Ovarian cancer test 91% accurate in early study

To test OvaPrint, researchers collected more than 370 tissue and blood samples from both people diagnosed with early-stage ovarian cancer and those with normal ovaries or benign tumors.

Upon analysis, researchers found the new blood test could distinguish between a cancerous and benign pelvic mass with up to 91% accuracy.

“It’s all about detecting ovarian cancers at early stages when it is more treatable and the outcomes are significantly better,” Dr. Salhia said. “There are still no effective screening tools for ovarian cancer for use in the general population. CA125 and ultrasound just don’t work well for ovarian cancer early detection, especially, because CA125 is non-specific and is elevated in many other conditions”

“We are launching a follow-up study to validate their results in hundreds of patients,” she added. “If the follow-up study results validate the efficacy of the test, we plan to release a commercially viable version of the test for clinical use within two years or less.”

Step in the right direction

After reviewing this study, Dr. John Diaz, chief of gynecologic oncology with Miami Cancer Institute, part of Baptist Health South Florida, and director of robotic surgery with Miami Cancer Institute, part of Baptist Health South Florida, not involved in the research, told MNT that gynecologic oncologists face several challenges in addressing women with adnexal massesTrusted Source.

“The surgical approach and intraoperative decision-making may change based on whether one suspects a benign or malignant ovarian mass,” he continued. “Having additional information preoperatively may help in determining the best surgical approach for these patients. This could result in improved surgical outcomes.”

Dr. Steve Vasilev, a board-certified integrative gynecologic oncologist and medical director of Integrative Gynecologic Oncology at Providence Saint John’s Health Center and professor at Saint John’s Cancer Institute in Santa Monica, CA, also not involved in the study, told MNT that since there is currently no effective screening tool for ovarian cancer, this is a step in the right direction in our current evolving molecular age.

“Techniques to assess cfDNATrusted Source from malignant tumors and to identify and utilize other molecular biomarkers are much more sensitive compared to tumor markers currently used, like CA125,” he explained. “The reported sensitivity, specificity, as well as positive and negative predictive values are impressive, with an accuracy of over 90% as a triage tool.”

“However,“ he cautioned, “as provocative as this is, the data is very preliminary, as the authors acknowledge.”

Dr. Vasilev added that: “In order to prove the safety and efficacy of a screening tool, [it] can take many years of clinical trials or high-quality observational data with a very large population sample. Thus we are quite far from implementation as a general screening tool at this time.”