360 Commercials

Diane Salvatore, Editor-in-Chief, Prevention Magazine, writes on the Huffington Post about "The Cancer You’re Probably Not Being Screened For."
Specifically, she advocates for transvaginal ultrasound screening for ovarian cancer.
Here’s what the American Cancer Society states about that approach:

"these tests are not recommended for women at average risk"

Here’s what the National Cancer Institute says:

"There is inadequate evidence to determine whether
routine screening for ovarian cancer with serum markers such as CA-125
levels, transvaginal ultrasound, or pelvic examinations would result in a
decrease in mortality from ovarian cancer."

More from the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center:

"There is no clear evidence to suggest that ovarian
cancer screening with currently available methods will result in a
decrease in the number of deaths from ovarian cancer."

The Los Angeles Times reports:

Ovarian cancer screening does more harm than good, study shows
…
An 18-year study by the National Cancer Institute finds that ultrasounds
and blood tests aimed at early detection don’t save lives, but expose
women to avoidable complications.
"Every professional group says ‘no screening for average-risk
women,’" said Dr. Beth Karlan, who directs the Women’s Cancer Research
Institute at Cedars-Sinai’s Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute
in Los Angeles. "We need to be sober in listening to the result."

In her column, Salvatore encourages readers to join the Ovarian
Cancer National Alliance — among other groups — "to educate the public
about this senseless killer." But a comment left on the Huffington Post
site in response to Salvatore’s column from a woman who says she
represents the Ovarian Cancer National Alliance states:

"There remains no reliable early detection or screening
test. Unfortunat­ely, the medical data does not show that receiving a
transvagin­al ultrasound and CA-125 blood test at an annual exam will
save women’s lives.
In fact, a multi-year study of almost 80,000 women showed that annual
CA-125 tests for six years and annual ultrasound­s for four years
helped diagnose more women but did not save lives. False positive tests
did not necessaril­y cause psychologi­cal harm, as this article implies,
but rather physical harm through unnecessar­y surgery and associated
complicati­ons from those surgeries. These are not minor risks; some
women died as a result of unnecessar­y surgeries.
…
The current tools we have are just not appropriat­e for annual
screening. This is unfortunate, as women diagnosed in early stages of
ovarian cancer live longer than those diagnosed in later stages.
However, we cannot advocate for policies or practices that are not
firmly rooted in the science."