Elsevier

Gynecologic Oncology

Volume 127, Issue 3, December 2012, Pages 556-563
Gynecologic Oncology

Psychological outcomes of familial ovarian cancer screening: No evidence of long-term harm

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.08.034Get rights and content

Abstract

Objectives

Ovarian cancer screening for women at increased genetic risk in the UK involves 4-monthly CA125 tests and annual ultrasound, with further tests prompted by an abnormal result. The study evaluated the longer-term psychological and behavioural effects of frequent ovarian screening.

Methods

Women completed T1 questionnaires before their first routine 4-monthly CA125 test, and T2 follow-up questionnaires one week after their result. Women with abnormal results completed a further questionnaire one week after return to routine screening (T3 primary end-point). T4 questionnaires were sent at nine months. Measures included cancer distress, general anxiety/depression, reassurance, and withdrawal from screening.

Results

A total 1999 (62%) of 3224 women completed T1 questionnaires. T2 questionnaires were completed by 1384/1609 participants (86%): 1217 (89%) with normal results and 167/242 (69%) with abnormal results. T3 questionnaires were completed by 141/163 (87%) women, with 912/1173 (78%) completing T4 questionnaires. Analysis of covariance indicated that, compared to women with normal results, women with abnormal results reported moderate cancer distress (F = 27.47, p  .001, η2 = 0.02) one week after their abnormal result and were significantly more likely to withdraw from screening (OR = 4.38, p  .001). These effects were not apparent at T3 or T4. The effect of screening result on general anxiety/depression or overall reassurance was not significant.

Conclusions

Women participating in frequent ovarian screening who are recalled for an abnormal result may experience transient cancer-specific distress, which may prompt reconsideration of risk management options. Health professionals and policy makers may be reassured that frequent familial ovarian screening does not cause sustained psychological harm.

Highlights

► Abnormal results of familial ovarian cancer screening may raise women's concerns in the short-term but not in the longer-term. ► Women receiving abnormal test results are more likely to withdraw from screening, primarily for salpingo-oophorectomy. ► Decision support is needed for women who are considering options for managing their risk of familial ovarian cancer.

Introduction

Ovarian cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer death in women in the UK and US [1], [2]. Diagnosis of early stage ovarian cancer is associated with improved survival rates compared with late stage disease, hence the expectation that screening for early disease may reduce mortality. Approximately 10% of women who develop ovarian cancer have a strong family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer. In some of these families a BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation can be identified, which is associated with a 25–45% lifetime risk of developing ovarian cancer [3]. Despite clear evidence that risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) substantially reduces the risk of ovarian, fallopian tube and breast cancer [4], [5], [6], it is not the choice of all women mainly due to loss of fertility and quality of life issues associated with the onset of early menopause [7]. Early detection or prevention strategies such as ovarian cancer screening (OCS) are still being investigated and are not recommended outside clinical trials. In response to the growing literature of lack of efficacy of annual OCS in these high-risk women, the UK Familial Ovarian Cancer Screening Study was established to determine the effectiveness of an annual serum CA125 test and transvaginal ultrasound scan (UKFOCSS Phase 1) [8] and more recently, 4-monthly CA125 tests combined with annual transvaginal ultrasound scans (UKFOCSS Phase 2, 2007–2011).

Evidence regarding the psychological as well as clinical outcomes of frequent familial OCS is essential. The combination of transvaginal ultrasound (TVS) and CA125 yields a significant rate of false positive abnormalities, particularly in pre-menopausal women [9]. This is magnified by use of the Risk of Ovarian Cancer (ROC) algorithm [10] that recalls 15% of women with the highest risk based on change in CA125 levels from individual baseline. Population breast screening studies suggest that women who have to undergo further tests following an abnormal result may experience adverse psychological consequences, even if further tests are normal [11], and may be discouraged from attending subsequent screening [12]. In familial OCS, false positive results of ovarian scans have been associated with transient increases in anxiety compared to normal results [13]. A US study of women at increased familial risk found reduced quality of life six months after receiving an abnormal (yet benign) result of combined CA125 and TVS screening [14]. Population-based studies of the impact of abnormal OCS results show mixed findings [15], [16], [17].

The longer-term psychological and behavioural consequences of increasing the frequency of OCS tests have not previously been evaluated. Cross-sectional data from the study suggested that withdrawal from screening in favour of surgery was influenced by prior experience of screening, past recall due to an abnormal result, and higher levels of cancer distress [18]. The present study reports prospective longitudinal data regarding the short- and longer-term impact of UKFOCSS Phase 2 screening on ovarian cancer-specific distress, anxiety and depression, overall reassurance, and rate of withdrawal from screening in a large sample of women at increased risk. The primary hypothesis was that women recalled for further tests due to an initial abnormal result would report higher cancer-specific distress shortly after being returned to routine screening compared with women who received a normal result. Secondary hypotheses were that initial recall would be associated with distress and a lack of reassurance in the longer-term, and would prompt withdrawal from familial OCS.

Section snippets

Participants

Women aged over 35 years and identified as at increased genetic risk (estimated lifetime risk > 10%) were recruited from those consenting to UKFOCSS Phase 2. UK FOCSS participants were recruited from women registered with the UK Familial Ovarian Cancer Registry, attending clinical genetic centres participating in UK FOCSS, or were identified in other clinics (e.g., gynaecology clinics, medical oncology clinics) as being at high risk of ovarian cancer due to their family histories. All women

Participation bias

Table 1 displays T1 scores for questionnaire completers and non-completers at each subsequent stage. Women who were sent but did not complete T2 questionnaires reported significantly higher T1 HADS-Anxiety (p  .01) and T1 HADS-Depression (p  .01), and were significantly more likely to have had an abnormal result (p  .001), than T2 completers. Within the recall group, there were no significant T1 differences between women who were sent but did/did not complete the T3 questionnaire. T4

Discussion

The present study evaluated the short- and longer-term psychological consequences of frequent OCS in a large sample of women at increased risk. It revealed a small, significant short-term adverse effect, with higher cancer-specific distress in women who received an abnormal result. The effect of screening result on general anxiety and depression was not significant, suggesting that measures of cancer-specific distress such as the IES are more sensitive to subtle psychological consequences of

Conflict of interest statement

AR: Received honoraria from Fujirebio Diagnostics for lecturing on familial ovarian cancer screening. UM: Financial interest through UCL business and Abcodia Ltd in the third party exploitation of clinical trial biobanks which have been developed through research at UCL. UM also received grant funding from MRC, CRUK, NIHR, Eve Appeal and European Union for research into ovarian cancer screening and biomarkers.

Acknowledgements

A major portion of this work was done at UCLH/UCL within the Women's Health Theme of the NIHR UCLH/UCL Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre supported by the UK Department of Health. We would like to acknowledge Louise Bayne, Rachel Iredale, Ian Jacobs, and the late Joan Austoker for their contributions to the study as members of the study management group. Invaluable administrative assistance was given by Philip Badman, Lesley Hague, Kathryn Harris, Lisa Hinton, Liza James, Tracy Pearmain,

References (30)

  • T.R. Rebbeck et al.

    Prophylactic oophorectomy in carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations

    N Engl J Med

    (2002)
  • N.D. Kauff et al.

    Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy for the prevention of BRCA1- and BRCA2-associated breast and gynaecologic cancer: a multicenter, prospective study

    J Clin Oncol

    (2008)
  • Rosenthal AN, Fraser L, Manchanda R, Badman P, Philpott S, Mozersky J, et al. Results of annual screening in the UK...
  • S.J. Skates et al.

    Calculation of risk of ovarian cancer from serial CA-125 values for preclinical detection in postmenopausal women

    J Clin Oncol

    (2003)
  • J. Brett et al.

    Women who are recalled for further investigation for breast screening: psychological consequences 3 years after recall and factors influencing re-attendance

    J Public Health Med

    (2001)
  • Cited by (19)

    • Feasibility, patient compliance and acceptability of ovarian cancer surveillance using two serum biomarkers and Risk of Ovarian Cancer Algorithm compared to standard ultrasound and CA 125 among women with BRCA mutations

      2020, Gynecologic Oncology
      Citation Excerpt :

      With the use of the two-marker ROCA algorithm, we were able to reduce the number of secondary screens and ultrasounds ordered. Others have shown that the frequency of call backs was associated with increases in cancer anxiety and distress [22,23], so it is plausible that the reduced rate of abnormal screens in the ROCA arm enhanced patient acceptability. Certain limitations of this study must be considered.

    • Adapting the coping in deliberation (CODE) framework: A multi-method approach in the context of familial ovarian cancer risk management

      2014, Patient Education and Counseling
      Citation Excerpt :

      Although effectiveness of screening for ovarian cancer has not yet been established, women may consider private screening instead of surgery [19,27,57]. Due to the recently conducted UK Familial Ovarian Cancer Screening study [13,81] many stakeholders in the UK discussed screening options for ovarian cancer. “I went to my GP and explained to him that the screening had stopped and […] he said because of the family history that […] I can have a CA125 test yearly […]” (P3CQ1, Patient)

    • Psychological aspects in breast and ovarian cancer genetic testing

      2020, A Comprehensive Guide to Genetic Counseling
    View all citing articles on Scopus

    This work was supported by a grant from the BUPA Foundation.

    View full text