Rapid Review Quiz: Ovarian Cancer Screening and Prevention

Reliably screening for ovarian cancer in the general population remains a challenge. Common tools such as CA-125 testing and transvaginal ultrasound have shown limited sensitivity and specificity, leading to unnecessary surgeries and false reassurance. However, advances in genetic testing and molecular pathology have reshaped prevention strategies, particularly in individuals at elevated hereditary risk such as BRCA mutation carriers.
Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy remains the cornerstone of prevention for high-risk patients, while oral contraceptives offer a risk-reducing effect in the general population. Additionally, genetic counseling has become an essential step in identifying at-risk individuals who may benefit from tailored interventions.
How much do you know about recent developments in ovarian cancer screening and prevention? Test your knowledge with this updated review.
Despite significant research efforts, no screening strategy has yet demonstrated a mortality benefit in average-risk female patients. As noted in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines, landmark clinical trials — including the PLCO (Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian) cancer screening trial — failed to show a survival benefit from annual CA-125 testing or transvaginal ultrasound alone or in combination. The risk of ovarian cancer algorithm (ROCA) — which evaluates CA-125 trends over time — did improve early-stage detection rates but did not ultimately reduce mortality. As a result, current guidelines from the United States Preventive Services Task Force and other expert bodies, including the NCCN, recommend against routine screening for ovarian cancer in asymptomatic, average-risk females. Instead, attention has shifted toward identifying and managing high-risk individuals through genetic counseling and risk-reducing strategies. Routine screening in the general population is considered ineffective and may result in harms from false-positive tests and unnecessary surgical interventions.
Learn more about the workup for ovarian cancer.
Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) remains the most effective strategy for preventing ovarian and fallopian tube cancer in individuals with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. Guidelines recommend RRSO typically between ages 35 and 45, depending on the specific mutation and family history. This surgery significantly lowers the risk of high-grade serous carcinoma, the most common and aggressive subtype. Studies have shown that RRSO can reduce ovarian cancer risk significantly also confer a survival benefit, particularly in BRCA1 carriers. While oral contraceptives also reduce risk, they do not offer the same degree of protection as surgical removal of at-risk tissue. Annual pelvic exams and imaging have not demonstrated efficacy in early detection or mortality reduction in this population. Patients considering RRSO should be counseled about surgical menopause and may require hormone therapy depending on age and symptom burden. The procedure is essential in the preventive care of high-risk individuals.
Learn more more about ovarian cancer deterrence and prevention.
Emerging evidence over the past decade suggests that the fallopian tube epithelium — not the ovary — is the origin of many high-grade serous ovarian carcinomas. As a result, the practice of opportunistic salpingectomy — removing the fallopian tubes during hysterectomy or tubal sterilization procedures — has gained traction as a preventive strategy, even in females at average risk. Major gynecologic societies now endorse this practice as a safe and effective risk-reducing option during pelvic surgery for benign indications. The rationale is grounded in the theory of serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma as a precursor lesion to high-grade serous cancer. Unlike endometrial cancer, whose origin lies in the uterine lining, salpingectomy directly targets the tissue where most serous carcinomas are thought to begin.
Learn more about ovarian cancer and surgical considerations.
Current guidelines recommend genetic counseling and consideration of BRCA and multigene panel testing in females with a personal or strong family history of breast, ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer. Identifying carriers of pathogenic variants enables implementation of life-saving risk-reducing strategies, including salpingo-oophorectomy or enhanced surveillance. Importantly, such testing is also offered to individuals with male relatives who have had breast cancer, early-onset cancers, or known mutations in cancer susceptibility genes. Genetic testing should ideally be preceded by counseling to interpret results accurately and discuss implications for family members. Patients with unrelated gynecologic conditions like endometriosis or abnormal uterine bleeding, and those without relevant family history, are not routinely offered genetic testing unless other risk factors emerge. Early identification of mutation carriers is essential for tailored management, timely preventive interventions, and cascade testing of at-risk relatives.
Learn more about risk assessment and genetic counseling in ovarian cancer.
Multiple large observational studies and meta-analyses have consistently demonstrated a protective effect of combined oral contraceptives (COCs) against ovarian cancer. The reduction in risk is observed with long-term use, typically over 5 years, and persists for decades after discontinuation. The proposed mechanism involves suppression of ovulation, thereby reducing the repetitive trauma and repair cycles to the ovarian epithelium, which may underlie carcinogenesis. The protective effect spans multiple histologic subtypes, including high-grade serous, endometrioid, and clear cell carcinomas. While other agents such as NSAIDs have been evaluated, their protective role is less well established and not considered standard for chemoprevention. Aromatase inhibitors and bisphosphonates are not used for ovarian cancer prevention. As with any medication, the decision to use oral contraceptives must consider individual risk profiles, including thromboembolic and cardiovascular risks, and be guided by patient preferences and shared decision-making.
Learn more about ovarian cancer and the impact of oral contraceptives.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Business Insider

14-06-2025

• Business Insider

I got breast cancer at 30. My treatment means I'll need to delay having kids for 5 to 10 years.

Shortly after my 30th birthday, I was diagnosed with hormone-positive breast cancer. I froze my eggs ahead of my partial mastectomy; treatment means I can't get pregnant for five years. I resent that I have to wait to build a family, but grateful for the chance at survival. When I turned 30, it felt like I was stepping into a new chapter. My partner and I had spent most of our 20s together and were finally in a place where planning for the future felt tangible. After a few difficult years, including the sudden loss of my father and several career missteps, I found myself longing for something joyful and grounding. I wanted purpose, direction, and maybe even a little stability. For the first time, I began picturing myself as a mom. Then I was diagnosed with breast cancer. I was shocked when I got my diagnosis I was diagnosed by accident. I had gone years without seeing a gynecologist. During a routine check-up, I casually mentioned this to my primary care physician, who offered to do a quick breast exam"just in case." That's when she felt a lump. I mentioned that I'd recently been laid off and was in between jobs, without insurance. She told me to reach out once I had coverage and she'd write a prescription for a mammogram. On the drive home, I felt a quiet but urgent instinct not to wait. As soon as I got home, I called her back and asked for the prescription. After a mammogram, ultrasound, and biopsy, I received my diagnosis: stage 1 estrogen receptor-positive, progesterone receptor-positive invasive ductal carcinoma. I couldn't make sense of what I was hearing. Nothing about me fit the narrative I'd grown up believing about who gets breast cancer. I have no family history, don't carry the BRCA gene mutation or any other genetic markers linked to increased risk. What was once seen as a medical anomaly is becoming increasingly common among women my age. My treatment plan included a partial mastectomy, four weeks of daily radiation treatments, and a daily hormone therapy regimen of Tamoxifen, prescribed for five to 10 years, depending on how my system responds. Tamoxifen, often prescribed to treat hormone-positive breast cancer, suppresses estrogen and simulates menopause. It comes with a parade of side effects, including hot flashes, weight gain, and unpredictable mood swings. I learned I can't get pregnant during my treatment Then came a very different kind of blow. Pregnancy while on the medication is strongly discouraged due to the risk of serious complications, including birth defects, miscarriage, and stillbirth. Beyond that, the hormonal surge associated with pregnancy before completing treatment could increase the likelihood of a cancer recurrence. I was scheduled for surgery just one month after my diagnosis. And two weeks before the procedure, my oncologist urged me to freeze my eggs. She explained that pregnancy wouldn't be advised until I was at least 35 due to the complications that could be caused by Tamoxifen — an age that, however dated or insulting it sounds, qualifies as a "geriatric pregnancy" by medical standards. I dissociated my way through a blur of hormone injections, blood draws, and invasive procedures that I barely had time to process. Thankfully, I was spared the financial burden, an immense relief amid the mental, emotional, and physical toll. In 2018, my home state of Connecticut became the first in the nation to require insurance coverage for fertility preservation in cancer patients. Delaying motherhood isn't my choice Though my treatment plan gives me the best chance at survival, it comes at a cost. I'm losing the ability to choose when I want to have kids, and now, I won't be able to have them before 35 at the earliest — possibly as late as 40. I resent that, like it or not, I'll have to be an "old mom" before I ever had the chance to be a "young" one. So far, my partner has been supportive. But I know he always pictured himself becoming a dad sooner rather than later. And when I see him play with our friends' kids, I feel a pang of guilt I can't always ignore. Now we're stuck in limbo while our friends move forward — throwing baby showers, assembling cribs, and posting first-day-of-school photos. I picture myself at preschool, the silver-haired mom whose knees crack at circle time. And I hate that I care. But I do. Then, there's navigating the dissonance between medical necessity and personal expectation. By my 30s, I expected to have it all figured out — career, family, identity. But my timeline was taken from me, redrawn by scans and blood tests, follow-ups, and daily pills. There's also no villain here, no one to blame. It's just a sterile, clinical equation guiding huge decisions about my future. I don't know what's next, but I'm still grateful I'm grateful to be here. I know many people diagnosed with breast cancer never get to consider family planning at all. But I also want to be honest about the loss, the uncertainty, and the weird in-between space where you're healthy but still healing, coping but still grieving the version of your life that never got to happen. I don't know what comes next. Maybe the family I envisioned is still on the way, just a little later than I thought. This isn't the path I planned, but it's the one I'm on. And for now, that has to be enough.

Medscape

13-06-2025

• Medscape

Fast Five Quiz: Ovarian Cancer Overview

Ovarian cancer poses a significant threat to women's health, often developing quietly and without early symptoms. It is commonly discovered after progression. This late detection, along with resistance to treatment and frequent relapse, contributes to poor outcomes. Although medical and surgical interventions have evolved, survival rates remain low. These challenges highlight the critical importance of early detection methods, precise diagnostic technologies, and individualized care coordinated across medical specialties. How much do you know about ovarian cancer? Test your knowledge with this quick quiz. High-grade serous carcinoma is by far the most prevalent, representing approximately 70%-80% of epithelial ovarian cancer cases. In contrast, the low-grade form of serous carcinoma is much less common (< 5%). Endometrioid and clear cell subtypes are each responsible for about 10% of cases and have known associations with endometriosis. Mucinous carcinomas are uncommon, comprising a small fraction (around 3%) of epithelial ovarian cancers. Learn more about ovarian cancer. According to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines, for patients with inherited mutations linked to a higher chance of developing ovarian cancer (eg, alterations in BRCA1, BRCA2, RAD51C, RAD51D, BRIP1, PALB2 ), the most effective preventive surgical procedure is the bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (which is the removal of both fallopian tubes and ovaries). This intervention has been proven to greatly reduce ovarian cancer risk and enhance long-term survival among these high-risk groups. However, when performed in premenopausal women, it induces menopause. Removing one ovary (unilateral oophorectomy) or the uterus (total hysterectomy) does not offer adequate protection against ovarian cancer. Procedures like cervical conization are unrelated to ovarian cancer and are used to manage cervical abnormalities. Learn more about salpingo-oophorectomy. HRT is typically recommended for women who undergo bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy before reaching the natural age of menopause and have not had breast cancer. This type of surgery causes a sudden and early drop in estrogen levels, which can result in bothersome symptoms and increase the risk for long-term health issues such as bone loss or cardiovascular problems. HRT helps ease these effects and maintain health until the typical menopausal age. In contrast, women older than age 50 years are often already in or near menopause, and HRT is not routinely needed unless specific symptoms arise. Patients who have a history of breast cancer must be assessed on a case-by-case basis because HRT might not be safe. Women with a uterus should be offered combined HRT, whereas women without a uterus should be offered estrogen-only HRT. Additionally, women who have not had their ovaries removed do not experience the abrupt hormonal shift that warrants preventive HRT. Learn more about HRT. Individuals who carry a BRCA1 mutation face a significantly elevated risk of developing ovarian cancer, often at a younger age than those with other hereditary mutations. If a woman with a BRCA1 mutation decides not to undergo surgery to remove her ovaries and fallopian tubes, monitoring for early signs of cancer should begin after age 35 years. This timing aligns with evidence suggesting that BRCA1 -related ovarian cancers tend to occur earlier than those linked to BRCA2 or other genetic variants. Initiating surveillance at age 30 years is generally premature and not part of standard recommendations. For BRCA2 carriers, screening is usually deferred until after age 40 years, whereas those with alterations in genes like RAD51C, RAD51D, BRIP1 , or PALB2 typically begin surveillance after age 45 years. Individuals with Lynch syndrome-related mutations (eg, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 ) are also advised to start at age 35 years if surgery is postponed. Learn more about breast cancer risk factors. Although mucinous tumors can arise directly from the ovary, many are actually secondary cancers that have spread from other organs, most notably the gastrointestinal system, including the colon and appendix. Distinguishing between primary and metastatic mucinous tumors is crucial for proper diagnosis and management. High-grade serous cancers more commonly begin in the epithelium of the fallopian tubes rather than the ovaries. On the other hand, low-grade serous carcinomas are thought to originate in the ovary and are typically diagnosed in younger females, with outcomes generally more favorable than their high-grade counterparts. Germ cell tumors and sex cord-stromal tumors are far more frequent in adolescents and young adults, with most cases occurring before age 30 years and not in women older than 45. Learn more about endometrioid carcinoma.

Medscape

12-06-2025

• Medscape

Fast Five Quiz: Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

Although diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is characterized by aggressive clinical behavior, standard treatment can provide good long-term survival outcomes. However, management can be complex, with certain comorbidities exacerbating disease severity and complications such as extranodal involvement significantly affecting prognosis. Understanding the nuances of DLCBL presentation, diagnosis, and management is key to delivering the best outcomes to patients affected by this rapidly progressive disease. What do you know about DLBCL? Check your knowledge with this quick quiz. Both primary and secondary Sjögren syndrome are strongly associated DLBCL. Other autoimmune disorders that have been associated with DLBCL include hemolytic anemia, rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, and Crohn's disease. In addition to autoimmune disorders, viral infections have also been linked to DLBCL; these include HIV, hepatitis B, hepatitis C, and Epstein-Barr. Further, data have shown that patients with rheumatic diseases have a heightened risk of DLBCL development. Though fugal or bacterial pneumonia, humoral deficiency, and bone infections (such as osteomyelitis) can occur in patients with DLBCL, data have indicated that survivors of DLBCL were more likely to experience these conditions, rather than being strongly linked to DLBCL itself. Learn more about DLBCL staging. In the NCCN's guidelines, PET/CT is the preferred modality for imaging in DLBCL workup. C/A/P CT with contrast can also be used in a complementary setting to help stage the disease and identify other factors such as extranodal disease or visceral involvement, but it is not preferred. Although not essential, head CT/MRI or neck CT/MRI with contrast (as well as bone marrow biopsy) can be useful for workup in selected cases. Specifically, bone marrow biopsy can be helpful in identifying indolent or low-volume disease. However, the NCCN notes that bone marrow biopsy is not needed if PET/CT shows bone disease. Learn more about DLBCL workup. Data indicate that extranodal involvement occurs in approximately 30%– 50% of patients with DLBCL; further, it is reported that gastrointestinal involvement is the most common extranodal site. Other affected sites include the skin, bones, spleen, and central nervous system; kidneys, testicles, and the liver can also be impacted, but they are not regarded as the most common. Learn more about DLCBL and extranodal involvement. A population-based study involving over 30,000 patients with extranodal DLBCL found that the best outcomes are associated with heart and mediastinal sites, with a 42% reduction in mortality risk compared with involvement of the intestinal tract. Involvement of the pancreas and hepatobiliary system, respiratory system, or nervous system are associated with significantly greater risks of mortality compared with the intestinal tract. Other factors associated with greater mortality risk include late age at onset, history of other malignancy, late age at presentation, and Black, non-Hispanic ethnicity. Learn more about DLBCL prognosis. CAR T therapy is typically utilized as a second-line treatment for patients with relapsed/refractory DLBCL. CD19-directed CAR T-cell therapy is considered ' the standard of care' for relapsed/refractory DLBCL, with three treatments approved for this population. Although a number of factors can lead to CAR T cell therapy resistance, the key mechanism is typically down regulation or loss of CD19 expression. Abnormal differentiation and dysfunction of T cells can also cause poor response to CAR T therapy, and being unable to collect enough T cells can also negatively affect the impact of CAR T products; however, these factors are not considered key mechanisms for resistance to CAR T-cell therapy. As such, early collection of T-cells in high-risk patients with DLBCL is one strategy to ensure enough T cells are available when needed. Partial response or relapse after CAR T therapy should prompt third-line therapy, such as alternative systemic therapy not previously given, clinical trial, palliative involved-site radiation therapy, or best supportive care. Learn more about relapsed or refractory DLBCL.