, there is a constant need to review and revise the procedures used for delivering various aspects such as invitation, enrolment, follow-up of participants, delivery of the new test, data collection, and analysis. We report on the processes used in the United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening, one of the largest such trials. The United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening enrolled over 202,000 women (2001­5), delivered over 670,000 yearly screens (2001­11) and followed all participants until 2020. Key to our successful completion were the involvement of senior investigators in day-to-day running of the trial, a pre-emptive approach to issues, a willingness to innovate, and the use of technology. Our underlying ethos was that trial participants should always be at the centre of all our processes. We ensured that they were able to always contact either their local or the central team for clarifications and rescheduling of appointments. To facilitate this, we shared participant contact details (with consent) with both teams. We built a comprehensive electronic system to manage all aspects of the trial. This included online forms that the teams completed in real time (resulting in an almost paperless trial) and systems to check and manage trial processes and track blood samples. We automated key steps such as checking whether participants were eligible, assigning correct action based on results of screening tests, scheduling appointments and printing letters. As a result, all participants were treated as set out in the trial plan. Our engagement with participants ensured that they continued participating and we had a low rate of complaints. We faced issues with regard to our initial trial design and the way we planned to analyse the data. We feel that our solutions are highly relevant, especially as there is a renewed focus on trials for early detection of cancer.

Tumour stage, treatment, and survival of women with high-grade serous tubo-ovarian cancer in UKCTOCS: an exploratory analysis of a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In UKCTOCS, there was a decrease in the diagnosis of advanced stage tubo-ovarian cancer but no reduction in deaths in the multimodal screening group compared with the no screening group. Therefore, we did exploratory analyses of patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer to understand the reason for the discrepancy. METHODS: UKCTOCS was a 13-centre randomised controlled trial of screening postmenopausal women from the general population, aged 50-74 years, with intact ovaries. The trial management system randomly allocated (2:1:1) eligible participants (recruited from April 17, 2001, to Sept 29, 2005) in blocks of 32 using computer generated random numbers to no screening or annual screening (multimodal screening or ultrasound screening) until Dec 31, 2011. Follow-up was through national registries until June 30, 2020. An outcome review committee, masked to randomisation group, adjudicated on ovarian cancer diagnosis, histotype, stage, and cause of death. In this study, analyses were intention-to-screen comparisons of women with high-grade serous cancer at censorship (Dec 31, 2014) in multimodal screening versus no screening, using descriptive statistics for stage and treatment endpoints, and the Versatile test for survival from randomisation. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN Registry, 22488978, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00058032. FINDINGS: 202 562 eligible women were recruited (50 625 multimodal screening; 50 623 ultrasound screening; 101 314 no screening). 259 (0·5%) of 50 625 participants in the multimodal screening group and 520 (0·5%) of 101 314 in the no screening group were diagnosed with high-grade serous cancer. In the multimodal screening group compared with the no screening group, fewer were diagnosed with advanced stage disease (195 [75%] of 259 vs 446 [86%] of 520; p=0·0003), more had primary surgery (158 [61%] vs 219 [42%]; p<0·0001), more had zero residual disease following debulking surgery (119 [46%] vs 157 [30%]; p<0·0001), and more received treatment including both surgery and chemotherapy (192 [74%] vs 331 [64%]; p=0·0032). There was no difference in the first-line combination chemotherapy rate (142 [55%] vs 293 [56%]; p=0·69). Median follow-up from randomisation of 779 women with high-grade serous cancer in the multimodal and no screening groups was 9·51 years (IQR 6·04-13·00). At censorship (June 30, 2020), survival from randomisation was longer in women with high-grade serous cancer in the multimodal screening group than in the no screening group with absolute difference in survival of 6·9% (95% CI 0·4-13·0; p=0·042) at 18 years (21% [95% CI 15·6-26·2] vs 14% [95% CI 10·5-17·4]). INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, this is the first evidence that screening can detect high-grade serous cancer earlier and lead to improved short-term treatment outcomes compared with no screening. The potential survival benefit for women with high-grade serous cancer was small, most likely due to only modest gains in early detection and treatment improvement, and tumour biology. The cumulative results of the trial suggest that surrogate endpoints for disease-specific mortality should not currently be used in screening trials for ovarian cancer. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research, Medical Research Council, Cancer Research UK, The Eve Appeal.

Mortality impact, risks, and benefits of general population screening for ovarian cancer: the UKCTOCS randomised controlled trial.

Background: Ovarian and tubal cancers are lethal gynaecological cancers, with over 50% of the patients diagnosed at advanced stage. Trial design: Randomised controlled trial involving 27 primary care trusts adjacent to 13 trial centres based at NHS Trusts in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Methods: Postmenopausal average-risk women, aged 50-74, with intact ovaries and no previous ovarian or current non-ovarian cancer. Interventions: One of two annual screening strategies: (1) multimodal screening (MMS) using a longitudinal CA125 algorithm with repeat CA125 testing and transvaginal scan (TVS) as second line test (2) ultrasound screening (USS) using TVS alone with repeat scan to confirm any abnormality. The control (C) group had no screening. Follow-up was through linkage to national registries, postal follow-up questionnaires and direct communication with trial centres and participants. Objective: To assess comprehensively risks and benefits of ovarian cancer screening in the general population. Outcome: Primary outcome was death due to ovarian or tubal cancer as assigned by an independent outcomes review committee. Secondary outcomes included incidence and stage at diagnosis of ovarian and tubal cancer, compliance, performance characteristics, harms and cost-effectiveness of the two screening strategies and a bioresource for future research. Randomisation: The trial management system confirmed eligibility and randomly allocated participants using computer-generated random numbers to MMS, USS and C groups in a 1:1:2 ratio. Blinding: Investigators and participants were unblinded and outcomes review committee was masked to randomisation group. Analyses: Primary analyses were by intention to screen, comparing separately MMS and USS with C using the Versatile test. Results: 1,243,282 women were invited and 205,090 attended for recruitment between April 2001 and September 2005. Randomised: 202,638 women: 50,640 MMS, 50,639 USS and 101,359 C group. Numbers analysed for primary outcome: 202,562 (>99.9%): 50,625 (>99.9%) MMS, 50,623 (>99.9%) USS, and 101,314 (>99.9%) C group. Outcome: Women in MMS and USS groups underwent 345,570 and 327,775 annual screens between randomisation and 31 December 2011. At median follow-up of 16.3 (IQR 15.1-17.3) years, 2055 women developed ovarian or tubal cancer: 522 (1.0% of 50,625) MMS, 517 (1.0% of 50,623) USS, and 1016 (1.0% of 101314) in C group. Compared to the C group, in the MMS group, the incidence of Stage I/II disease was 39.2% (95% CI 16.1 to 66.9) higher and stage III/IV 10.2% (95% CI -21.3 to 2.4) lower. There was no difference in stage in the USS group. 1206 women died of the disease: 296 (0.6%) MMS, 291 (0.6%) USS, and 619 (0.6%) C group. There was no significant reduction in ovarian and tubal cancer deaths in either MMS (p = 0.580) or USS (p = 0.360) groups compared to the C group. Overall compliance with annual screening episode was 80.8% (345,570/420,047) in the MMS and 78.0% (327,775/420,047) in the USS group. For ovarian and tubal cancers diagnosed within one year of the last test in a screening episode, in the MMS group, the sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive values were 83.8% (95% CI 78.7 to 88.1), 99.8% (95% CI 99.8 to 99.9), and 28.8% (95% CI 25.5 to 32.2) and in the USS group, 72.2% (95% CI 65.9 to 78.0), 99.5% (95% CI 99.5 to 99.5), and 9.1% (95% CI 7.8 to 10.5) respectively. The final within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis was not undertaken as there was no mortality reduction. A bioresource (UKCTOCS Longitudinal Women's Cohort) of longitudinal outcome data and over 0.5 million serum samples including serial annual samples in women in the MMS group was established and to date has been used in many new studies, mainly focused on early detection of cancer. Harms: Both screening tests (venepuncture and TVS) were associated with minor complications with low (8.6/100,000 screens MMS; 18.6/100,000 screens USS) complication rates. Screening itself did not cause anxiety unless more intense repeat testing was required following abnormal screens. In the MMS group, for each screen-detected ovarian or tubal cancer, an additional 2.3 (489 false positives; 212 cancers) women in the MMS group had unnecessary false-positive (benign adnexal pathology or normal adnexa) surgery. Overall, 14 (489/345,572 annual screens) underwent unnecessary surgery per 10,000 screens. In the USS group, for each screen-detected ovarian or tubal cancer, an additional 10 (1630 false positives; 164 cancers) underwent unnecessary false-positive surgery. Overall, 50 (1630/327,775 annual screens) women underwent unnecessary surgery per 10,000 screens. Conclusions: Population screening for ovarian and tubal cancer for average-risk women using these strategies should not be undertaken. Decreased incidence of Stage III/IV cancers during multimodal screening did not translate to mortality reduction. Researchers should be cautious about using early stage as a surrogate outcome in screening trials. Meanwhile the bioresource provides a unique opportunity to evaluate early cancer detection tests. Funding: Long-term follow-up UKCTOCS (2015-2020) - National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR HTA grant 16/46/01), Cancer Research UK, and The Eve Appeal. UKCTOCS (2001-2014) - Medical Research Council (MRC) (G9901012/G0801228), Cancer Research UK (C1479/A2884), and the UK Department of Health, with additional support from The Eve Appeal. Researchers at UCL were supported by the NIHR UCL Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre and by MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL core funding (MR_UU_12023).

Text: Most women with ovarian cancer are diagnosed after the disease has spread widely (advanced stage ­ III and IV) and more than half die within 5 years. We wanted to find out if testing women without symptoms could pick up ovarian cancer at an earlier stage before it has spread beyond the ovaries and tubes and reduce deaths. We also wanted to assess the risks and benefits of such screening. Text: We invited over 1.2 million women living near 13 centres in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Of them, 202,638 joined the trial. All women were between 50 and 74 and were no longer having periods. They had never been diagnosed with ovarian cancer or were not having treatment for any other cancer. They did not have many relatives with ovarian or breast cancer. The volunteers were placed into one of three groups at random. List: 1. The blood test group contained 50,640 women who had yearly CA125 blood tests. If these showed a moderate or high chance of ovarian cancer, they had repeat CA125 tests and a scan. List: 2. The scan group contained 50,639 women who had yearly internal scans of their ovaries and tubes which were repeated if they showed an abnormality. List: 3. The no-screening group contained 101,359 women. Text: Those in the blood and scan groups had screening every year until December 2011. We sent all women health questionnaires and also, with their permission, received information about them from the national cancer and death registries till mid-2020. Text: Women in the screened groups had an average of eight years of screening. We followed them for approximately 16 years after they had joined the trial. During this period, 2055 women were diagnosed with ovarian and tubal cancer. It was about 1 in 100 women (1%) in all three groups. List: • 522 of 50,625 in the blood group. List: • 517 of 50,623 in the scan group. List: • 1016 of 101,314 in the no-screening group. Text: More women were diagnosed with early-stage cancer and fewer were diagnosed with advanced cancer in the blood group compared to the no-screening group. There was no difference in the number diagnosed with early or advanced disease between the scan and no-screening group. Despite this difference, the number of women in each group who died from ovarian and tubal cancer was similar in all three groups: 296 of 50,625 (0.6%) in the blood group, 291 of 50,623 (0.6%) in the scan group and 619 of 101,314 (0.6%) in the no-screening group. Other results showed. List: • Overall, 81% women in the blood group and 78% in the scan group attended all of their annual screening appointments. List: • In the blood group, screening detected 84% of ovarian and tubal cancers diagnosed within one year of the test and correctly classified as normal 99.8% of women who did not have ovarian and tubal cancer. List: • In the scan group, screening detected 72% of ovarian and tubal cancers diagnosed within one year of the last test and correctly classified 99.5% of those who did not have ovarian and tubal cancer. List: • Both screening tests were associated with minor complications. List: • While screening did not increase anxiety, there was slightly increased worry in women who were asked to return for more intense repeat testing. List: • Both screening methods picked up changes that were in fact not ovarian cancer. This meant that women had unnecessary surgery together with the worry and risk of complications that go with it. List: ◦ In the blood group 14 women had unnecessary surgery for every 10,000 women screened annually. This means that for each woman found to have ovarian cancer, an additional 2 women had unnecessary surgery. List: ◦ In the scan group 50 women had unnecessary surgery for every 10,000 women screened annually. This means that for each woman found to have ovarian cancer, an additional 10 women had unnecessary surgery. List: • A biobank with all the donated data and over 0.5 million serum samples, including yearly samples from women in the blood group, was built and continues to be used in many new studies, mainly focused on early detection of cancer. Text: Screening using the CA125 blood test or transvaginal ultrasound scan to test for ovarian cancer did not save lives. Additionally, it was associated with some harm. Therefore, an ovarian cancer screening programme for most women cannot be currently recommended. The trial also showed for the first time that ovarian cancer can be detected earlier through screening. However, for screening to save lives, the test needs to pick up many more women earlier in the course of the disease so that available treatments are effective. The biobank provides an opportunity for scientists to see if newer tests for cancer can detect the disease earlier.

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.

BACKGROUND: Ovarian cancer continues to have a poor prognosis with the majority of women diagnosed with advanced disease. Therefore, we undertook the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS) to determine if population screening can reduce deaths due to the disease. We report on ovarian cancer mortality after long-term follow-up in UKCTOCS. METHODS: In this randomised controlled trial, postmenopausal women aged 50-74 years were recruited from 13 centres in National Health Service trusts in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. Exclusion criteria were bilateral oophorectomy, previous ovarian or active non-ovarian malignancy, or increased familial ovarian cancer risk. The trial management system confirmed eligibility and randomly allocated participants in blocks of 32 using computer generated random numbers to annual multimodal screening (MMS), annual transvaginal ultrasound screening (USS), or no screening, in a 1:1:2 ratio. Follow-up was through national registries. The primary outcome was death due to ovarian or tubal cancer (WHO 2014 criteria) by June 30, 2020. Analyses were by intention to screen, comparing MMS and USS separately with no screening using the versatile test. Investigators and participants were aware of screening type, whereas the outcomes review committee were masked to randomisation group. This study is registered with ISRCTN, 22488978, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00058032. FINDINGS: Between April 17, 2001, and Sept 29, 2005, of 1 243 282 women invited, 202 638 were recruited and randomly assigned, and 202 562 were included in the analysis: 50 625 (25·0%) in the MMS group, 50 623 (25·0%) in the USS group, and 101 314 (50·0%) in the no screening group. At a median follow-up of 16·3 years (IQR 15·1-17·3), 2055 women were diagnosed with tubal or ovarian cancer: 522 (1·0%) of 50 625 in the MMS group, 517 (1·0%) of 50 623 in the USS group, and 1016 (1·0%) of 101 314 in the no screening group. Compared with no screening, there was a 47·2% (95% CI 19·7 to 81·1) increase in stage I and 24·5% (-41·8 to -2·0) decrease in stage IV disease incidence in the MMS group. Overall the incidence of stage I or II disease was 39·2% (95% CI 16·1 to 66·9) higher in the MMS group than in the no screening group, whereas the incidence of stage III or IV disease was 10·2% (-21·3 to 2·4) lower. 1206 women died of the disease: 296 (0·6%) of 50 625 in the MMS group, 291 (0·6%) of 50 623 in the USS group, and 619 (0·6%) of 101 314 in the no screening group. No significant reduction in ovarian and tubal cancer deaths was observed in the MMS (p=0·58) or USS (p=0·36) groups compared with the no screening group. INTERPRETATION: The reduction in stage III or IV disease incidence in the MMS group was not sufficient to translate into lives saved, illustrating the importance of specifying cancer mortality as the primary outcome in screening trials. Given that screening did not significantly reduce ovarian and tubal cancer deaths, general population screening cannot be recommended. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research, Cancer Research UK, and The Eve Appeal.

UKCTOCS update: applying insights of delayed effects in cancer screening trials to the long-term follow-up mortality analysis.

BACKGROUND: During trials that span decades, new evidence including progress in statistical methodology, may require revision of original assumptions. An example is the continued use of a constant-effect approach to analyse the mortality reduction which is often delayed in cancer-screening trials. The latter led us to re-examine our approach for the upcoming primary mortality analysis (2020) of long-term follow-up of the United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (LTFU UKCTOCS), having initially (2014) used the proportional hazards (PH) Cox model. METHODS: We wrote to 12 experts in statistics/epidemiology/screening trials, setting out current evidence, the importance of pre-specification, our previous mortality analysis (2014) and three possible choices for the follow-up analysis (2020) of the mortality outcome: (A) all data (2001-2020) using the Cox model (2014), (B) new data (2015-2020) only and (C) all data (2001-2020) using a test that allows for delayed effects. RESULTS: Of 11 respondents, eight supported changing the 2014 approach to allow for a potential delayed effect (option C), suggesting various tests while three favoured retaining the Cox model (option A). Consequently, we opted for the Versatile test introduced in 2016 which maintains good power for early, constant or delayed effects. We retained the Royston-Parmar model to estimate absolute differences in disease-specific mortality at 5, 10, 15 and 18 years. CONCLUSIONS: The decision to alter the follow-up analysis for the primary outcome on the basis of new evidence and using new statistical methodology for long-term follow-up is novel and has implications beyond UKCTOCS. There is an urgent need for consensus building on how best to design, test, estimate and report mortality outcomes from long-term randomised cancer screening trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN22488978 . Registered on 6 April 2000.

Multi-Marker Longitudinal Algorithms Incorporating HE4 and CA125 in Ovarian Cancer Screening of Postmenopausal Women.

Longitudinal CA125 algorithms are the current basis of ovarian cancer screening. We report on longitudinal algorithms incorporating multiple markers. In the multimodal arm of United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS), 50,640 postmenopausal women underwent annual screening using a serum CA125 longitudinal algorithm. Women (cases) with invasive tubo-ovarian cancer (WHO 2014) following outcome review with stored annual serum samples donated in the 5 years preceding diagnosis were matched 1:1 to controls (no invasive tubo-ovarian cancer) in terms of the number of annual samples and age at randomisation. Blinded samples were assayed for serum human epididymis protein 4 (HE4), CA72-4 and anti-TP53 autoantibodies. Multimarker method of mean trends (MMT) longitudinal algorithms were developed using the assay results and trial CA125 values on the training set and evaluated in the blinded validation set. The study set comprised of 1363 (2-5 per woman) serial samples from 179 cases and 181 controls. In the validation set, area under the curve (AUC) and sensitivity of longitudinal CA125-MMT algorithm were 0.911 (0.871-0.952) and 90.5% (82.5-98.6%). None of the longitudinal multi-marker algorithms (CA125-HE4, CA125-HE4-CA72-4, CA125-HE4-CA72-4-anti-TP53) performed better or improved on lead-time. Our population study suggests that longitudinal HE4, CA72-4, anti-TP53 autoantibodies adds little value to longitudinal serum CA125 as a first-line test in ovarian cancer screening of postmenopausal women.

Sexual functioning in 4,418 postmenopausal women participating in UKCTOCS: a qualitative free-text analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Sexual well-being can contribute significantly to the overall quality of women's lives. This qualitative study aimed to examine sexual activity, functioning, and satisfaction in a large sample of postmenopausal women from the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS) METHODS:: Thematic analysis was used to evaluate the free-text data of the Fallowfield Sexual Activity Questionnaire (FSAQ) completed by UKCTOCS participants at baseline before annual screening. RESULTS: A total of 24,305 women completed the baseline FSAQ and 4,525 (19%) provided free-text data, with 4,418 comments eligible for analysis. Median age was 64 years; 65% had a partner and 22.5% were sexually active. Four interrelated themes were derived: partner availability, physical and sexual health, mental well-being, and interpersonal relationships. Primary reason for absence of sexual activity was lack of a partner, mainly due to widowhood (n = 1,000). Women discussed how partner's medical condition (27%) or sexual dysfunction (13.5%), their own physical health (18%) or menopause-related symptoms (12.5%), and prescribed medication (7%) affected sexual activity. Impact of low libido in self (16%) or partner (7%), relationship problems (10.5%) or logistics (6%), and perceptions of ageing (9%) were also mentioned. Few (3%) referred to positive sexual experiences or had sought medical help for sexual problems (6%). CONCLUSIONS: This qualitative analysis explored postmenopausal women's perspective on their sexual functioning. Having an intimate partner and good physical health are key factors for continuation of sexual activity and satisfaction. Further sexual education for healthcare professionals is needed to raise awareness about sexuality and sexual difficulties in later life. : Video Summary: Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/MENO/A426.

The cost-effectiveness of screening for ovarian cancer: results from the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS).

BACKGROUND: To assess the within-trial cost-effectiveness of an NHS ovarian cancer screening (OCS) programme using data from UKCTOCS and extrapolate results based on average life expectancy. METHODS: Within-trial economic evaluation of no screening (C) vs either (1) an annual OCS programme using transvaginal ultrasound (USS) or (2) an annual ovarian cancer multimodal screening programme with serum CA125 interpreted using a risk algorithm (ROCA) and transvaginal ultrasound as a second-line test (MMS), plus comparison of lifetime extrapolation of the no screening arm and the MMS programme using both a predictive and a Markov model. RESULTS: Using a CA125-ROCA cost of £20, the within-trial results show USS to be strictly dominated by MMS, with the MMS vs C comparison returning an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £91 452 per life year gained (LYG). If the CA125-ROCA unit cost is reduced to £15, the ICER becomes £77 818 per LYG. Predictive extrapolation over the expected lifetime of the UKCTOCS women returns an ICER of £30 033 per LYG, while Markov modelling produces an ICER of £46 922 per QALY. CONCLUSION: Analysis suggests that, after accounting for the lead time required to establish full mortality benefits, a national OCS programme based on the MMS strategy quickly approaches the current NICE thresholds for cost-effectiveness when extrapolated out to lifetime as compared with the within-trial ICER estimates. Whether MMS could be recommended on economic grounds would depend on the confirmation and size of the mortality benefit at the end of an ongoing follow-up of the UKCTOCS cohort.

Evidence of Stage Shift in Women Diagnosed With Ovarian Cancer During Phase II of the United Kingdom Familial Ovarian Cancer Screening Study.

Purpose To establish the performance of screening with serum cancer antigen 125 (CA-125), interpreted using the risk of ovarian cancer algorithm (ROCA), and transvaginal sonography (TVS) for women at high risk of ovarian cancer (OC) or fallopian tube cancer (FTC). Patients and Methods Women whose estimated lifetime risk of OC/FTC was ≥ 10% were recruited at 42 centers in the United Kingdom and underwent ROCA screening every 4 months. TVS occurred annually if ROCA results were normal or within 2 months of an abnormal ROCA result. Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) was encouraged throughout the study. Participants were observed via cancer registries, questionnaires, and notification by centers. Performance was calculated after censoring 365 days after prior screen, with modeling of occult cancers detected at RRSO. Results Between June 14, 2007, and May 15, 2012, 4,348 women underwent 13,728 women-years of screening. The median follow-up time was 4.8 years. Nineteen patients were diagnosed with invasive OC/FTC within 1 year of prior screening (13 diagnoses were screen-detected and six were occult at RRSO). No symptomatic interval cancers occurred. Ten (52.6%) of the total 19 diagnoses were stage I to II OC/FTC (CI, 28.9% to 75.6%). Of the 13 screen-detected cancers, five (38.5%) were stage I to II (CI, 13.9% to 68.4%). Of the six occult cancers, five (83.3%) were stage I to II (CI, 35.9% to 99.6%). Modeled sensitivity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for OC/FTC detection within 1 year were 94.7% (CI, 74.0% to 99.9%), 10.8% (6.5% to 16.5%), and 100% (CI, 100% to 100%), respectively. Seven (36.8%) of the 19 cancers diagnosed < 1 year after prior screen were stage IIIb to IV (CI, 16.3% to 61.6%) compared with 17 (94.4%) of 18 cancers diagnosed > 1 year after screening ended (CI, 72.7% to 99.9%; P < .001). Eighteen (94.8%) of 19 cancers diagnosed < 1 year after prior screen had zero residual disease (with lower surgical complexity, P = .16) (CI, 74.0% to 99.9%) compared with 13 (72.2%) of 18 cancers subsequently diagnosed (CI, 46.5% to 90.3%; P = .09). Conclusion ROCA-based screening is an option for women at high risk of OC/FTC who defer or decline RRSO, given its high sensitivity and significant stage shift. However, it remains unknown whether this strategy would improve survival in screened high-risk women.

Testing breast cancer serum biomarkers for early detection and prognosis in pre-diagnosis samples.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Although mammography screening is available, there is an ongoing interest in improved early detection and prognosis. Herein, we have analysed a combination of serological biomarkers in a case-control cohort of sera taken before diagnosis. METHODS: This nested case-control study within the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS) used serum samples from 239 women who subsequently developed breast cancer and 239 matched cancer-free controls. Sera were screened by ELISA for 9 candidate markers. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to examine associations with clinico-pathological features and between case controls in different time groups before diagnosis. RESULTS: Significant associations with clinico-pathological features related to prognosis were found for several candidates (CA15-3, HSP90A and PAI-1). However, there were no consistent differences between cases and controls for any candidate in the lead up to diagnosis. Whilst combination models outperformed single markers, there was no increase in performance towards diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: This study using unique pre-diagnosis samples shows that CA15-3, HSP90A and PAI-1 have potential as early prognostic markers and warrant further investigation. However, none of the candidates or combinations would be useful for screening.

Aberrant regulation of RANKL/OPG in women at high risk of developing breast cancer.

Breast cancer is the most common female cancer, affecting approximately one in eight women during their lifetime in North America and Europe. Receptor Activator of NF-kB Ligand (RANKL), its receptor RANK and the natural antagonist osteoprotegerin (OPG) are essential regulators of bone resorption. We have initially shown that RANKL/RANK are essential for hormone-driven mammary epithelial proliferation in pregnancy and RANKL/RANK have been implicated in mammary stem cell biology. Using genetic mouse-models, we and others identified the RANKL/RANK system as a key regulator of sex hormone, BRCA1-mutation, and oncogene-driven breast cancer and we proposed that RANKL/RANK might be involved in the initiation of breast tumors. We now report that in postmenopausal women without known genetic predisposition, high RANKL and progesterone serum levels stratify a subpopulation of women at high risk of developing breast cancer 12-24 months before diagnosis (5.33-fold risk, 95%CI 1.5-25.4; P=0.02). In women with established breast cancer, we demonstrate that RANKL/OPG ratios change dependent on the presence of circulating tumor cells (CTCs). Finally, we show in a prospective human breast cancer cohort that alterations in RANKL/OPG ratios are significantly associated with breast cancer manifestation. These data indicate that the RANKL/RANK/OPG system is deregulated in post-menopausal women at high risk for breast cancer and in women with circulating tumor cells. Thus, serum levels of RANKL/OPG are potentially indicative of predisposition and progression of breast cancer in humans. Advancement of our findings towards clinical application awaits prior validation in independent patient cohorts.

Ovarian cancer screening and mortality in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS): a randomised controlled trial.

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, number NCT00058032. 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.

Decreased Serum Thrombospondin-1 Levels in Pancreatic Cancer Patients Up to 24 Months Prior to Clinical Diagnosis: Association with Diabetes Mellitus.

PURPOSE: Identification of serum biomarkers enabling earlier diagnosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) could improve outcome. Serum protein profiles in patients with preclinical disease and at diagnosis were investigated. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Serum from cases up to 4 years prior to PDAC diagnosis and controls (UKCTOCS,n= 174) were studied, alongside samples from patients diagnosed with PDAC, chronic pancreatitis, benign biliary disease, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and healthy subjects (n= 298). Isobaric tags for relative and absolute quantification (iTRAQ) enabled comparisons of pooled serum from a test set (n= 150). Validation was undertaken using multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) and/or Western blotting in all 472 human samples and samples from a KPC mouse model. RESULTS: iTRAQ identified thrombospondin-1 (TSP-1) as reduced preclinically and in diagnosed samples. MRM confirmed significant reduction in levels of TSP-1 up to 24 months prior to diagnosis. A combination of TSP-1 and CA19-9 gave an AUC of 0.86, significantly outperforming both markers alone (0.69 and 0.77, respectively;P< 0.01). TSP-1 was also decreased in PDAC patients compared with healthy controls (P< 0.05) and patients with benign biliary obstruction (P< 0.01). Low levels of TSP-1 correlated with poorer survival, preclinically (P< 0.05) and at clinical diagnosis (P< 0.02). In PDAC patients, reduced TSP-1 levels were more frequently observed in those with confirmed diabetes mellitus (P< 0.01). Significantly lower levels were also observed in PDAC patients with diabetes compared with individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (P= 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Circulating TSP-1 levels decrease up to 24 months prior to diagnosis of PDAC and significantly enhance the diagnostic performance of CA19-9. The influence of diabetes mellitus on biomarker behavior should be considered in future studies.

Osteoprotegerin (OPG), The Endogenous Inhibitor of Receptor Activator of NF-κB Ligand (RANKL), is Dysregulated in BRCA Mutation Carriers.

Breast cancer development in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers is a net consequence of cell-autonomous and cell nonautonomous factors which may serve as excellent targets for cancer prevention. In light of our previous data we sought to investigate the consequences of the BRCA-mutation carrier state on RANKL/osteoprotegerin (OPG) signalling. We analysed serum levels of RANKL, OPG, RANKL/OPG complex, oestradiol (E2), and progesterone (P) during menstrual cycle progression in 391 BRCA1/2-mutation carriers and 782 noncarriers. These studies were complemented by analyses of RANKL and OPG in the serum and mammary tissues of female cynomolgus macaques (n = 88) and serum RANKL and OPG in postmenopausal women (n = 150). BRCA-mutation carriers had lower mean values of free serum OPG in particular in BRCA1-mutation carriers (p = 0.018) compared with controls. Among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, lower OPG levels were associated with germline mutation locations known to confer an increased breast cancer risk (p = 0.003). P is associated with low OPG levels in serum and tissue, particularly in BRCA-mutation carriers (rho = - 0.216; p = 0.002). Serum OPG levels were inversely correlated (rho = - 0.545, p < 0.001) with mammary epithelial proliferation measured by Ki67 expression and increased (p = 0.01) in postmenopause. The P-RANKL/OPG system is dysregulated in BRCA-mutation carriers. These and previously published data provide a strong rationale for further investigation of antiprogestogens or an anti-RANKL antibody such as denosumab for breast cancer prevention.

HOTAIR and its surrogate DNA methylation signature indicate carboplatin resistance in ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Understanding carboplatin resistance in ovarian cancer is critical for the improvement of patients' lives. Multipotent mesenchymal stem cells or an aggravated epithelial to mesenchymal transition phenotype of a cancer are integrally involved in pathways conferring chemo-resistance. Long non-coding RNA HOTAIR (HOX transcript antisense intergenic RNA) is involved in mesenchymal stem cell fate and cancer biology. METHODS: We analyzed HOTAIR expression and associated surrogate DNA methylation (DNAme) in 134 primary ovarian cancer cases (63 received carboplatin, 55 received cisplatin and 16 no chemotherapy). We validated our findings by HOTAIR expression and DNAme analysis in a multicentre setting of five additional sets, encompassing 946 ovarian cancers. Chemo-sensitivity has been assessed in cell culture experiments. RESULTS: HOTAIR expression was significantly associated with poor survival in carboplatin-treated patients with adjusted hazard ratios for death of 3.64 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.78-7.42; P < 0.001) in the discovery and 1.63 (95 % CI 1.04-2.56; P = 0.032) in the validation set. This effect was not seen in patients who did not receive carboplatin (0.97 [95 % CI 0.52-1.80; P = 0.932]). HOTAIR expression or its surrogate DNAme signature predicted poor outcome in all additional sets of carboplatin-treated ovarian cancer patients while HOTAIR expressors responded preferentially to cisplatin (multivariate interaction P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Non-coding RNA HOTAIR or its more stable DNAme surrogate may indicate the presence of a subset of cells which confer resistance to carboplatin and can serve as (1) a marker to personalise treatment and (2) a novel target to overcome carboplatin resistance.

Contribution of Germline Mutations in the RAD51B, RAD51C, and RAD51D Genes to Ovarian Cancer in the Population.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to estimate the contribution of deleterious mutations in the RAD51B, RAD51C, and RAD51D genes to invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) in the population and in a screening trial of individuals at high risk of ovarian cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The coding sequence and splice site boundaries of the three RAD51 genes were sequenced and analyzed in germline DNA from a case-control study of 3,429 patients with invasive EOC and 2,772 controls as well as in 2,000 unaffected women who were BRCA1/BRCA2 negative from the United Kingdom Familial Ovarian Cancer Screening Study (UK_FOCSS) after quality-control analysis. RESULTS: In the case-control study, we identified predicted deleterious mutations in 28 EOC cases (0.82%) compared with three controls (0.11%; P < .001). Mutations in EOC cases were more frequent in RAD51C (14 occurrences, 0.41%) and RAD51D (12 occurrences, 0.35%) than in RAD51B (two occurrences, 0.06%). RAD51C mutations were associated with an odds ratio of 5.2 (95% CI, 1.1 to 24; P = .035), and RAD51D mutations conferred an odds ratio of 12 (95% CI, 1.5 to 90; P = .019). We identified 13 RAD51 mutations (0.65%) in unaffected UK_FOCSS participants (RAD51C, n = 7; RAD51D, n = 5; and RAD51B, n = 1), which was a significantly greater rate than in controls (P < .001); furthermore, RAD51 mutation carriers were more likely than noncarriers to have a family history of ovarian cancer (P < .001). CONCLUSION: These results confirm that RAD51C and RAD51D are moderate ovarian cancer susceptibility genes and suggest that they confer levels of risk of EOC that may warrant their use alongside BRCA1 and BRCA2 in routine clinical genetic testing.

Germline Mutations in the BRIP1, BARD1, PALB2, and NBN Genes in Women With Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is the most lethal gynecological malignancy, responsible for 13 000 deaths per year in the United States. Risk prediction based on identifying germline mutations in ovarian cancer susceptibility genes could have a clinically significant impact on reducing disease mortality. METHODS: Next generation sequencing was used to identify germline mutations in the coding regions of four candidate susceptibility genes-BRIP1, BARD1, PALB2 and NBN-in 3236 invasive EOC case patients and 3431 control patients of European origin, and in 2000 unaffected high-risk women from a clinical screening trial of ovarian cancer (UKFOCSS). For each gene, we estimated the prevalence and EOC risks and evaluated associations between germline variant status and clinical and epidemiological risk factor information. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: We found an increased frequency of deleterious mutations in BRIP1 in case patients (0.9%) and in the UKFOCSS participants (0.6%) compared with control patients (0.09%) (P = 1 x 10(-4) and 8 x 10(-4), respectively), but no differences for BARD1 (P = .39), NBN1 ( P = .61), or PALB2 (P = .08). There was also a difference in the frequency of rare missense variants in BRIP1 between case patients and control patients (P = 5.5 x 10(-4)). The relative risks associated with BRIP1 mutations were 11.22 for invasive EOC (95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.22 to 34.10, P = 1 x 10(-4)) and 14.09 for high-grade serous disease (95% CI = 4.04 to 45.02, P = 2 x 10(-5)). Segregation analysis in families estimated the average relative risks in BRIP1 mutation carriers compared with the general population to be 3.41 (95% CI = 2.12 to 5.54, P = 7×10(-7)). CONCLUSIONS: Deleterious germline mutations in BRIP1 are associated with a moderate increase in EOC risk. These data have clinical implications for risk prediction and prevention approaches for ovarian cancer and emphasize the critical need for risk estimates based on very large sample sizes before genes of moderate penetrance have clinical utility in cancer prevention.

Serum CA19-9 is significantly upregulated up to 2 years before diagnosis with pancreatic cancer: implications for early disease detection.

PURPOSE: Biomarkers for the early detection of pancreatic cancer are urgently needed. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate whether increased levels of serum CA19-9, CA125, CEACAM1, and REG3A are present before clinical presentation of pancreatic cancer and to assess the performance of combined markers for early detection and prognosis. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: This nested case-control study within the UKCTOCS included 118 single and 143 serial serum samples from 154 postmenopausal women who were subsequently diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and 304 matched noncancer controls. Samples were split randomly into independent training and test sets. CA19-9, CA125, CEACAM1, and REG3A were measured using ELISA and/or CLIA. Performance of markers to detect cancers at different times before diagnosis and for prognosis was evaluated. RESULTS: At 95% specificity, CA19-9 (>37 U/mL) had a sensitivity of 68% up to 1 year, and 53% up to 2 years before diagnosis. Combining CA19-9 and CA125 improved sensitivity as CA125 was elevated (>30 U/mL) in approximately 20% of CA19-9-negative cases. CEACAM1 and REG3A were late markers adding little in combined models. Average lead times of 20 to 23 months were estimated for test-positive cases. Prediagnostic levels of CA19-9 and CA125 were associated with poor overall survival (HR, 2.69 and 3.15, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: CA19-9 and CA125 have encouraging sensitivity for detecting preclinical pancreatic cancer, and both markers can be used as prognostic tools. This work challenges the prevailing view that CA19-9 is upregulated late in the course of pancreatic cancer development.

Performance of ultrasound as a second line test to serum CA125 in ovarian cancer screening.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the performance of ultrasonography in a multimodal ovarian cancer screening strategy. DESIGN: Prospective ovarian cancer screening trial between December 1986 and June 1993. SETTING: General practice, occupational health departments and an ovarian cancer screening clinic at a London teaching hospital. POPULATION: Postmenopausal women, ≥ 45 years with a raised CA125. METHODS: Volunteers with a CA125 ≥ 30 U/mL underwent a pelvic ultrasound. Scans were classified as normal, abnormal (ovarian volume ≥ 8.8 mL) or equivocal (normal volume with abnormal morphology). Abnormal ovarian morphology was subclassified as simple cyst (single, thin walled cyst with no septa or papillary projections) or complex (all other abnormalities). Volunteers with abnormal scans were referred for a gynaecological opinion. Follow up was via the cancer registry and postal questionnaires. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value of different ultrasound criteria for detection of index cancer (e.g. primary invasive epithelial carcinoma of the ovary and fallopian tube). RESULTS: Seven hundred and forty-one women underwent 1219 scans and 20 index cancers occurred during a median follow up of 6.8 years. The sensitivity for detection of ovarian cancer of different ultrasound criteria was 100% for abnormal morphology, 89.5% for abnormal volume and 84% for complex morphology. The highest specificity (97%) and positive predictive value (37.2%) was achieved using complex morphology. CONCLUSION: A variety of ultrasound criteria can achieve high sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value for index cancers in postmenopausal women with an elevated CA125. Use of ovarian morphology to interpret ultrasound may increase sensitivity and use of complex ovarian morphology may increase the positive predictive value.