ArticleJournal of prevention (2022)2026
Consecutive Negative Screening Tests for Ovarian Cancer: A Reliable Basis for Reassurance of Low Ovarian Cancer Mortality Risk?
Article in Journal of prevention (2022), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
Although ovarian cancer screening is not recommended for non-high-risk women, they seek screening to alleviate their fear of the disease. Therefore, we investigated whether receiving consecutive negative results is associated with lower risk of ovarian cancer mortality compared to no screening. This study was conducted using data from the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Randomized Controlled Trial, conducted in the United States (n = 52,633). Five-year cumulative ovarian cancer mortality was compared between females with three consecutive negative screening results using transvaginal ultrasound and CA-125 tests (negative group) and those not undergoing screening (control group) via Gray's test. Sensitivity analyses were also conducted considering known factors affecting ovarian cancer risk, such as oral contraceptive use, hormone therapy, parity, and family history of ovarian or breast cancer. The 5-year cumulative ovarian cancer mortality in the negative group was 8.6 deaths/10,000 persons (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.6-12.6 deaths/10,000 persons), which was not different from that in the control group (8.8 deaths/10,000 persons; 95% CI, 5.6-12.1 deaths/10,000 persons; p = 0.79). Furthermore, no evidence of a difference in ovarian cancer mortality was observed between the negative and control groups even among women at low risk, such as those with oral contraceptive use, no menopausal hormone therapy, being parous, and without a family history of breast cancer and ovarian cancer (all p-value ≥ 0.35). It is essential for both physicians and patients to understand that even three consecutive annual negative screenings for ovarian cancer should not be interpreted as evidence of lower ovarian cancer mortality compared with no screening.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42776419What 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.