Search

Randomised controlled trials are challenging to deliver. There is a constant need to review and refine recruitment and implementation strategies if they are to be completed on time and within budget. We present the strategies adopted in the United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening, one of the largest individually randomised controlled trials in the world. The trial recruited over 202,000 women (2001–5) and delivered over 670,000 annual screens (2001–11) and over 3 million women-years of follow-up (2001–20). Key to the successful completion were the involvement of senior investigators in the day-to-day running of the trial, proactive trial management and willingness to innovate and use technology. Our underlying ethos was that trial participants should always be at the centre of all our processes. We ensured that they were able to contact either the site or the coordinating centre teams for clarifications about their results, for follow-up and for rescheduling of appointments. To facilitate this, we shared personal identifiers (with consent) with both teams and had dedicated reception staff at both site and coordinating centre. Key aspects were a comprehensive online trial management system which included an electronic data capture system (resulting in an almost paperless trial), biobanking, monitoring and project management modules. The automation of algorithms (to ascertain eligibility and classify results and ensuing actions) and processes (scheduling of appointments, printing of letters, etc.) ensured the protocol was closely followed and timelines were met. Significant engagement with participants ensured retention and low rates of complaints. Our solutions to the design, conduct and analyses issues we faced are highly relevant, given the renewed focus on trials for early detection of cancer. Future work There is a pressing need to increase the evidence base to support decision making about all aspects of trial methodology. Trial registration ISRCTN-22488978; ClinicalTrials.gov-NCT00058032. Funding This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme as award number 16/46/01. The long-term follow-up UKCTOCS (2015 20) was supported by National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR HTA grant 16/46/01), Cancer Research UK, and The Eve Appeal. UKCTOCS (2001–14) was funded by the MRC (G9901012 and G0801228), Cancer Research UK (C1479/A2884), and the UK Department of Health, with additional support from The Eve Appeal. Researchers at UCL were supported by the NIHR UCL Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre and by the MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL core funding (MC_UU_00004/09, MC_UU_00004/08, MC_UU_00004/07). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the UK Department of Health and Social Care. Plain language summary Randomised controlled trials help us decide whether new health-care approaches are better than those in current use. To successfully complete these on time and within budget, there is a constant need to review and revise the procedures used for delivering various aspects such as invitation, enrolment, follow-up of participants, delivery of the new test, data collection, and analysis. We report on the processes used in the United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening, one of the largest such trials. The United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening enrolled over 202,000 women (2001–5), delivered over 670,000 yearly screens (2001–11) and followed all participants until 2020. Key to our successful completion were the involvement of senior investigators in day-to-day running of the trial, a pre-emptive approach to issues, a willingness to innovate, and the use of technology. Our underlying ethos was that trial participants should always be at the centre of all our processes. We ensured that they were able to always contact either their local or the central team for clarifications and rescheduling of appointments. To facilitate this, we shared participant contact details (with consent) with both teams. We built a comprehensive electronic system to manage all aspects of the trial. This included online forms that the teams completed in real time (resulting in an almost paperless trial) and systems to check and manage trial processes and track blood samples. We automated key steps such as checking whether participants were eligible, assigning correct action based on results of screening tests, scheduling appointments and printing letters. As a result, all participants were treated as set out in the trial plan. Our engagement with participants ensured that they continued participating and we had a low rate of complaints. We faced issues with regard to our initial trial design and the way we planned to analyse the data. We feel that our solutions are highly relevant, especially as there is a renewed focus on trials for early detection of cancer.

Analysis of cell‐free DNA methylation (cfDNAme), alone or combined with CA125, could help to detect ovarian cancers earlier and may reduce mortality. We assessed cfDNAme in regions of ZNF154, C2CD4D and WNT6 via targeted bisulfite sequencing in diagnostic and early detection (preceding diagnosis) settings. Diagnostic samples were obtained via prospective blood collection in cell‐free DNA tubes in a convenience series of patients with a pelvic mass. Early detection samples were matched case‐control samples derived from the UK Familial Ovarian Cancer Screening Study (UKFOCSS). In the diagnostic set (ncases = 27, ncontrols = 41), the specificity of cfDNAme was 97.6% (95% CI: 87.1%‐99.9%). High‐risk cancers were detected with a sensitivity of 80% (56.3%‐94.3%). Combination of cfDNAme and CA125 resulted in a sensitivity of 94.4% (72.7%‐99.9%) for high‐risk cancers. Despite technical issues in the early detection set (ncases = 29, ncontrols = 29), the specificity of cfDNAme was 100% (88.1%‐100.0%). We detected 27.3% (6.0%‐61.0%) of high‐risk cases with relatively lower genomic DNA (gDNA) contamination. The sensitivity rose to 33.3% (7.5%‐70.1%) in samples taken <1 year before diagnosis. We detected ovarian cancer in several patients up to 1 year before diagnosis despite technical limitations associated with archival samples (UKFOCSS). Combined cfDNAme and CA125 assessment may improve ovarian cancer screening in high‐risk populations, but future large‐scale prospective studies will be required to validate current findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Participants in trials evaluating preventive interventions such as screening are on average healthier than the general population. To decrease this 'healthy volunteer effect' (HVE) women were randomly invited from population registers to participate in the United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS) and not allowed to self refer. This report assesses the extent of the HVE still prevalent in UKCTOCS and considers how certain shortfalls in mortality and incidence can be related to differences in socioeconomic status. Methods Between 2001 and 2005, 202 638 postmenopausal women joined the trial out of 1 243 312 women randomly invited from local health authority registers. The cohort was flagged for deaths and cancer registrations and mean follow up at censoring was 5.55 years for mortality, and 2.58 years for cancer incidence. Overall and cause-specific Standardised Mortality Ratios (SMRs) and Standardised Incidence Ratios (SIRs) were calculated based on national mortality (2005) and cancer incidence (2006) statistics. The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD 2007) was used to assess the link between socioeconomic status and mortality/cancer incidence, and differences between the invited and recruited populations. Results The SMR for all trial participants was 37%. By subgroup, the SMRs were higher for: younger age groups, extremes of BMI distribution and with each increasing year in trial. There was a clear trend between lower socioeconomic status and increased mortality but less pronounced with incidence. While the invited population had higher mean IMD scores (more deprived) than the national average, those who joined the trial were less deprived. Conclusions Recruitment to screening trials through invitation from population registers does not prevent a pronounced HVE on mortality. The impact on cancer incidence is much smaller. Similar shortfalls can be expected in other screening RCTs and it maybe prudent to use the various mortality and incidence rates presented as guides for calculating event rates and power in RCTs involving women. Trial Registration This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN22488978. Medical Research Council (grant no. G990102), Cancer Research UK (grant no. C1479/A2884) and Department of Health

Objective: Estrogen is a well-established risk factor for various cancers. It causes endometrial proliferation, which is assessed routinely as endometrial thickness (ET) using transvaginal ultrasound (TVS). Only one previous study, restricted to endometrial and breast cancer, has considered ET and the risk of non-endometrial cancer. The aim of this study was to explore the association between baseline and serial ET measurements and nine non-endometrial hormone-sensitive cancers, in postmenopausal women, using contemporary statistical methodology that attempts to minimize the biases typical of endogenous serial data.Methods: This was a cohort study nested within the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS). In the ultrasound arm of UKCTOCS, 50639 postmenopausal women, aged 50-74, underwent annual TVS examination, of whom 38 105 had a valid ET measurement, no prior hysterectomy and complete covariate data, and were included in this study. All women were followed up through linkage to national cancer registries. The effect of ET on the risk of six estrogen-dependent cancers (breast, ovarian, colorectal, bladder, lung and pancreatic) was assessed using joint models for longitudinal biomarker and time-to-event data, and Cox models were used to assess the association between baseline ET measurement and these six cancers in addition to liver cancer, gastric cancer and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). All models were adjusted for current hormone-replacement therapy (HRT) use, body mass index, age at last menstrual period, parity and oral contraceptive pill use.Results: The 38 105 included women had a combined total of 267 567 (median, 8; interquartile range, 5-9) valid ET measurements. During a combined total of 407 838 (median, 10.9) years of follow-up, 1398 breast, 351 endometrial, 381 lung, 495 colorectal, 222 ovarian, 94 pancreatic, 79 bladder, 62 gastric, 38 liver cancers and 52 NHLs were registered. Using joint models, a doubling of ET increased significantly the risk of breast (hazard ratio (HR), 1.21; 95% CI, 1.09-1.36; P = 0.001), ovarian (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.06-1.82; P = 0.018) and lung (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.02-1.54; P = 0.036) cancers. There were no statistically significant associations between ET and the remaining six cancers.Conclusion: Postmenopausal women with high/increasing ET on TVS are at increased risk of breast, ovarian and lung cancer. It is important that clinicians are aware of these risks, as TVS is a common investigation. © 2019 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]