| 1. |
- Fortner, Renee T., et al.
(författare)
-
Reproductive and hormone-related risk factors for epithelial ovarian cancer by histologic pathways, invasiveness and histologic subtypes: Results from the EPIC cohort
- 2015
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Cancer. - : Wiley. - 0020-7136 .- 1097-0215. ; 137:5, s. 1196-1208
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Whether risk factors for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) differ by subtype (i.e., dualistic pathway of carcinogenesis, histologic subtype) is not well understood; however, data to date suggest risk factor differences. We examined associations between reproductive and hormone-related risk factors for EOC by subtype in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort. Among 334,126 women with data on reproductive and hormone-related risk factors (follow-up: 1992-2010), 1,245 incident cases of EOC with known histology and invasiveness were identified. Data on tumor histology, grade, and invasiveness, were available from cancer registries and pathology record review. We observed significant heterogeneity by the dualistic model (i.e., type I [low grade serous or endometrioid, mucinous, clear cell, malignant Brenner] vs. type II [high grade serous or endometrioid]) for full-term pregnancy (p(het)=0.02). Full-term pregnancy was more strongly inversely associated with type I than type II tumors (ever vs. never: type I: relative risk (RR) 0.47 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.33-0.69]; type II, RR: 0.81 [0.61-1.06]). We observed no significant differences in risk in analyses by major histologic subtypes of invasive EOC (serous, mucinous, endometrioid, clear cell). None of the investigated factors were associated with borderline tumors. Established protective factors, including duration of oral contraceptive use and full term pregnancy, were consistently inversely associated with risk across histologic subtypes (e.g., ever full-term pregnancy: serous, RR: 0.73 [0.58-0.92]; mucinous, RR: 0.53 [0.30-0.95]; endometrioid, RR: 0.65 [0.40-1.06]; clear cell, RR: 0.34 [0.18-0.64]; p(het)=0.16). These results suggest limited heterogeneity between reproductive and hormone-related risk factors and EOC subtypes. What's new? Reproductive and hormone-related risk factors for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) have been extensively investigated. However, EOC is increasingly recognized as a heterogeneous disease and risk factor differences across EOC subtypes, as defined by the recently proposed dualistic pathway of ovarian carcinogenesis and histological characteristics, are not well understood. Here, the authors present a detailed prospective investigation on reproductive and hormone-related risk factors for borderline tumors and epithelial ovarian cancer by main histological subtypes and, for the first time, by the types defined by the dualistic pathway. The results suggest limited heterogeneity between reproductive and hormone-related risk factors and EOC subtypes.
|
|
| 2. |
- Terry, Kathryn L., et al.
(författare)
-
A Prospective Evaluation of Early Detection Biomarkers for Ovarian Cancer in the European EPIC Cohort
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Clinical Cancer Research. - : American Association for Cancer Research. - 1078-0432 .- 1557-3265. ; 22:18, s. 4664-4675
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose: About 60% of ovarian cancers are diagnosed at late stage, when 5-year survival is less than 30% in contrast to 90% for local disease. This has prompted search for early detection biomarkers. For initial testing, specimens taken months or years before ovarian cancer diagnosis are the best source of information to evaluate earlydetection biomarkers. Here we evaluate the most promising ovarian cancer screening biomarkers in prospectively collected samples from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition study. Experimental Design: We measured CA125, HE4, CA72.4, and CA15.3 in 810 invasive epithelial ovarian cancer cases and 1,939 controls. We calculated the sensitivity at 95% and 98% specificity as well as area under the receiver operator curve (C-statistic) for each marker individually and in combination. In addition, we evaluated marker performance by stage at diagnosis and time between blood draw and diagnosis. Results: We observed the best discrimination between cases and controls within 6 months of diagnosis for CA125 (C-statistic = 0.92), then HE4 (0.84), CA72.4 (0.77), and CA15.3 (0.73). Marker performance declined with longer time between blood draw and diagnosis and for earlier staged disease. However, assessment of discriminatory ability at early stage was limited by small numbers. Combinations of markers performed modestly, but significantly better than any single marker. Conclusions: CA125 remains the single best marker for the early detection of invasive epithelial ovarian cancer, but can be slightly improved by combining with other markers. Identifying novel markers for ovarian cancer will require studies including larger numbers of early-stage cases.
|
|
