4.6 Review

Future Screening Prospects for Ovarian Cancer

Journal

CANCERS
Volume 13, Issue 15, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cancers13153840

Keywords

ovarian cancer; liquid biopsies; uterine lavage; high-throughput methods; NGS-based multigene panels

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Ovarian cancer has the highest mortality rate among gynecological cancers, with a higher survival rate if diagnosed early, but current diagnostic tools lack sensitivity and specificity. The lack of early symptoms and effective screening strategies leads to a poor prognosis for ovarian cancer, highlighting the urgent need for new diagnostic and screening methods. Liquid biopsies, as a noninvasive and promising method, have been considered for early cancer detection through the analysis of molecular biomarkers.
Simple Summary Ovarian cancer (OC) has the highest mortality rate of all gynecological cancers. It is usually diagnosed in late stages (FIGO III-IV), and therefore, overall survival is very poor. If diagnosed at the early stages, ovarian cancer has a 90% five-year survival rate. Liquid biopsy has a good potential to improve early ovarian cancer detection and is discussed in this review. Current diagnostic tools used in clinical practice such as transvaginal ultrasound, CA 125, and HE4 are not sensitive and specific enough to diagnose OC in the early stages. A lack of early symptoms and an effective asymptomatic population screening strategy leads to a poor prognosis in OC. New diagnostic and screening methods are urgently needed for early OC diagnosis. Liquid biopsies have been considered as a new noninvasive and promising method, using plasma/serum, uterine lavage, and urine samples for early cancer detection. We analyzed recent studies on molecular biomarkers with specific emphasis on liquid biopsy methods and diagnostic efficacy for OC through the detection of circulating tumor cells, circulating cell-free DNA, small noncoding RNAs, and tumor-educated platelets.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available