Sialyl-Tn serves as a potential therapeutic target for ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Ovarian cancer remains the deadliest of the gynecologic cancers in the United States. There have been limited advances in treatment strategies that have seen marked increases in overall survival. Thus, it is essential to continue developing and validating new treatment strategies and markers to identify patients who would benefit from the new strategy. In this report, we sought to further validate applications for a novel humanized anti-Sialyl Tn antibody-drug conjugate (anti-STn-ADC) in ovarian cancer. METHODS: We aimed to further test a humanized anti-STn-ADC in sialyl-Tn (STn) positive and negative ovarian cancer cell line, patient-derived organoid (PDO), and patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models. Furthermore, we sought to determine whether serum STn levels would reflect STn positivity in the tumor samples enabling us to identify patients that an anti-STn-ADC strategy would best serve. We developed a custom ELISA with high specificity and sensitivity, that was used to assess whether circulating STn levels would correlate with stage, progression-free survival, overall survival, and its value in augmenting CA-125 as a diagnostic. Lastly, we assessed whether the serum levels reflected what was observed via immunohistochemical analysis in a subset of tumor samples. RESULTS: Our in vitro experiments further define the specificity of the anti-STn-ADC. The ovarian cancer PDO, and PDX models provide additional support for an anti-STn-ADC-based strategy for targeting ovarian cancer. The custom serum ELISA was informative in potential triaging of patients with elevated levels of STn. However, it was not sensitive enough to add value to existing CA-125 levels for a diagnostic. While the ELISA identified non-serous ovarian tumors with low CA-125 levels, the sample numbers were too small to provide any confidence the STn ELISA would meaningfully add to CA-125 for diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Our preclinical data support the concept that an anti-STn-ADC may be a viable option for treating patients with elevated STn levels. Moreover, our STn-based ELISA could complement IHC in identifying patients with whom an anti-STn-based strategy might be more effective.

Normal Risk Ovarian Screening Study: 21-Year Update.

PURPOSE: The Normal Risk Ovarian Screening Study (NROSS) tested a two-stage screening strategy in postmenopausal women at conventional hereditary risk where significantly rising cancer antigen (CA)-125 prompted transvaginal sonography (TVS) and abnormal TVS prompted surgery to detect ovarian cancer. METHODS: A total of 7,856 healthy postmenopausal women were screened annually for a total of 50,596 woman-years in a single-arm study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00539162). Serum CA125 was analyzed with the Risk of Ovarian Cancer Algorithm (ROCA) each year. If risk was unchanged and <1:2,000, women returned in a year. If risk increased above 1:500, TVS was undertaken immediately, and if risk was intermediate, CA125 was repeated in 3 months with a further increase in risk above 1:500 prompting referral for TVS. An average of 2% of participants were referred to TVS annually. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were referred for operations detecting 15 ovarian cancers and two borderline tumors with 12 in early stage (I-II). In addition, seven endometrial cancers were detected with six in stage I. As four ovarian cancers and two borderline tumors were diagnosed with a normal ROCA, the sensitivity for detecting ovarian and borderline cancer was 74% (17 of 23), and 70% of ROCA-detected cases (12 of 17) were in stage I-II. NROSS screening reduced late-stage (III-IV) disease by 34% compared with UKCTOCS controls and by 30% compared with US SEER values. The positive predictive value (PPV) was 50% (17 of 34) for detecting ovarian cancer and 74% (25 of 34) for any cancer, far exceeding the minimum acceptable study end point of 10% PPV. CONCLUSION: While the NROSS trial was not powered to detect reduced mortality, the high specificity, PPV, and marked stage shift support further development of this strategy.

Autoantibodies, antigen-autoantibody complexes and antigens complement CA125 for early detection of ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Multiple antigens, autoantibodies (AAb), and antigen-autoantibody (Ag-AAb) complexes were compared for their ability to complement CA125 for early detection of ovarian cancer. METHODS: Twenty six biomarkers were measured in a single panel of sera from women with early stage (I-II) ovarian cancers (n = 64), late stage (III-IV) ovarian cancers (186), benign pelvic masses (200) and from healthy controls (502), and then split randomly (50:50) into a training set to identify the most promising classifier and a validation set to compare its performance to CA125 alone. RESULTS: Eight biomarkers detected ≥ 8% of early stage cases at 98% specificity. A four-biomarker panel including CA125, HE4, HE4 Ag-AAb and osteopontin detected 75% of early stage cancers in the validation set from among healthy controls compared to 62% with CA125 alone (p = 0.003) at 98% specificity. The same panel increased sensitivity for distinguishing early-stage ovarian cancers from benign pelvic masses by 25% (p = 0.0004) at 95% specificity. From 21 autoantibody candidates, 3 AAb (anti-p53, anti-CTAG1 and annt-Il-8) detected 22% of early stage ovarian cancers, potentially lengthening lead time prior to diagnosis. CONCLUSION: A four biomarker panel achieved greater sensitivity at the same specificity for early detection of ovarian cancer than CA125 alone.

Ovarian cancer symptoms in pre-clinical invasive epithelial ovarian cancer - An exploratory analysis nested within the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS).

OBJECTIVE: UKCTOCS provides an opportunity to explore symptoms in preclinical invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (iEOC). We report on symptoms in women with pre-clinical (screen-detected) cancers (PC) compared to clinically diagnosed (CD) cancers. METHODS: In UKCTOCS, 202638 postmenopausal women, aged 50-74 were randomly allocated (April 17, 2001-September 29, 2005) 2:1:1 to no screening or annual screening till Dec 31,2011, using a multimodal or ultrasound strategy. Follow-up was through national registries. An outcomes committee adjudicated on OC diagnosis, histotype, stage. Eligible women were those diagnosed with iEOC at primary censorship (Dec 31, 2014). Symptom details were extracted from trial clinical-assessment forms and medical records. Descriptive statistics were used to compare symptoms in PC versus CD women with early (I/II) and advanced (III/IV/unable to stage) stage high-grade-serous (HGSC) cancer. ISRCTN-22488978; ClinicalTrials.gov-NCT00058032. RESULTS: 1133 (286PC; 847CD) women developed iEOC. Median age (years) at diagnosis was earlier in PC compared to CD (66.8PC, 68.7CD, p = 0.0001) group. In the PC group, 48% (112/234; 90%, 660/730CD) reported symptoms when questioned. Half PC (50%, 13/26PC; 36%, 29/80CD; p = 0.213) women with symptomatic HGSC had >1symptom, with abdominal symptoms most common, both in early (62%, 16/26, PC; 53% 42/80, CD; p = 0.421) and advanced (57%, 49/86, PC; 74%, 431/580, CD; p = 0.001) stages. In symptomatic early-stage HGSC, compared to CD, PC women reported more gastrointestinal (change in bowel habits and dyspepsia) (35%, 9/26PC; 9%, 7/80CD; p = 0.001) and systemic (mostly lethargy/tiredness) (27%, 7/26PC; 9%, 7/80CD; p = 0.017) symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings, add to the growing evidence, that we should reconsider what constitutes alert symptoms for early tubo-ovarian cancer. We need a more nuanced complex of key symptoms which is then evaluated and refined in a prospective trial.

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.

The Liquid Biopsy Consortium: Challenges and opportunities for early cancer detection and monitoring.

The emerging field of liquid biopsy stands at the forefront of novel diagnostic strategies for cancer and other diseases. Liquid biopsy allows minimally invasive molecular characterization of cancers for diagnosis, patient stratification to therapy, and longitudinal monitoring. Liquid biopsy strategies include detection and monitoring of circulating tumor cells, cell-free DNA, and extracellular vesicles. In this review, we address the current understanding and the role of existing liquid-biopsy-based modalities in cancer diagnostics and monitoring. We specifically focus on the technical and clinical challenges associated with liquid biopsy and biomarker development being addressed by the Liquid Biopsy Consortium, established through the National Cancer Institute. The Liquid Biopsy Consortium has developed new methods/assays and validated existing methods/technologies to capture and characterize tumor-derived circulating cargo, as well as addressed existing challenges and provided recommendations for advancing biomarker assays.

Ultrasensitive Detection of Circulating LINE-1 ORF1p as a Specific Multicancer Biomarker.

Improved biomarkers are needed for early cancer detection, risk stratification, treatment selection, and monitoring treatment response. Although proteins can be useful blood-based biomarkers, many have limited sensitivity or specificity for these applications. Long INterspersed Element-1 (LINE-1) open reading frame 1 protein (ORF1p) is a transposable element protein overexpressed in carcinomas and high-risk precursors during carcinogenesis with negligible expression in normal tissues, suggesting ORF1p could be a highly specific cancer biomarker. To explore ORF1p as a blood-based biomarker, we engineered ultrasensitive digital immunoassays that detect mid-attomolar (10-17 mol/L) ORF1p concentrations in plasma across multiple cancers with high specificity. Plasma ORF1p shows promise for early detection of ovarian cancer, improves diagnostic performance in a multianalyte panel, provides early therapeutic response monitoring in gastroesophageal cancers, and is prognostic for overall survival in gastroesophageal and colorectal cancers. Together, these observations nominate ORF1p as a multicancer biomarker with potential utility for disease detection and monitoring. SIGNIFICANCE: The LINE-1 ORF1p transposon protein is pervasively expressed in many cancers and is a highly specific biomarker of multiple common, lethal carcinomas and their high-risk precursors in tissue and blood. Ultrasensitive ORF1p assays from as little as 25 µL plasma are novel, rapid, cost-effective tools in cancer detection and monitoring. See related commentary by Doucet and Cristofari, p. 2502. This article is featured in Selected Articles from This Issue, p. 2489.

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.

Ultrasensitive detection of circulating LINE-1 ORF1p as a specific multi-cancer biomarker.

Improved biomarkers are needed for early cancer detection, risk stratification, treatment selection, and monitoring treatment response. While proteins can be useful blood-based biomarkers, many have limited sensitivity or specificity for these applications. Long INterspersed Element-1 (LINE-1, L1) open reading frame 1 protein (ORF1p) is a transposable element protein overexpressed in carcinomas and high-risk precursors during carcinogenesis with negligible detectable expression in corresponding normal tissues, suggesting ORF1p could be a highly specific cancer biomarker. To explore the potential of ORF1p as a blood-based biomarker, we engineered ultrasensitive digital immunoassays that detect mid-attomolar (10-17 M) ORF1p concentrations in patient plasma samples across multiple cancers with high specificity. Plasma ORF1p shows promise for early detection of ovarian cancer, improves diagnostic performance in a multi-analyte panel, and provides early therapeutic response monitoring in gastric and esophageal cancers. Together, these observations nominate ORF1p as a multi-cancer biomarker with potential utility for disease detection and monitoring.

LINE-1 ORF1p as a candidate biomarker in high grade serous ovarian carcinoma.

Long interspersed element 1 (LINE-1) open reading frame 1 protein (ORF1p) expression is a common feature of many cancer types, including high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSOC). Here, we report that ORF1p is not only expressed but also released by ovarian cancer and primary tumor cells. Immuno-multiple reaction monitoring-mass spectrometry assays showed that released ORF1p is confidently detectable in conditioned media, ascites, and patients' plasma, implicating ORF1p as a potential biomarker. Interestingly, ORF1p expression is detectable in fallopian tube (FT) epithelial precursors of HGSOC but not in benign FT, suggesting that ORF1p expression in an early event in HGSOC development. Finally, treatment of FT cells with DNA methyltransferase inhibitors led to robust expression and release of ORF1p, validating the regulatory role of DNA methylation in LINE-1 repression in non-tumorigenic tissue.

Internal Standard Triggered-Parallel Reaction Monitoring Mass Spectrometry Enables Multiplexed Quantification of Candidate Biomarkers in Plasma.

Despite advances in proteomic technologies, clinical translation of plasma biomarkers remains low, partly due to a major bottleneck between the discovery of candidate biomarkers and costly clinical validation studies. Due to a dearth of multiplexable assays, generally only a few candidate biomarkers are tested, and the validation success rate is accordingly low. Previously, mass spectrometry-based approaches have been used to fill this gap but feature poor quantitative performance and were generally limited to hundreds of proteins. Here, we demonstrate the capability of an internal standard triggered-parallel reaction monitoring (IS-PRM) assay to greatly expand the numbers of candidates that can be tested with improved quantitative performance. The assay couples immunodepletion and fractionation with IS-PRM and was developed and implemented in human plasma to quantify 5176 peptides representing 1314 breast cancer biomarker candidates. Characterization of the IS-PRM assay demonstrated the precision (median % CV of 7.7%), linearity (median R2 > 0.999 over 4 orders of magnitude), and sensitivity (median LLOQ < 1 fmol, approximately) to enable rank-ordering of candidate biomarkers for validation studies. Using three plasma pools from breast cancer patients and three control pools, 893 proteins were quantified, of which 162 candidate biomarkers were verified in at least one of the cancer pools and 22 were verified in all three cancer pools. The assay greatly expands capabilities for quantification of large numbers of proteins and is well suited for prioritization of viable candidate biomarkers.

Multicancer Early Detection Technologies: A Review Informed by Past Cancer Screening Studies.

More than 75% of cancer-related deaths occur from cancers for which we do not screen. New screening liquid biopsies may help fill these clinical gaps, although evidence of benefit still needs to be assessed. Which lessons can we learn from previous efforts to guide those of the future? Screening trials for ovarian, prostate, pancreatic, and esophageal cancers are revisited to assess the evidence, which has been limited by small effect sizes, short duration of early-stage disease relative to screening frequency, study design, and confounding factors. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) to show mortality reduction have required millions of screening-years, two-decade durations, and been susceptible to external confounding. Future RCTs with late-stage incidence as a surrogate endpoint could substantially reduce these challenges, and clinical studies demonstrating safety and effectiveness of screening in high-risk populations may enable extrapolation to broader average-risk populations. Multicancer early detection tests provide an opportunity to advance these practical study designs. Conditional approvals based on RCTs with surrogate endpoints, contingent upon real world evidence generation and continuation of trials to definitive endpoints, may lower practical barriers to innovation in cancer screening and enable greater progress.

Seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies in the staff of a public school system in the midwestern United States.

Since March 2020, the United States has lost over 580,000 lives to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes COVID-19. A growing body of literature describes population-level SARS-CoV-2 exposure, but studies of antibody seroprevalence within school systems are critically lacking, hampering evidence-based discussions on school reopenings. The Lake Central School Corporation (LCSC), a public school system in suburban Indiana, USA, assessed SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in its staff and identified correlations between seropositivity and subjective histories and demographics. This study is a cross-sectional, population-based analysis of the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in LCSC staff measured in July 2020. We tested for seroprevalence with the Abbott Alinity™ SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody test. The primary outcome was the total seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2, and secondary outcomes included trends of antibody presence in relation to baseline attributes. 753 participants representative of the staff at large were enrolled. 22 participants (2.9%, 95% CI: 1.8% - 4.4%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Correcting for test performance parameters, the seroprevalence is estimated at 1.7% (90% Credible Interval: 0.27% - 3.3%). Multivariable logistic regression including mask wearing, travel history, symptom history, and contact history revealed a 48-fold increase in the odds of seropositivity if an individual previously tested positive for COVID-19 (OR: 48, 95% CI: 4-600). Amongst individuals with no previous positive test, exposure to a person diagnosed with COVID-19 increased the odds of seropositivity by 7-fold (OR: 7.2, 95% CI: 2.6-19). Assuming the presence of antibodies is associated with immunity against SARS-CoV-2 infection, these results demonstrate a broad lack of herd immunity amongst the school corporation's staff irrespective of employment role or location. Protective measures like contact tracing, face coverings, and social distancing are therefore vital to maintaining the safety of both students and staff as the school year progresses.

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.

Performance Characteristics of the Ultrasound Strategy during Incidence Screening in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS).

Randomised controlled trials of ovarian cancer (OC) screening have not yet demonstrated an impact on disease mortality. Meanwhile, the screening data from clinical trials represents a rich resource to understand the performance of modalities used. We report here on incidence screening in the ultrasound arm of UKCTOCS. 44,799 of the 50,639 women who were randomised to annual screening with transvaginal ultrasound attended annual incidence screening between 28 April 2002 and 31 December 2011. Transvaginal ultrasound was used both as the first and the second line test. Participants were followed up through electronic health record linkage and postal questionnaires. Out of 280,534 annual incidence screens, 960 women underwent screen-positive surgery. 113 had ovarian/tubal cancer (80 invasive epithelial). Of the screen-detected invasive epithelial cancers, 37.5% (95% CI: 26.9-49.0) were Stage I/II. An additional 52 (50 invasive epithelial) were diagnosed within one year of their last screen. Of the 50 interval epithelial cancers, 6.0% (95% CI: 1.3-16.5) were Stage I/II. For detection of all ovarian/tubal cancers diagnosed within one year of screen, the sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive values were 68.5% (95% CI: 60.8-75.5), 99.7% (95% CI: 99.7-99.7), and 11.8% (95% CI: 9.8-14) respectively. When the analysis was restricted to invasive epithelial cancers, sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive values were 61.5% (95% CI: 52.6-69.9); 99.7% (95% CI: 99.7-99.7) and 8.3% (95% CI: 6.7-10.3), with 12 surgeries per screen positive. The low sensitivity coupled with the advanced stage of interval cancers suggests that ultrasound scanning as the first line test might not be suitable for population screening for ovarian cancer. Trial registration: ISRCTN22488978. Registered on 6 April 2000.

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.

Seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG Antibodies in the Staff of a Public School System in the Midwestern United States.

BACKGROUND: Since March 2020, the United States has lost over 200,000 lives to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes COVID-19. A growing body of literature describes population-level SARS-CoV-2 exposure, but studies of antibody seroprevalence within school systems are critically lacking, hampering evidence-based discussions on school reopenings. The Lake Central School Corporation (LCSC), a public school system in suburban Indiana, USA, assessed SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in its staff and identified correlations between seropositivity and subjective histories and demographics. METHODS: This study is a cross-sectional, population-based analysis of the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in LCSC staff measured in July 2020. We tested for seroprevalence with the Abbott Alinity™ SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody test. The primary outcome was the total seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2, and secondary outcomes included trends of antibody presence in relation to baseline attributes. FINDINGS: 753 participants representative of the staff at large were enrolled. 22 participants (2·9%, 95% CI: 1·8% - 4·4%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Correcting for test performance parameters, the seroprevalence is estimated at 1·7% (90% Credible Interval: 0·27% - 3·3%). Multivariable logistic regression including mask wearing, travel history, symptom history, and contact history revealed a 48-fold increase in the odds of seropositivity if an individual previously tested positive for COVID-19 (OR: 48.2, 95% CI: 4 - 600). Amongst individuals with no previous positive test, exposure to a person diagnosed with COVID-19 increased the odds of seropositivity by 7-fold (OR: 6.5, 95% CI: 2.06 - 18.9). INTERPRETATION: Assuming the presence of antibodies is associated with immunity against SARS-CoV-2 infection, these results demonstrate a broad lack of herd immunity amongst the school corporation's staff irrespective of employment role or location. Protective measures like contact tracing face coverings, and social distancing are therefore vital to maintaining the safety of both students and staff as the school year progresses. FUNDING: Lake Central School Corporation. RESEARCH IN CONTEXT: Evidence before this study: We searched PubMed, SSRN, Research Square, and Gale Power Search for peer-reviewed articles, preprints, and research reports on the seroprevalence of anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) IgG antibodies, published in English, using the search terms "COVID-19 in schools," "COVID-19 seroprevalence," "COVID antibodies," and similar terms up to August 30, 2020. We identified several articles pertaining to the spread of COVID-19 within schools and among children. Current evidence on the pediatric transmission of COVID-19 is mixed, but early data on secondary school transmission are sobering. Shared among this literature was an acknowledgement of the paucity of data regarding how the pandemic may progress in the students and staff of primary and secondary education systems. To our knowledge, there is no study that specifically interrogates the seroprevalence of COVID-19 among US public school staff.Added value of this study: As of September 2020, the United States has had more COVID-19 cases than any other country. With many US schools opening for in-person classes for the 2020-2021 school year, a granular understanding of the transmission dynamics within public school systems is vital to effectively and appropriately defending against COVID-19. Most seroprevalence studies have been based on city or hospital-level populations; this study establishes a baseline seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in a Midwest public school district prior to the initiation of the school year.Implications of all available evidence: The results of this study reveal that the majority (98·3%) of LCSC staff have not been exposed to COVID-19 prior to the start of the school year. Staff are therefore vulnerable to a large outbreak after the school opens, underscoring the importance of maintaining rigorous sanitary practices within the schools. It is vital that all members of LCSC and similar school districts across the country continue social distancing and mask wearing throughout the school day to limit exposure to COVID-19. Contact tracing in combination with rapid testing for individuals exposed to an individual with COVID-19 should also be employed.

Biomarkers and Strategies for Early Detection of Ovarian Cancer.

Early detection of ovarian cancer remains an important unmet medical need. Effective screening could reduce mortality by 10%-30%. Used individually, neither serum CA125 nor transvaginal sonography (TVS) is sufficiently sensitive or specific. Two-stage strategies have proven more effective, where a significant rise above a woman's baseline CA125 prompts TVS and an abnormal sonogram prompts surgery. Two major screening trials have documented that this strategy has adequate specificity, but sensitivity for early-stage (I-II) disease must improve to have a greater impact on mortality. To improve the first stage, different panels of protein biomarkers have detected cases missed by CA125. Autoantibodies against TP53 have detected 20% of early-stage ovarian cancers 8 months before elevation of CA125 and 22 months before clinical diagnosis. Panels of autoantibodies and antigen-autoantibody complexes are being evaluated with the goal of detecting >90% of early-stage ovarian cancers, alone or in combination with CA125, while maintaining 98% specificity in control subjects. Other biomarkers, including micro-RNAs, ctDNA, methylated DNA, and combinations of ctDNA alterations, are being tested to provide an optimal first-stage test. New technologies are also being developed with greater sensitivity than TVS to image small volumes of tumor.See all articles in this CEBP Focus section, "NCI Early Detection Research Network: Making Cancer Detection Possible."