ReviewThe British journal of radiology2018
Ovarian cancer screening-ultrasound; impact on ovarian cancer mortality.
Review in The British journal of radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
27 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhancing the positive predictive value of early-stage ovarian cancer detection using a two-step machine learning framework.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Article
- Recent Update Targeting Autophagy-Apoptosis Crosstalk Using Bioactive Natural Products for Ovarian Cancer Treatment.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Radiomics-based MRI model for differentiating ovarian cystadenoma and cystadenocarcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Current insights into breast and ovarian cancer risk: a contemporary review.Minerva surgery · 2025Review
- Gynecologic Cancer Screening and Prevention: State of the Science and Practice.Current treatment options in oncology · 2025Review
- Res-ECA-UNet++: an automatic segmentation model for ovarian tumor ultrasound images based on residual networks and channel attention mechanism.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Validation of the BOADICEA model for epithelial tubo-ovarian cancer risk prediction in UK Biobank.British journal of cancer · 2024Article
- Current trends in the characterization and monitoring of vascular response to cancer therapy.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2024Review
- Evaluating the Effectiveness of 2D and 3D CT Image Features for Predicting Tumor Response to Chemotherapy.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Ultrahigh Resolution Lipid Mass Spectrometry Imaging of High-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer Mouse Models.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- Liability, risks, and recommendations for ultrasound use in the diagnosis of obstetrics diseases.Heliyon · 2023Review
- The Role of EMT-Related lncRNAs in Ovarian Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Electrochemical and Photoelectrochemical Immunosensors for the Detection of Ovarian Cancer Biomarkers.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Circulating Biomarkers for Cancer Detection: Could Salivary microRNAs Be an Opportunity for Ovarian Cancer Diagnostics?Biomedicines · 2023Review
- Spectrum of Ovarian Incidentalomas: Diagnosis and Management.The British journal of radiology · 2023Review
- Ovarian Cancer: A Landscape of Mitochondria with Emphasis on Mitochondrial Dynamics.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Ultrahigh resolution lipid mass spectrometry imaging of high-grade serous ovarian cancer mouse models.Frontiers in chemistry · 2023Article
- Ultrasound-enhanced Unet model for quantitative photoacoustic tomography of ovarian lesions.Photoacoustics · 2022Article
- Energy Metabolism in Gynecological Cancers: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Current update on the molecular genetics and management of hereditary ovarian cancers: a primer for radiologists.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although ovarian cancer (OC) is the most lethal of all female malignancies, debate still exists concerning the benefits and harms of the screening programs and their impact on long-term survival and mortality from the disease. The most widely tested screening strategies have focused on transvaginal ultrasound (TVU) and on algorithms that measure serum levels or interval changes of cancer antigen-125 (CA-125) either individually or in combination. Transvaginal ultrasound can identify size and morphology changes of the ovary that may signal a developing malignancy; yet, it is still accused of having a low specificity. There is preliminary evidence that screening can improve survival, but the impact of screening on mortality from OC is still unclear and warrants further validation. In spite of having many published prospective studies, up to-date, none have been able to demonstrate conclusively a reduction in mortality from OC both in the screened general or high-risk population. Data from the US Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial has not shown survival or mortality benefits in the general population. Most prospective trials have reported a decrease in stage at detection (with the exception of the PLCO trial), thereby allowing treatment to be initiated when the disease is most curable. Research is in progress to develop new diagnostic tests and novel biomarkers, which when used in combination can increase the accuracy and outcomes of screening. In this review article, we will discuss the debate provoked on OC screening programs and the impact of using ultrasound on the reduction of OC-related mortality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.