Aspirin use and cancer incidence in UKCTOCS
Research type
Research Study
Full title
A prospective cohort study within the United Kingdom Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS): Aspirin use and cancer incidence
IRAS ID
271266
Contact name
Archie Macnair
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
University College London
Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier
Z6364106/2019/10/107 , Data Protection reference
Duration of Study in the UK
1 years, 11 months, 31 days
Research summary
United Kingdom Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS) is a randomised controlled trial aiming to assess the impact of screening on mortality from ovarian cancer. They recruited approximately 202,638 postmenopausal women aged between 50-74 into the study. The study used electronic health records to follow up the participants and women consented for these records to be used in secondary studies.
In the first instance we will use UKCTOCS’ already collected electronic health record data as a foundation of the evidence synthesis to establish if a larger randomised controlled trial for aspirin in the primary prevention of cancer would be appropriate. There is increasing evidence that aspirin may have a primary prevention effect with respect to cancer. This is based mainly on observational studies and randomised controlled trials primarily designed to determine the benefit of aspirin in cardiovascular disease. Definitive evidence for aspirin as an anti-cancer agent would require a prospective, randomised study. One potential design would be an open label randomised control trial using electronic health records for both the recruitment process and follow up.
Interrogating UKCTOCS data with respect to aspirin use and subsequent cancer outcomes will provide further evidence as to whether aspirin decreases the risk of cancer and improves cancer outcomes in this particular cohort of women. If this hypothesis is correct then this would increase the body of evidence for aspirin as a primary prevention medication for cancer furthering our case for a larger prospective trial. Additionally it would aim to demonstrate if routinely collected electronic health records could provide the necessary follow up information to run a primary prevention trial rather than using conventional trial follow up methods.REC name
London - Hampstead Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
19/LO/1989
Date of REC Opinion
20 Dec 2019
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion