Obstetrics & Gynecology Track the topics, authors and articles important to you
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Obstetrics & Gynecology 2000;96:70-74
© 2000 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by DRESCHER, C.
Right arrow Articles by URBAN, N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by DRESCHER, C.
Right arrow Articles by URBAN, N.

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Reported Ovarian Cancer Screening Among a Population-Based Sample in Washington State

CHARLES DRESCHER, MD, SARAH K. HOLT, MPH, M. ROBYN ANDERSEN, PhD, GARNET ANDERSON, PhD and NICOLE URBAN, ScD

From the Department of Obstetrics/Gynecology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; the Marsha Rivkin Center for Ovarian Cancer Research, Seattle, Washington; and the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington.

Address reprint requests to: Charles Drescher, MD, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1101 Madison Street, Suite 1500, Seattle, WA 98104, E-mail: cdresche{at}fhcrc.org

Objective: To assess the prevalence of reported ovarian cancer screening among a population-based sample of women from Washington state and identify factors that influence the decision to be screened.

Methods: A population-based sample of 6749 women aged 54–84 years, living in 40 predominately rural communities in Washington state, was surveyed about their utilization of ultrasonography and CA 125 for ovarian cancer screening. We also assessed relevant demographic, family history, psychosocial, and health behavior variables.

Results: After exclusions, data from 4938 respondents were available. Two percent (n = 96) reported having been screened. Multiple logistic regression identified ovarian cancer worry, contact with an obstetrician-gynecologist, and family history of ovarian cancer as independently associated with screening. Based on self-reported family histories, 27 women had pedigrees consistent with high risk of ovarian cancer, but none of those women reported having been screened.

Conclusion: Ovarian cancer screening is rare. Women at high risk of it might not be getting recommended screening.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
M. W. McIntosh, Y. Liu, C. Drescher, N. Urban, and E. P. Diamandis
Validation and Characterization of Human Kallikrein 11 as a Serum Marker for Diagnosis of Ovarian Carcinoma
Clin. Cancer Res., August 1, 2007; 13(15): 4422 - 4428.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
C. W. Drescher, J. Nelson, S. Peacock, M. R. Andersen, M. W. McIntosh, and N. Urban
Compliance of Average- and Intermediate-Risk Women to Semiannual Ovarian Cancer Screening
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., April 1, 2004; 13(4): 600 - 606.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JCOHome page
M. D. Schwartz, E. Kaufman, B. N. Peshkin, C. Isaacs, C. Hughes, T. DeMarco, C. Finch, and C. Lerman
Bilateral Prophylactic Oophorectomy and Ovarian Cancer Screening Following BRCA1/BRCA2 Mutation Testing
J. Clin. Oncol., November 1, 2003; 21(21): 4034 - 4041.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2000 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.