ArticleJournal of ovarian research2024
Risk-stratified CA125 screening integrating CA125 trajectories, trajectory-specific progression and transvaginal ultrasound for ovarian cancer.
Article in Journal of ovarian research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Constructing a prognostic survival model for patients with stage II-IV epithelial ovarian cancer: a study based on the SEER database and external validation in China.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Limited Clinical Benefit of Immune Checkpoint Inhibition in Ovarian Cancer with Opportunities in Selected Subtypes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Minimal Residual Disease Detection: Bridging Molecular and Clinical Strategies for Recurrence Prevention in Gynecologic Cancers.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Comparative study of Exosome Ovarian Cancer auxiliary diagnostic kit (Chemiluminescence) and Serum Tumor Marker CA125 in the diagnosis of Ovarian Epithelial Cell Carcinoma.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2025Article
- Evolving landscape of female cancers along with attributable risk factors in China from 1990 to 2021, and projections to 2040.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Global burden of ovarian cancer attributable to high body mass index among women of childbearing age from 1990 to 2021 and projections to 2050: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2021.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundsCancer antigen 125 (CA125) is widely used for screening ovarian cancer (OC), yet its effectiveness remains debated. Potential factors may include ineffective cut-off value for CA125 in screening, as well as a lack of consideration for CA125 trajectories and trajectory-specific progression.
methodsBased on data from multiple rounds of CA125 tests and transvaginal ultrasound (TVU) examinations conducted on 28,456 women in the PLCO Trial, time-dependent receiver-operating-characteristic curves (ROCs) and area-under-the-curves (tdAUCs) analyses were employed to identify the optimal CA125 cut-off values for OC screening. Participants were categorized into four CA125 trajectories: stable negative CA125 (CA125
resultsAfter a median follow-up of 14.8 years for OC incidence and 23.8 years for OC mortality, 250 OC cases and 218 OC deaths were identified. The tdAUC for 10-year OC incidence with CA125 was 0.663, with an optimal cut-off value of 13.00 U/ml. Trajectory analyses showed that both CA125
conclusionsIncorporating CA125 trajectories and trajectory-specific progression into screening protocols enhances the identification of the population at high-risk of OC. An optimized screening strategy, which includes these factors along with TVU, is recommended to improve the effectiveness of OC screening.
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.