Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of transvaginal ultrasound (TVU) and serum CA-125 measurement in women at different risk of developing ovarian cancer/fallopian tube cancer (OC/FTC) and the incidence of primary peritoneal cancer (PPC) after risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO). Methods: Between 2002 and 2014, 661 women at different risk of OC/FTC/PPC due to a family history or BRCA1/2 gene mutation were offered TVU and CA-125 measurement or RRSO as prevention strategies. The detection rate of OC/FTC/PPC was evaluated, and the sensitivity and specificity for CA-125 measurement and TVU were calculated. Survival and event analysis was performed for diagnosed patients. Results: After a median follow-up of 112 months, 12 OC/FTC/PPC cases were detected (2.6/1,000 persons/year). The screening sensitivity was 70%, with 73% for BRCA carriers. Six (50%) of 12 cancers were stage I or II. Among 41 women who underwent RRSO, 2 BRCA1 carriers developed a PPC (4.9%). At 61-month follow-up, overall and event-free survival were 75 and 64%, respectively. Conclusions: The cancer detection rate in women with BRCA mutation or a strong family history supports the effectiveness of our surveillance program for early diagnosis. Screening for women at lower risk of OC/FTC is not recommended. A residual risk of PPC after RRSO remains for BRCA1 carriers.

1.
Walsh T, Casadei S, Lee MK, et al: Mutations in 12 genes for inherited ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal carcinoma identified by massively parallel sequencing. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2011;108:18032-18037.
2.
Wooster R, Weber BL: Breast and ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med 2003;348:2339-2347.
3.
Brose MS, Rebbeck TR, Calzone KA, Stopfer JE, Nathanson KL, Weber BL: Cancer risk estimates for BRCA1 mutation carriers identified in a risk evaluation program. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94:1365-1372.
4.
Ford D, Easton DF, Bishop DT, Narod SA, Goldgar DE: Risks of cancer in BRCA1-mutation carriers. Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium. Lancet 1994;343:692-695.
5.
Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium: Cancer risks in BRCA2 mutation carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999;91:1310-1316.
6.
Walsh T, Casadei S, Coats KH, et al: Spectrum of mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, and TP53 in families at high risk of breast cancer. JAMA 2006;295:1379-1388.
7.
Casadei S, Norquist BM, Walsh T, et al: Contribution of inherited mutations in the BRCA2-interacting protein PALB2 to familial breast cancer. Cancer Res 2011;71:2222-2229.
8.
Engel NJ, Gordon P, Thull DL, et al: A multidisciplinary clinic for individualizing management of patients at increased risk for breast and gynecologic cancer. Fam Cancer 2012;11:419-427.
9.
Kauff ND, Domchek SM, Friebel TM, et al: Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy for the prevention of BRCA1- and BRCA2-associated breast and gynecologic cancer: a multicenter, prospective study. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:1331-1337.
10.
Rebbeck TR, Lynch HT, Neuhausen SL, et al: Prophylactic oophorectomy in carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. N Engl J Med 2002;346:1616-1622.
11.
Ludwig KK, Neuner J, Butler A, et al: Risk reduction and survival benefit of prophylactic surgery in BRCA mutation carriers, a systematic review. Am J Surg 2016;212:660-669.
12.
Madorsky-Feldman D, Sklair-Levy M, Perri T, et al: An international survey of surveillance schemes for unaffected BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2016;157:319-327.
13.
Hermsen BB, Olivier RI, Verheijen RH, et al: No efficacy of annual gynaecological screening in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers; an observational follow-up study. Br J Cancer 2007;96:1335-1342.
14.
Olivier RI, Lubsen-Brandsma MA, Verhoef S, et al: CA125 and transvaginal ultrasound monitoring in high-risk women cannot prevent the diagnosis of advanced ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2006;100:20-26.
15.
van der Velde NM, Mourits MJ, Arts HJ, et al: Time to stop ovarian cancer screening in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers? Int J Cancer 2009;124:919-923.
16.
Evans DG, Gaarenstroom KN, Stirling D, et al: Screening for familial ovarian cancer: poor survival of BRCA1/2 related cancers. J Med Genet 2009;46:593-597.
17.
Rosenthal AN, Fraser L, Manchanda R, et al: Results of annual screening in phase I of the United Kingdom Familial Ovarian Cancer Screening Study highlight the need for strict adherence to screening schedule. J Clin Oncol 2013;31:49-57.
18.
Cortesi L, Turchetti D, Marchi I, et al: Breast cancer screening in women at increased risk according to different family histories: an update of the Modena Study Group experience. BMC Cancer 2006;6:210.
19.
Timmerman D, Van Calster B, Testa AC, et al: Ovarian cancer prediction in adnexal masses using ultrasound-based logistic regression models: a temporal and external validation study by the IOTA group. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2010;36:226-234.
20.
Fischerova D: Ultrasound scanning of the pelvis and abdomen for staging of gynecological tumors: a review. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011;38:246-266.
21.
Kurian AW, Sigal BM, Plevritis SK: Survival analysis of cancer risk reduction strategies for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:222-231.
22.
Malpica A, Deavers MT, Lu K, et al: Grading ovarian serous carcinoma using a two-tier system. Am J Surg Pathol 2004;28:496-504.
23.
National Cancer Intelligence Network: Stage Breakdown by CCG 2013. London, NCIN, 2015.
24.
Zhong Q, Peng HL, Zhao X, Zhang L, Hwang WT: Effects of BRCA1- and BRCA2-related mutations on ovarian and breast cancer survival: a meta-analysis. Clin Cancer Res 2015;21:211-220.
25.
Savelli L, De Iaco P, Ceccaroni M, et al: Transvaginal sonographic features of peritoneal carcinomatosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2005;26:552-557.
26.
Chapman JS, Powell CB, McLennan J: Surveillance of survivors: follow-up after risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in BRCA 1/2 mutation carriers. Gynecol Oncol 2011;122:339-343.
27.
Kobayashi H, Yamada Y, Sado T, et al: A randomized study of screening for ovarian cancer: a multicenter study in Japan. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2008;18:414-420.
28.
Menon U, Gentry-Maharaj A, Hallett R, et al: Sensitivity and specificity of multimodal and ultrasound screening for ovarian cancer, and stage distribution of detected cancers: results of the prevalence screen of the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS). Lancet Oncol 2009;10:327-340.
29.
van Nagell JR Jr, DePriest PD, Ueland FR, et al: Ovarian cancer screening with annual transvaginal sonography: findings of 25,000 women screened. Cancer 2007;109:1887-1896.
30.
Jacobs IJ, Menon U, Ryan A, et al: Ovarian cancer screening and mortality in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2016;387:945-956.
31.
Buys SS, Partridge E, Black A; PLCO Project Team: Effect of screening on ovarian cancer mortality: the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Randomized Controlled Trial. JAMA 2011;305:2295-2303.
32.
Skates SJ, Mai P, Horick NK, et al: Large prospective study of ovarian cancer screening in high-risk women: CA125 cut-point defined by menopausal status. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 2011;4:1401-1408.
33.
Finch A, Beiner M, Lubinski J, et al: Salpingo-oophorectomy and the risk of ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancers in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. JAMA 2006;296:185-192.
34.
Finch APM, Lubinski J, Møller P, et al: Impact of oophorectomy on cancer incidence and mortality in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. J Clin Oncol 2014;32:1547-1553.
35.
Vetter L, Keller M, Bruckner T, et al: Adherence to the breast cancer surveillance program for women at risk for familial breast and ovarian cancer versus overscreening: a monocenter study in Germany. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2016;156:289-299.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.