Diagnostic Performance of the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) Ultrasound Risk Score in Women in the United States

Classification and risk assessment of ovarian-adnexal lesions using parametric and radiomic analysis of co-registered ultrasound-photoacoustic tomographic images

Ovarian-adnexal lesions are conventionally assessed with ultrasound (US) under the guidance of the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS). However, the low specificity of O-RADS results in many unnecessary surgeries. Here, we use co-registered US and photoacoustic tomography (PAT) to improve the diagnostic accuracy of O-RADS. Physics-based parametric algorithms for US and PAT were developed to estimate the acoustic and photoacoustic properties of 93 ovarian lesions. Additionally, statistics-based radiomic algorithms were applied to quantify differences in the lesion texture on US-PAT images. A machine learning model (US-PAT KNN model) was developed based on an optimized subset of eight US and PAT imaging features to classify a lesion as either cancer, one of four subtypes of benign lesions, or a normal ovary. The model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.969 and a balanced six-class classification accuracy of 86.0 %.

Inter-reader reliability of Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System US: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) US provides a standardized lexicon for ovarian and adnexal lesions, facilitating risk stratification based on morphological features for malignancy assessment, which is essential for proper management. However, systematic determination of inter-reader reliability in O-RADS US categorization remains unexplored. This study aimed to systematically determine the inter-reader reliability of O-RADS US categorization and identify the factors that affect it.

METHODS

Original articles reporting the inter-reader reliability of O-RADS US in lesion categorization were identified in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases from January 2018 to December 2023. DerSimonian-Laird random-effects models were used to determine the meta-analytic pooled inter-reader reliability of the O-RADS US categorization. Subgroup meta-regression analysis was performed to identify the factors causing study heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Fourteen original articles with 5139 ovarian and adnexal lesions were included. The inter-reader reliability of O-RADS US in lesion categorization ranged from 0.71 to 0.99, with a meta-analytic pooled estimate of 0.83 (95% CI, 0.78-0.88), indicating almost perfect reliability. Substantial study heterogeneity was observed in the inter-reader reliability of the O-RADS US categorization (I2 = 96.9). In subgroup meta-regression analysis, reader experience was the only factor associated with study heterogeneity. Pooled inter-reader reliability of the O-RADS US categorization was higher in studies with all experienced readers (0.86; 95% CI, 0.81-0.91) compared to those with multiple readers including trainees (0.74; 95% CI, 0.70-0.78; P = 0.009). The inter-reader reliability of US descriptors ranged from 0.39 to 0.97, with ascites and peritoneal nodules showing almost perfect reliability (0.79- 0.97).

CONCLUSION

The O-RADS US risk stratification system demonstrated almost perfect inter-reader reliability in lesion categorization. Our results highlight the importance of targeted training and descriptor simplification to improve inter-reader reliability and clinical adoption.

Automatic segmentation model and machine learning model grounded in ultrasound radiomics for distinguishing between low malignant risk and intermediate-high malignant risk of adnexal masses

OBJECTIVE

To develop an automatic segmentation model to delineate the adnexal masses and construct a machine learning model to differentiate between low malignant risk and intermediate-high malignant risk of adnexal masses based on ovarian-adnexal reporting and data system (O-RADS).

METHODS

A total of 663 ultrasound images of adnexal mass were collected and divided into two sets according to experienced radiologists: a low malignant risk set (n = 446) and an intermediate-high malignant risk set (n = 217). Deep learning segmentation models were trained and selected to automatically segment adnexal masses. Radiomics features were extracted utilizing a feature analysis system in Pyradiomics. Feature selection was conducted using the Spearman correlation analysis, Mann-Whitney U-test, and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression. A nomogram integrating radiomic and clinical features using a machine learning model was established and evaluated. The SHapley Additive exPlanations were used for model interpretability and visualization.

RESULTS

The FCN ResNet101 demonstrated the highest segmentation performance for adnexal masses (Dice similarity coefficient: 89.1%). Support vector machine achieved the best AUC (0.961, 95% CI: 0.925-0.996). The nomogram using the LightGBM algorithm reached the best AUC (0.966, 95% CI: 0.927-1.000). The diagnostic performance of the nomogram was comparable to that of experienced radiologists (p > 0.05) and outperformed that of less-experienced radiologists (p < 0.05). The model significantly improved the diagnostic accuracy of less-experienced radiologists.

CONCLUSIONS

The segmentation model serves as a valuable tool for the automated delineation of adnexal lesions. The machine learning model exhibited commendable classification capability and outperformed the diagnostic performance of less-experienced radiologists.

CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

The ultrasound radiomics-based machine learning model holds the potential to elevate the professional ability of less-experienced radiologists and can be used to assist in the clinical screening of ovarian cancer.

KEY POINTS

We developed an image segmentation model to automatically delineate adnexal masses. We developed a model to classify adnexal masses based on O-RADS. The machine learning model has achieved commendable classification performance. The machine learning model possesses the capability to enhance the proficiency of less-experienced radiologists. We used SHapley Additive exPlanations to interpret and visualize the model.

Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System Ultrasound v2022: From Origin to Everyday Use

This review of the American College of Radiology Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) ultrasound (US) v2022 will familiarize the reader with the updated O-RADS US system, highlight new updates, and outline key technical and reporting components. Additionally, this review will outline how to approach and incorporate the system into clinical practice, with reporting and real-world examples. Future directions will focus on addressing knowledge gaps and expanding on research opportunities.

Ovarian-Adnexal Imaging-Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) ultrasound version 2019: a prospective validation and comparison to updated version (v2022) in pathologically confirmed adnexal masses

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and reliability of the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) ultrasound v2019 in classifying adnexal masses (AMs) and compare the old and updated systems (v2022).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective study enrolled 977 consecutive women with suspected AMs from three institutions between January 2022 and December 2023. Ultrasound examinations were performed by three experienced radiologists who categorized AMs according to O-RADS ultrasound v2019. The same radiologists retrospectively reviewed the stored ultrasound images and provided the O-RADS ultrasound v2022 classification. Histopathology was used as the reference standard to calculate the diagnostic accuracy of the O-RADS versions in predicting malignant AMs. Inter-observer agreement (IOA) of the O-RADS scoring results was evaluated using the Fleiss kappa (κ) test.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 803 women with 855 AMs (219 (25.6%) malignant and 636 (74.4%) benign). Both O-RADS versions demonstrated good diagnostic accuracy, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging from 0.906 to 0.923 (v2019) and 0.919 to 0.936 (v2022). The updated v2022 showed a slightly higher accuracy (82.5-86.7% vs. 80.7-85.3%), sensitivity (93.6-95.0% vs. 92.2-94.1%), and specificity (78.1-84.1% vs. 76.1-82.9%) compared to v2019. The IOA for the overall O-RADS classification was perfect for both versions (κ = 0.96-0.97).

CONCLUSIONS

The O-RADS ultrasound classification system demonstrated good diagnostic accuracy and reliability in predicting malignant AMs, with the updated v2022 showing modest improvements.

KEY POINTS

Question Accurate classification of adnexal masses is essential for management. Can updated O-RADS ultrasound v2022 improve diagnostic accuracy and reliability compared to v2019 in predicting malignancies? Findings O-RADS ultrasound v2022 demonstrated slightly higher diagnostic accuracy for identifying malignant adnexal masses compared to v2019, reflecting modest improvements in risk stratification and clinical decision-making. Clinical relevance The updated O-RADS ultrasound v2022 provides improved risk stratification for adnexal masses, enhancing diagnostic confidence, supporting more precise clinical decision-making, and improving patient outcomes through timely intervention or tailored management strategies in ovarian cancer care.

Accuracy of O-RADS System in Differentiating Between Benign and Malignant Adnexal Masses Assessed via External Validation by Inexperienced Gynecologists

Objective: To evaluate the accuracy of the O-RADS system in differentiating between benign and malignant adnexal masses, as assessed by inexperienced gynecologists. Methods: Ten gynecologic residents attended a 20 h training course on the O-RADS system conducted by experienced examiners. Following the training, the residents performed ultrasound examinations on patients admitted with adnexal masses under supervision, recording the data in a database that included videos and still images. The senior author later accessed this ultrasound database and presented the cases offline to ten residents for O-RADS rating, with the raters being blinded to the final diagnosis. The efficacy of the O-RADS system by the residents and inter-observer variability were assessed. Results: A total of 201 adnexal masses meeting the inclusion criteria were evaluated, consisting of 136 (67.7%) benign masses and 65 (32.3%) malignant masses. The diagnostic performance of the O-RADS system showed a sensitivity of 90.8% (95% CI: 82.2-96.2%) and a specificity of 86.8% (95% CI: 80.4-91.8%). Inter-observer variability in scoring was analyzed using multi-rater Fleiss Kappa analysis, yielding Kappa indices of 0.642 (95% CI: 0.641-0.643). The false positive rate was primarily due to the misclassification of solid components in classic benign masses as O-RADS-4 or O-RADS-5. Conclusions: The O-RADS system demonstrates high diagnostic performance in distinguishing benign from malignant adnexal masses, even when used by inexperienced examiners. However, the false positive rate remains relatively high, mainly due to the over-interpretation of solid-appearing components in classic benign lesions. Despite this, inter-observer variability among non-expert raters was substantial. Incorporating O-RADS system training into residency programs is beneficial for inexperienced practitioners. This study could be an educational model for gynecologic residency training for other systems of sonographic features.

Advanced Visualization of Musculoskeletal Pathologies Using MV-Flow Ultrasound: A Case Series

The blood flow-detecting mode of ultrasound images can be beneficial for assessing the degree of inflammation among various musculoskeletal conditions and their recovery. Power Doppler (PD) ultrasound is typically used for blood flow, but its limitations in detecting low-velocity blood flow hinder comprehensive assessment. The microvascular flow tool (MV-Flow) from the Samsung V7 and RS85 ultrasound systems (Samsung Co., Seoul, South Korea), offers advanced visualization of microcirculatory and slow-flow connections that PD and Color Doppler (CD) cannot detect. This case series highlights the novel application of MV-Flow in diagnosing sports medicine-related conditions, specifically tendinopathy, demonstrating its utility even when magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and conventional ultrasound fail to reveal abnormalities.

Risk-prediction models in postmenopausal patients with symptoms of suspected ovarian cancer in the UK (ROCkeTS): a multicentre, prospective diagnostic accuracy study

BACKGROUND

Multiple risk-prediction models are used in clinical practice to triage patients as being at low risk or high risk of ovarian cancer. In the ROCkeTS study, we aimed to identify the best diagnostic test for ovarian cancer in symptomatic patients, through head-to-head comparisons of risk-prediction models, in a real-world setting. Here, we report the results for the postmenopausal cohort.

METHODS

In this multicentre, prospective diagnostic accuracy study, we recruited newly presenting female patients aged 16-90 years with non-specific symptoms and raised CA125 or abnormal ultrasound results (or both) who had been referred via rapid access, elective clinics, or emergency presentations from 23 hospitals in the UK. Patients with normal CA125 and simple ovarian cysts of smaller than 5 cm in diameter, active non-ovarian malignancy, or previous ovarian malignancy, or those who were pregnant or declined a transvaginal scan, were ineligible. In this analysis, only postmenopausal participants were included. Participants completed a symptom questionnaire, gave a blood sample, and had transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasounds performed by International Ovarian Tumour Analysis consortium (IOTA)-certified sonographers. Index tests were Risk of Malignancy 1 (RMI1) at a threshold of 200, Risk of Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) at multiple thresholds, IOTA Assessment of Different Neoplasias in the Adnexa (ADNEX) at thresholds of 3% and 10%, IOTA SRRisk model at thresholds of 3% and 10%, IOTA Simple Rules (malignant vs benign, or inconclusive), and CA125 at 35 IU/mL. In a post-hoc analysis, the Ovarian Adnexal and Reporting Data System (ORADS) at 10% was derived from IOTA ultrasound variables using established methods since ORADS was described after completion of recruitment. Index tests were conducted by study staff masked to the results of the reference standard. The comparator was RMI1 at the 250 threshold (the current UK National Health Service standard of care). The reference standard was surgical or biopsy tissue histology or cytology within 3 months, or a self-reported diagnosis of ovarian cancer at 12 month follow-up. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy at predicting primary invasive ovarian cancer versus benign or normal histology, assessed by analysing the sensitivity, specificity, C-index, area under receiver operating characteristic curve, positive and negative predictive values, and calibration plots in participants with conclusive reference standard results and available index test data. This study is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry (ISRCTN17160843).

FINDINGS

Between July 13, 2015, and Nov 30, 2018, 1242 postmenopausal patients were recruited, of whom 215 (17%) had primary ovarian cancer. 166 participants had missing, inconclusive, or other reference standard results; therefore, data from a maximum of 1076 participants were used to assess the index tests for the primary outcome. Compared with RMI1 at 250 (sensitivity 82·9% [95% CI 76·7 to 88·0], specificity 87·4% [84·9 to 89·6]), IOTA ADNEX at 10% was more sensitive (difference of -13·9% [-20·2 to -7·6], p<0·0001) but less specific (difference of 28·5% [24·7 to 32·3], p<0·0001). ROMA at 29·9 had similar sensitivity (difference of -3·6% [-9·1 to 1·9], p=0·24) but lower specificity (difference of 5·2% [2·5 to 8·0], p=0·0001). RMI1 at 200 had similar sensitivity (difference of -2·1% [-4·7 to 0·5], p=0·13) but lower specificity (difference of 3·0% [1·7 to 4·3], p<0·0001). IOTA SRRisk model at 10% had similar sensitivity (difference of -4·3% [-11·0 to -2·3], p=0·23) but lower specificity (difference of 16·2% [12·6 to 19·8], p<0·0001). IOTA Simple Rules had similar sensitivity (difference of -1·6% [-9·3 to 6·2], p=0·82) and specificity (difference of -2·2% [-5·1 to 0·6], p=0·14). CA125 at 35 IU/mL had similar sensitivity (difference of -2·1% [-6·6 to 2·3], p=0·42) but higher specificity (difference of 6·7% [4·3 to 9·1], p<0·0001). In a post-hoc analysis, when compared with RMI1 at 250, ORADS achieved similar sensitivity (difference of -2·1%, 95% CI -8·6 to 4·3, p=0·60) and lower specificity (difference of 10·2%, 95% CI 6·8 to 13·6, p<0·0001).

INTERPRETATION

In view of its higher sensitivity than RMI1 at 250, despite some loss in specificity, we recommend that IOTA ADNEX at 10% should be considered as the new standard-of-care diagnostic in ovarian cancer for postmenopausal patients.

FUNDING

UK National Institute of Heath Research.

The Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) US Score Effect on Surgical Resection Rate

Background The Ovarian-Adnexal Imaging Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) US risk score can be used to accurately stratify ovarian lesions based on morphologic characteristics. However, there are no large multicenter studies assessing the potential impact of using O-RADS US version 2022 risk score in patients referred for surgery for an ovarian or adnexal lesion. Purpose To retrospectively determine the proportion of patients with ovarian or adnexal lesions without acute symptoms who may have been managed conservatively by using the O-RADS US version 2022 risk score. Materials and Methods This multicenter retrospective study included patients with ovarian cystic lesions and nonacute symptoms who underwent surgical resection after US before the introduction of O-RADS US between January 2011 and December 2014. Investigators blinded to the final diagnoses recorded lesion imaging features and O-RADS US risk scores. The frequency of malignancy and the diagnostic performance of the risk score were calculated. The Mann-Whitney test and Fisher exact test were performed, with P < .05 indicating a statistically significant difference. Results A total of 377 patients with surgically resected lesions were included. Among the resected lesions, 42% (157 of 377) were assigned an O-RADS US risk score of 2. Of the O-RADS US 2 lesions, 54% (86 of 157) were nonneoplastic, 45% (70 of 157) were dermoids or other benign tumors, and less than 1% (one of 157) were malignant. Using O-RADS US 4 as the optimal threshold for malignancy prediction yielded a 94% (68 of 72) sensitivity, 64% (195 of 305) specificity, 38% (68 of 178) positive predictive value, and 98% (195 of 199) negative predictive value. Conclusion In patients without acute symptoms who underwent surgery for ovarian and adnexal lesions before the O-RADS US risk score was published, nearly half (42%) of surgically resected lesions retrospectively met the O-RADS US 2 version 2022 criteria. In these patients, imaging follow-up or conservative management could have been offered. © RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Fournier in this issue.

Diagnostic performances of the Ovarian Adnexal Reporting and Data System, the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm, and the Copenhagen Index in the preoperative prediction of ovarian cancer: a prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA), Copenhagen Index (CPH-I), and Ovarian Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) for the preoperative prediction of ovarian cancer (OC).

METHODS

A prospective cohort study was conducted on 462 patients diagnosed with ovarian tumors admitted to the Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hue University of Medicine and Pharmacy Hospital, and Hue Central Hospital from May 2020 to December 2022. ROMA and CPH-I were calculated using cancer antigen 125 (CA125), human epididymal protein 4 (HE4) levels, and patient characteristics (age and menopausal status). O-RADS criteria were applied to describe ovarian tumor characteristics from ultrasound findings. Compared with histopathological results, the predictive values of ROMA, CPH-I, and O-RADS alone or in combination with CA125/HE4 for OC were calculated.

RESULTS

Among 462 patients, 381 had benign tumors, 11 had borderline tumors, and 50 had OC. At optimal cut-off points, ROMA's and CPH-I's areas under the curves (AUCs) were 0.880 (95% confidence interval [CI]=0.846-0.909) and 0.890 (95% CI=0.857-0.918), respectively, and ROMA and CPH-I sensitivities/specificities (Se/Sp) were 68.85%/95.01% and 77.05%/91.08%, respectively. O-RADS ≥3 yielded an AUCs of 0.949 (95% CI=0.924-0.968), with Se/Sp of 88.52%/88.98% (p<0.001). Combining O-RADS with CA125 demonstrated the highest predictive value, with AUCs of 0.969 (95% CI=0.949-0.983) and Se/Sp of 98.36%/86.09% (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

The ROMA, CPH-I, O-RADS, O-RADS + CA125, and O-RADS + HE4 models demonstrated good predictive values for OC; the combination of O-RADS and CA125 yielded the highest values.

Differentiating Benign From Malignant Ovarian Masses With Solid Components: Diagnostic Performance of CEUS Combined With IOTA Simple Rules and O-RADS

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to apply the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Simple Rules (SR), the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in an identical cohort of Chinese patients and to analyze their performance in discrimination of ovarian masses with solid components.

METHODS

This was a two-center retrospective study that included a total of 94 ovarian lesions in 86 women enrolled from January 2018 to February 2023. The lesions were classified by using the IOTA terminology and CEUS was performed for the lesions exhibiting solid components on ultrasonography, IOTA SR and O-RADS were applied, and CEUS images were analyzed retrospectively. We assessed the time to wash-in, time to peak intensity (PI), PI compared to myometrium, and time to wash-out, and observed statistically significant differences between benign and malignant lesions in the first three parameters. CEUS characteristics were employed to determine CEUS scores for benign (score 0) and malignant (score 3) lesions. Subsequently, the lesions were reassessed based on the IOTA SR and O-RADS classifications and CEUS scores. The sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver-operating-characteristics curve (AUC) of the different models were also determined.

RESULTS

Among the 94 ovarian lesions, 46 (48.9%) were benign and 48 (51.1%) were malignant. It was found that in the 60 lesions to which the SR could be applied, the sensitivity, specificity, and AUC was 0.900, 0.667, and 0.783, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and AUC of O-RADS was observed to be 1.000, 0.283 and 0.641, respectively. When SR and O-RADS were combined with CEUS, their sensitivity, specificity, and AUC values were increased to 0.917, 0.891, 0.904, and 0.958, 0.783, 0.871, respectively.

CONCLUSION

IOTA SR and O-RADS exhibited relatively low specificity in differentiating malignant from benign ovarian lesions with the solid components, and their diagnostic performance can be significantly improved when combined with CEUS.

Clinical value of ACR O-RADS combined with CA125 in the risk stratification of adnexal masses

Purpose

To develop a combined diagnostic model integrating the subclassification of the 2022 version of the American College of Radiology (ACR) Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) with carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA125) and to validate whether the combined model can offer superior diagnostic efficacy than O-RADS alone in assessing adnexal malignancy risk.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on 593 patients with adnexal masses (AMs), and the pathological and clinical data were included. According to the large differences in malignancy risk indices for different image features in O-RADS category 4, the lesions were categorized into groups A and B. A new diagnostic criterion was developed. Lesions identified as category 1, 2, 3, or 4A with a CA125 level below 35 U/ml were classified as benign. Lesions identified as category 4A with a CA125 level more than or equal to 35 U/ml and lesions with a category of 4B and 5 were classified as malignant. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), accuracy, and area under the curve (AUC) of O-RADS (v2022), CA125, and the combined model in the diagnosis of AMs were calculated and compared.

Results

The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, accuracy, and AUCs of the combined model were 92.4%, 96.5%, 80.2%, 98.8%, 94.1%, and 0.945, respectively. The specificity, PPV, accuracy, and AUC of the combined model were significantly higher than those of O-RADS alone (all P < 0.01). In addition, both models had acceptable sensitivity and NPV, but there were no significant differences among them (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

The combined model integrating O-RADS subclassification with CA125 could improve the specificity and PPV in diagnosing malignant AMs. It could be a valuable tool in the clinical application of risk stratification of AMs.

The Roles of Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System US and Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System MRI in the Evaluation of Adnexal Lesions

The Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) is an evidence-based clinical support system for ovarian and adnexal lesion assessment in women of average risk. The system has both US and MRI components with separate but complementary lexicons and assessment categories to assign the risk of malignancy. US is an appropriate initial imaging modality, and O-RADS US can accurately help to characterize most adnexal lesions. MRI is a valuable adjunct imaging tool to US, and O-RADS MRI can help to both confirm a benign diagnosis and accurately stratify lesions that are at risk for malignancy. This article will review the O-RADS US and MRI systems, highlight their similarities and differences, and provide an overview of the interplay between the systems. When used together, the O-RADS US and MRI systems can help to accurately diagnose benign lesions, assess the risk of malignancy in lesions suspicious for malignancy, and triage patients for optimal management.

Analysis of Diagnostic Efficacy of the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis ADNEX Model and the ACR O-RADS US (Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System) for Benign and Malignant Ovarian Tumors: A Retrospective Study in a Tumor Center in Northeast China

This study is to analyze and compare the diagnostic efficacy of the ADNEX model and O-RADS in Northeast China for benign and malignant ovarian-adnexal tumors. From July 2020 to February 2022, ultrasound images of 312 ovarian-adnexal masses included in the study were analyzed retrospectively, and the properties of these masses were identified using the ADNEX model and O-RADS. The diagnostic efficiency of the ADNEX model and O-RADS was analyzed using a ROC curve, and the capacities of the two models in differentiating benign and malignant ovarian masses at the optimum cutoff value were compared, as well as the consistency of their diagnosis results was evaluated. The study included 312 ovarian-adnexal masses, including 145 malignant masses and 167 benign masses from 287 patients with an average age of (46.8 ± 11.3) years. The AUC of the ADNEX model was 0.974, and the optimum cutoff value was the risk value > 24.2%, with the corresponding sensitivity and specificity being 97.93 and 86.83, respectively. The AUC of the O-RADS was 0.956, and the optimum cutoff value was > O-RADS 3, with the corresponding sensitivity and specificity being 97.24 and 85.03, respectively. The AUCs of the two models were 0.924 and 0.911 at the optimum cutoff values, with no statistical differences between them (P = 0.284). Consistency analysis: the kappa values of the two models for the determination and pathological results of masses were 0.840 and 0.815, respectively, and that for the diagnostic outcomes was 0.910. Both the ADNEX model and O-RADS had good diagnostic performance in people from Northeast China. Their diagnostic capabilities were similar, and diagnostic results were highly consistent at the optimum cutoff values.

Ultrasound image-based nomogram combining clinical, radiomics, and deep transfer learning features for automatic classification of ovarian masses according to O-RADS

Background

Accurate and rapid discrimination between benign and malignant ovarian masses is crucial for optimal patient management. This study aimed to establish an ultrasound image-based nomogram combining clinical, radiomics, and deep transfer learning features to automatically classify the ovarian masses into low risk and intermediate-high risk of malignancy lesions according to the Ovarian- Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS).

Methods

The ultrasound images of 1,080 patients with 1,080 ovarian masses were included. The training cohort consisting of 683 patients was collected at the South China Hospital of Shenzhen University, and the test cohort consisting of 397 patients was collected at the Shenzhen University General Hospital. The workflow included image segmentation, feature extraction, feature selection, and model construction.

Results

The pre-trained Resnet-101 model achieved the best performance. Among the different mono-modal features and fusion feature models, nomogram achieved the highest level of diagnostic performance (AUC: 0.930, accuracy: 84.9%, sensitivity: 93.5%, specificity: 81.7%, PPV: 65.4%, NPV: 97.1%, precision: 65.4%). The diagnostic indices of the nomogram were higher than those of junior radiologists, and the diagnostic indices of junior radiologists significantly improved with the assistance of the model. The calibration curves showed good agreement between the prediction of nomogram and actual classification of ovarian masses. The decision curve analysis showed that the nomogram was clinically useful.

Conclusion

This model exhibited a satisfactory diagnostic performance compared to junior radiologists. It has the potential to improve the level of expertise of junior radiologists and provide a fast and effective method for ovarian cancer screening.

O-RADS MRI SCORE: An Essential First-Step Tool for the Characterization of Adnexal Masses

The ovarian-adnexal reporting and data system on magnetic resonance imaging (O-RADS MRI) score is now a well-established tool to characterize pelvic gynecological masses based on their likelihood of malignancy. The main added value of O-RADS MRI over O-RADS US is to correctly reclassify lesions that were considered suspicious on US as benign on MRI. The crucial issue when characterizing an adnexal mass is to determine the presence/absence of solid tissue and thus need to perform gadolinium injection. O-RADS MR score was built on a multivariate analysis and must be applied as a step-by-step analysis: 1) Is the mass an adnexal mass? 2) Is there an associated peritoneal carcinomatosis? 3) Is there any significant amount of fatty content? 4) Is there any wall enhancement? 5) Is there any internal enhancement? 6) When an internal enhancement is detected, does the internal enhancement correspond to solid tissue or not? 7) Is the solid tissue malignant? With its high value to distinguish benign from malignant adnexal masses and its high reproducibility, the O-RADS MRI score could be a valuable tool for timely referral of a patient to an expert center for the treatment of ovarian cancers. Finally, to make a precise diagnosis allowing optimal personalized treatment, the radiologist in gynecological imaging will combine the O-RADS MRI score with many other clinical, biological, and other MR criteria to suggest a pathological hypothesis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5 TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE: 3.

O-RADS MRI scoring system has the potential to reduce the frequency of avoidable adnexal surgery

OBJECTIVE

To assess the potential impact of the O-RADS MRI score on the decision-making process for the management of adnexal masses.

METHODS

EURAD database (prospective, European observational, multicenter study) was queried to identify asymptomatic women without history of infertility included between March 1st and March 31st 2018, with available surgical pathology or clinical findings at 2-year clinical follow-up. Blinded to final diagnosis, we stratified patients into five categories according to the O-RADS MRI score (absent i.e. non adnexal, benign, probably benign, indeterminate, probably malignant). Prospective management was compared to theoretical management according to the score established as following: those with presumed benign masses (scored O-RADS MRI 2 or 3) (follow-up recommended) and those with presumed malignant masses (scored O-RADS MRI 4 or 5) (surgery recommended).

RESULTS

The accuracy of the score for assessing the origin of the mass was of 97.2 % (564/580, CI95% 0.96-0.98) and was of 92.0 % (484/526) for categorizing lesions with a negative predictive value of 98.1 % (415/423, CI95% 0.96-0.99). Theoretical management using the score would have spared surgery in 229 patients (87.1 %, 229/263) with benign lesions and malignancy would have been missed in 6 borderline and 2 invasive cases. In patients with a presumed benign mass using O-RADS MRI score, recommending surgery for lesions >= 100 mm would miss only 4/77 (4.8 %) malignant adnexal tumors instead of 8 (50 % decrease).

CONCLUSION

The use of O-RADS MRI scoring system could drastically reduce the number of asymptomatic patients undergoing avoidable surgery.

O-RADS MRI to classify adnexal tumors: from clinical problem to daily use

Eighteen to 35% of adnexal masses remain non-classified following ultrasonography, leading to unnecessary surgeries and inappropriate management. This finding led to the conclusion that ultrasonography was insufficient to accurately assess adnexal masses and that a standardized MRI criteria could improve these patients' management. The aim of this work is to present the different steps from the identification of the clinical issue to the daily use of a score and its inclusion in the latest international guidelines. The different steps were the following: (1) preliminary work to formalize the issue, (2) physiopathological analysis and finding dynamic parameters relevant to increase MRI performances, (3) construction and internal validation of a score to predict the nature of the lesion, (4) external multicentric validation (the EURAD study) of the score named O-RADS MRI, and (5) communication and education work to spread its use and inclusion in guidelines. Future steps will include studies at patients' levels and a cost-efficiency analysis. Critical relevance statement We present translating radiological research into a clinical application based on a step-by-step structured and systematic approach methodology to validate MR imaging for the characterization of adnexal mass with the ultimate step of incorporation in the latest worldwide guidelines of the O-RADS MRI reporting system that allows to distinguish benign from malignant ovarian masses with a sensitivity and specificity higher than 90%. Key points • The initial diagnostic test accuracy studies show the limitation of a preoperative assessment of adnexal masses using solely ultrasonography.• The technical developments (DCE/DWI) were investigated with the value of dynamic MRI to accurately predict the nature of benign or malignant lesions to improve management.• The first developing score named ADNEX MR Score was constructed using multiple easily assessed criteria on MRI to classify indeterminate adnexal lesions following ultrasonography.• The multicentric adnexal study externally validated the score creating the O-RADS MR score and leading to its inclusion for daily use in international guidelines.

Application of O-RADS US combined with MV-Flow to diagnose ovarian-adnexal tumors

PURPOSE

This study aimed to explore the application of Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System Ultrasound (O-RADS US) combined with MV-Flow (Samsung Medison Co., Ltd.) to diagnose ovarian-adnexal masses.

METHODS

A total of 112 ovarian-adnexal masses (81 benign and 31 malignant) from 105 consecutive patients were analyzed. The O-RADS US and vascular index from MV-Flow (VIMV) were measured and compared with the reference standard. O-RADS US and MV-Flow were tested for consistency.

RESULTS

Receiver operating characteristic curves were drawn for O-RADS US, MV-Flow, and their combination. The combined methods had the largest area under the curve (0.955), followed by O-RADS US (0.929) and MV-Flow (0.923). A mass was considered malignant when the O-RADS US classification was 5 and VIMV was ≥7.15. With this definition, MV-Flow had the highest sensitivity (87.10%), with consistent findings for the combined diagnostic methods and O-RADS US (83.87%). The specificity of the combined diagnostic methods (93.83%) was higher than that of MV-Flow (91.36%). O-RADS US had the lowest specificity (90.12%). The combined diagnostic methods had the highest coincidence rate (91.07%), and MV-Flow (90.18%) had a significantly higher coincidence rate than O-RADS US (88.39%). Both O-RADS US and MV-Flow showed good consistency among different physicians (former kappa, 0.974; latter intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC], 0.986). MV-Flow had a high consistency for the same physician (ICC, 1).

CONCLUSION

O-RADS US and MV-Flow exhibited good diagnostic efficacy, and their combined diagnostic efficacy was higher than that of each individually. O-RADS US and MV-Flow can improve the diagnosis of benign and malignant ovarian-adnexal masses.

Prediction model of adnexal masses with complex ultrasound morphology

Background

Based on the ovarian-adnexal reporting and data system (O-RADS), we constructed a nomogram model to predict the malignancy potential of adnexal masses with sophisticated ultrasound morphology.

Methods

In a multicenter retrospective study, a total of 430 subjects with masses were collected in the adnexal region through an electronic medical record system at the Fourth Hospital of Harbin Medical University during the period of January 2019-April 2023. A total of 157 subjects were included in the exception validation cohort from Harbin Medical University Tumor Hospital. The pathological tumor findings were invoked as the gold standard to classify the subjects into benign and malignant groups. All patients were randomly allocated to the validation set and training set in a ratio of 7:3. A stepwise regression analysis was utilized for filtering variables. Logistic regression was conducted to construct a nomogram prediction model, which was further validated in the training set. The forest plot, C-index, calibration curve, and clinical decision curve were utilized to verify the model and assess its accuracy and validity, which were further compared with existing adnexal lesion models (O-RADS US) and assessments of different types of neoplasia in the adnexa (ADNEX).

Results

Four predictors as independent risk factors for malignancy were followed in the preparation of the diagnostic model: O-RADS classification, HE4 level, acoustic shadow, and protrusion blood flow score (all p < 0.05). The model showed moderate predictive power in the training set with a C-index of 0.959 (95%CI: 0.940-0.977), 0.929 (95%CI: 0.884-0.974) in the validation set, and 0.892 (95%CI: 0.843-0.940) in the external validation set. It showed that the predicted consequences of the nomogram agreed well with the actual results of the calibration curve, and the novel nomogram was clinically beneficial in decision curve analysis.

Conclusion

The risk of the nomogram of adnexal masses with complex ultrasound morphology contained four characteristics that showed a suitable predictive ability and provided better risk stratification. Its diagnostic performance significantly exceeded that of the ADNEX model and O-RADS US, and its screening performance was essentially equivalent to that of the ADNEX model and O-RADS US classification.

O-RADS scoring system for adnexal lesions: Diagnostic performance on TVUS performed by an expert sonographer and MRI

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE

To determine the diagnostic performance of transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS) performed by an US specialist and MRI based on the O-RADS scoring system.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between March 5th 2013 and December 31st 2021, 227 patients, referred to our center, underwent TVUS and pelvic MRI for characterization of an adnexal lesion proven by surgery or two years of negative follow-up. All lesions were classified according to O-RADS US and O-RADS MRI risk scoring systems. Imaging data were then correlated with histopathological diagnosis or negative follow-up for 2 years.

RESULTS

The prevalence of malignancy was 11.1%. Sensitivity of O-RADS US / O-RADS MRI were respectively of 83.3%/83.3% and specificity was 73.2%/92.9% (p < 0.001). O-RADS MRI was more accurate than O-RADS US even when performed by an US specialist (p < 0.001). When MRI was used after US, 51 lesions were reclassified correctly by MRI and only 4 lesions incorrectly reclassified. Most of the lesions (49/51) rated O-RADS US 4 or 5 and reclassified correctly by MRI were benign, mainly including cystadenomas or cystadenofibromas. Only 4 lesions were misclassified by MRI but correctly classified by ultrasound.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that MR imaging has equally high sensitivity but higher specificity than TVUS for the characterization of adnexal lesions based on O-RADS scoring system. MRI should be the recommended second-line technique when a mass is discovered during TVUS and is rated O-RADS 4 and 5 over than TVUS by an US specialist.

Characterization of adnexal lesions using photoacoustic imaging to improve sonographic O-RADS risk assessment

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of photoacoustic imaging (PAI) on the assessment of ovarian/adnexal lesion(s) of different risk categories using the sonographic ovarian-adnexal imaging-reporting-data system (O-RADS) in women undergoing planned oophorectomy.

METHOD

This prospective study enrolled women with ovarian/adnexal lesion(s) suggestive of malignancy referred for oophorectomy. Participants underwent clinical ultrasound (US) examination followed by coregistered US and PAI prior to oophorectomy. Each ovarian/adnexal lesion was graded by two radiologists using the US O-RADS scale. PAI was used to compute relative total hemoglobin concentration (rHbT) and blood oxygenation saturation (%sO2 ) colormaps in the region of interest. Lesions were categorized by histopathology into malignant ovarian/adnexal lesion, malignant Fallopian tube only and several benign categories, in order to assess the impact of incorporating PAI in the assessment of risk of malignancy with O-RADS. Malignant and benign histologic groups were compared with respect to rHbT and %sO2 and logistic regression models were developed based on tumor marker CA125 alone, US-based O-RADS alone, PAI-based rHbT with %sO2 , and the combination of CA125, O-RADS, rHbT and %sO2. Areas under the receiver-operating-characteristics curve (AUC) were used to compare the diagnostic performance of the models.

RESULTS

There were 93 lesions identified on imaging among 68 women (mean age, 52 (range, 21-79) years). Surgical pathology revealed 14 patients with malignant ovarian/adnexal lesion, two with malignant Fallopian tube only and 52 with benign findings. rHbT was significantly higher in malignant compared with benign lesions. %sO2 was lower in malignant lesions, but the difference was not statistically significant for all benign categories. Feature analysis revealed that rHbT, CA125, O-RADS and %sO2 were the most important predictors of malignancy. Logistic regression models revealed an AUC of 0.789 (95% CI, 0.626-0.953) for CA125 alone, AUC of 0.857 (95% CI, 0.733-0.981) for O-RADS only, AUC of 0.883 (95% CI, 0.760-1) for CA125 and O-RADS and an AUC of 0.900 (95% CI, 0.815-0.985) for rHbT and %sO2 in the prediction of malignancy. A model utilizing all four predictors (CA125, O-RADS, rHbT and %sO2 ) achieved superior performance, with an AUC of 0.970 (95% CI, 0.932-1), sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 82%.

CONCLUSIONS

Incorporating the additional information provided by PAI-derived rHbT and %sO2 improves significantly the performance of US-based O-RADS in the diagnosis of adnexal lesions. © 2023 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Effect of differences in O-RADS lexicon interpretation between senior and junior sonologists on O-RADS classification and diagnostic performance

PURPOSE

To assess the consistency of Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) lexicon interpretation between senior and junior sonologists and to investigate its impact on O-RADS classification and diagnostic performance.

METHODS

We prospectively studied 620 patients with adnexal lesions, all of whom underwent transvaginal or transrectal ultrasound performed by a senior sonologist (R1) who selected the O-RADS lexicon description and O-RADS category for the lesion after the examination. Meanwhile, the junior sonologist (R2) analyzed the images retained by R1 and divided the lesion in the same way. Pathological findings were used as a reference standard. kappa (к) statistics were used to assess the interobserver agreement.

RESULTS

Of the 620 adnexal lesions, 532 were benign and 88 were malignant. When using the O-RADS lexicon, R1 and R2 had almost perfect agreement regarding lesion category, external contour of solid lesions, presence of papillary inside cystic lesions, and fluid echogenicity (к: 0.81-1.00). Substantial agreement in solid components, acoustic shadow, vascularity and O-RADS categories (к: 0.61-0.80). Consistency in classifying classic benign lesions in the O-RADS category was only moderate (к = 0.535). No significant difference in diagnostic performance between them using O-RADS (P = 0.1211).

CONCLUSION

There was good agreement between senior and junior sonologists in the interpretation of the O-RADS lexicon and in the classification of O-RADS, except for a moderate agreement in the interpretation and classification of classic benign lesions. Differences in O-RADS category delineation between sonologists had no significant effect on the diagnostic performance of O-RADS.

Validation of the diagnostic efficacy of O-RADS in adnexal masses

The aim of this study was to validate the performance of the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data Systems (O-RADS) series models proposed by the American College of Radiology (ACR) in the preoperative diagnosis of adnexal masses (AMs). Two experienced sonologists examined 218 patients with AMs and gave the assessment results after the examination. Pathological findings were used as a reference standard. Of the 218 lesions, 166 were benign and 52 were malignant. Based on the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, we defined a malignant lesion as O-RADS > 3 (i.e., lesions in O-RADS categories 4 and 5 were malignant). The area under the curve (AUC) of O-RADS (v2022) was 0.970 (95% CI 0.938-0.988), which wasn't statistically significantly different from the O-RADS (v1) combined Simple Rules Risk (SRR) assessment model with the largest AUC of 0.976 (95% CI 0.946-0.992) (p = 0.1534), but was significantly higher than the O-RADS (v1) (AUC = 0.959, p = 0.0133) and subjective assessment (AUC = 0.918, p = 0.0255). The O-RADS series models have good diagnostic performance for AMs. Where, O-RADS (v2022) has higher accuracy and specificity than O-RADS (v1). The accuracy and specificity of O-RADS (v1), however, can be further improved when combined with SRR assessment.

Comprehensive Review of Serous Tumors of Tubo-Ovarian Origin: Clinical Behavior, Pathological Correlation, Current Molecular Updates, and Imaging Manifestations

Ovarian cancer is the eighth most common women's cancer worldwide, with the highest mortality rate of any gynecologic malignancy. On a global scale, the World Health Organization (WHO) reports that ovarian cancer has approximately 225,000 new cases every year with approximately 145,000 deaths. According to the National Institute of Health, Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results program (SEER) database, 5-year survival for women with ovarian cancer in the United States is 49.1%. High-grade serous ovarian carcinoma typically presents at an advanced stage and accounts for the majority of these cancer deaths. Given their prevalence and the lack of a reliable method for screening, early and reliable diagnosis of serous cancers is of paramount importance. Early differentiation of borderline, low and high-grade lesions can assist in surgical planning and support challenging intraoperative diagnoses. The objective of this article is to provide a review of the pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment of serous ovarian tumors, with a specific focus on the imaging characteristics that help to preoperatively differentiate borderline, low-grade, and high-grade serous ovarian lesions.

O-RADS US v2022: An Update from the American College of Radiology's Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System US Committee

First published in 2019, the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) US provides a standardized lexicon for ovarian and adnexal lesions, enables stratification of these lesions with use of a numeric score based on morphologic features to indicate the risk of malignancy, and offers management guidance. This risk stratification system has subsequently been validated in retrospective studies and has yielded good interreader concordance, even with users of different levels of expertise. As use of the system increased, it was recognized that an update was needed to address certain clinical challenges, clarify recommendations, and incorporate emerging data from validation studies. Additional morphologic features that favor benignity, such as the bilocular feature for cysts without solid components and shadowing for solid lesions with smooth contours, were added to O-RADS US for optimal risk-appropriate scoring. As O-RADS US 4 has been shown to be an appropriate cutoff for malignancy, it is now recommended that lower-risk O-RADS US 3 lesions be followed with US if not excised. For solid lesions and cystic lesions with solid components, further characterization with MRI is now emphasized as a supplemental evaluation method, as MRI may provide higher specificity. This statement summarizes the updates to the governing concepts, lexicon terminology and assessment categories, and management recommendations found in the 2022 version of O-RADS US.

O-RADS US: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Category-specific Malignancy Rates

Background Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) US provides a standardized method with which to stratify lesions into risk of malignancy categories, which is crucial for proper management. Purpose To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate malignancy rates for each O-RADS US score and evaluate the diagnostic performance of combined O-RADS US scores 4 and 5 in the diagnosis of malignancy. Materials and Methods A systematic literature search from the inception of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases through January 27, 2023, was performed for articles that reported using the O-RADS US stratification system and included malignancy rates per each O-RADS score. Bivariate random-effects models were used to determine the pooled malignancy rates for each O-RADS US score and to obtain summary estimates of the diagnostic performance of combined O-RADS US scores 4 and 5 in the diagnosis of malignant lesions. Results The final analysis included 18 studies consisting of 11 605 patients and 11 818 ovarian-adnexal lesions, with 2996 malignant (25.4%) and 8822 benign (74.6%) lesions. No malignant lesions were reported in O-RADS 1 category. The pooled percentages of malignancy were 0.6% (95% CI: 0.3, 1.0) for O-RADS 2, 3.9% (95% CI: 2.5, 5.4) for O-RADS 3, 43.5% (95% CI: 33.8, 53.2) for O-RADS 4, and 87.3% (95% CI: 83.0, 91.7) for O-RADS 5. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of combined O-RADS scores 4 and 5 in the diagnosis of malignant lesions were 95.6% (95% CI: 94.0, 97.2) and 76.6% (95% CI: 70.4, 82.7), respectively. Conclusion Each O-RADS US score provided the intended probability of malignant lesions as outlined by the O-RADS risk stratification system. When O-RADS US scores 4 and 5 were combined as a predictor for malignancy, O-RADS US showed a high sensitivity and moderate specificity. Clinical trial registration no. CRD42022352166 © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article.

Contrast-enhanced US to Improve Diagnostic Performance of O-RADS US Risk Stratification System for Malignancy

Background The Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) has limited specificity for malignancy. Contrast-enhanced US can help distinguish malignant from benign lesions, but its added value to O-RADS has not yet been assessed. Purpose To establish a diagnostic model combining O-RADS and contrast-enhanced US and to validate whether O-RADS plus contrast-enhanced US has a better diagnostic performance than O-RADS alone. Materials and Methods This prospective study included participants from May 2018 to March 2021 who underwent contrast-enhanced US before surgery and had lesions categorized as O-RADS 3, 4, or 5 by US, with a histopathologic reference standard. From April 2021 to July 2022, participants with pathologically confirmed ovarian-adnexal lesions were recruited for the validation group. In the pilot group, the initial enhancement time and enhancement intensity in comparison with the uterine myometrium, contrast agent distribution pattern, and dynamic changes in enhancement of lesions were assessed. Contrast-enhanced US features were used to calculate contrast-enhanced US scores for benign (score ≤2) and malignant (score ≥4) lesions. Lesions were then re-rated according to O-RADS category plus contrast-enhanced US scores. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed and compared using the DeLong method. The combined system was validated in an independent group. Results The pilot group included 76 women (mean age, 44 years ± 13 [SD]), and the validation group included 46 women (mean age, 42 years ± 14). Differences in initial enhancement time (P < .001), enhancement intensity (P < .001), and dynamic changes in enhancement (P < .001) between benign and malignant lesions were observed in the pilot group. Contrast-enhanced US scores were calculated using these features. The O-RADS risk stratification was upgraded one level for contrast-enhanced US scores of 4 or more and downgraded one level for contrast-enhanced US scores of 2 or less. In the validation group, the diagnostic performance of O-RADS plus contrast-enhanced US score was higher (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] = 0.93) than O-RADS (AUC = 0.71, P < .001). Conclusion Contrast-enhanced US improved the diagnostic performance for malignancy of the O-RADS categories 3-5. © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Grant in this issue.

In Vivo Ultrasound Molecular Imaging in the Evaluation of Complex Ovarian Masses: A Practical Guide to Correlation with Ex Vivo Immunohistochemistry

Ovarian cancer is the fifth leading cause of cancer-related deaths in women and the most lethal gynecologic cancer. It is curable when discovered at an early stage, but usually remains asymptomatic until advanced stages. It is crucial to diagnose the disease before it metastasizes to distant organs for optimal patient management. Conventional transvaginal ultrasound imaging offers limited sensitivity and specificity in the ovarian cancer detection. With molecularly targeted ligands addressing targets, such as kinase insert domain receptor (KDR), attached to contrast microbubbles, ultrasound molecular imaging (USMI) can be used to detect, characterize and monitor ovarian cancer at a molecular level. In this article, the authors propose a standardized protocol is proposed for the accurate correlation between in- vivo transvaginal KDR-targeted USMI and ex vivo histology and immunohistochemistry in clinical translational studies. The detailed procedures of in vivo USMI and ex vivo immunohistochemistry are described for four molecular markers, CD31 and KDR with a focus on how to enable the accurate correlation between in vivo imaging findings and ex vivo expression of the molecular markers, even if not the entire tumor could can be imaged by USMI, which is not an uncommon scenario in clinical translational studies. This work aims to enhance the workflow and the accuracy of characterization of ovarian masses on transvaginal USMI using histology and immunohistochemistry as reference standards, which involves sonographers, radiologists, surgeons, and pathologists in a highly collaborative research effort of USMI in cancer.

Diagnostic Performance of Ultrasonography-Based Risk Models in Differentiating Between Benign and Malignant Ovarian Tumors in a US Cohort

Importance

Ultrasonography-based risk models can help nonexpert clinicians evaluate adnexal lesions and reduce surgical interventions for benign tumors. Yet, these models have limited uptake in the US, and studies comparing their diagnostic accuracy are lacking.

Objective

To evaluate, in a US cohort, the diagnostic performance of 3 ultrasonography-based risk models for differentiating between benign and malignant adnexal lesions: International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Simple Rules with inconclusive cases reclassified as malignant or reevaluated by an expert, IOTA Assessment of Different Neoplasias in the Adnexa (ADNEX), and Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS).

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective diagnostic study was conducted at a single US academic medical center and included consecutive patients aged 18 to 89 years with adnexal masses that were managed surgically or conservatively between January 2017 and October 2022.

Exposure

Evaluation of adnexal lesions using the Simple Rules, ADNEX, and O-RADS.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcome was diagnostic performance, including area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and positive and negative likelihood ratios. Surgery or follow-up were reference standards. Secondary analyses evaluated the models' performances stratified by menopause status and race.

Results

The cohort included 511 female patients with a 15.9% malignant tumor prevalence (81 patients). Mean (SD) ages of patients with benign and malignant adnexal lesions were 44.1 (14.4) and 52.5 (15.2) years, respectively, and 200 (39.1%) were postmenopausal. In the ROC analysis, the AUCs for discriminative performance of the ADNEX and O-RADS models were 0.96 (95% CI, 0.93-0.98) and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.90-0.95), respectively. After converting the ADNEX continuous individualized risk into the discrete ordinal categories of O-RADS, the ADNEX performance was reduced to an AUC of 0.93 (95% CI, 0.90-0.96), which was similar to that for O-RADS. The Simple Rules combined with expert reevaluation had 93.8% sensitivity (95% CI, 86.2%-98.0%) and 91.9% specificity (95% CI, 88.9%-94.3%), and the Simple Rules combined with malignant classification had 93.8% sensitivity (95% CI, 86.2%-98.0%) and 88.1% specificity (95% CI, 84.7%-91.0%). At a 10% risk threshold, ADNEX had 91.4% sensitivity (95% CI, 83.0%-96.5%) and 86.3% specificity (95% CI, 82.7%-89.4%) and O-RADS had 98.8% sensitivity (95% CI, 93.3%-100%) and 74.4% specificity (95% CI, 70.0%-78.5%). The specificities of all models were significantly lower in the postmenopausal group. Subgroup analysis revealed high performances independent of race.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this diagnostic study of a US cohort, the Simple Rules, ADNEX, and O-RADS models performed well in differentiating between benign and malignant adnexal lesions; this outcome has been previously reported primarily in European populations. Risk stratification models can lead to more accurate and consistent evaluations of adnexal masses, especially when used by nonexpert clinicians, and may reduce unnecessary surgeries.

Adnexal Mass Imaging: Contemporary Guidelines for Clinical Practice

Several recent guidelines have been published to improve accuracy and consistency of adnexal mass imaging interpretation and to guide management. Guidance from the American College of Radiology (ACR) Appropriateness Criteria establishes preferred adnexal imaging modalities and follow-up. Moreover, the ACR Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting Data System establishes a comprehensive, unified set of evidence-based guidelines for classification of adnexal masses by both ultrasound and MR imaging, communicating risk of malignancy to further guide management.

Diagnostic performance of IOTA SR and O-RADS combined with CA125, HE4, and risk of malignancy algorithm to distinguish benign and malignant adnexal masses

PURPOSE

To compare the diagnostic performance of International Ovarian Tumour Analysis Simple Rules (IOTA SR) and Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS), and to analyse whether combining IOTA SR and O-RADS with the biomarkers cancer antigen 125 (CA125), human epididymis protein 4 (HE4), and risk of malignancy algorithm (ROMA) further improves diagnostic performance in women with different menopause status.

METHODS

This study retrospectively included patients with ovarian adnexal masses confirmed by surgical pathology between September 2021 and February 2022. The area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity were calculated to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of IOTA SR, O-RADS, and their combination with CA125, HE4, and ROMA.

RESULTS

This study included 1,179 ovarian adnexal masses. In all women, the AUC of IOTA SR was comparable to O-RADS (0.879 vs. 0.889, P = 0.361), and O-RADS had a significantly higher sensitivity than IOTA SR (95.77 % vs. 87.32 %, P < 0.001). In premenopausal women, O-RADS had a significantly higher AUC than other diagnostic strategies (all P < 0.05), and the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 93.33 %, 84.74 %, and 85.59 %, respectively. In postmenopausal women, IOTA SR + ROMA had a significantly higher AUC than other diagnostic strategies (all P < 0.05), and the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 85.37 %, 93.88 %, and 90.00 %, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study supports the high diagnostic value of IOTA SR or O-RADS alone in all women, and O-RADS was more sensitive than IOTA SR. In premenopausal women, O-RADS had the highest diagnostic value. In postmenopausal women, IOTA SR outperformed O-RADS, and IOTA SR + ROMA had the highest diagnostic value.

Adnexal Lesion Imaging: Past, Present, and Future

Currently, imaging is part of the standard of care for patients with adnexal lesions prior to definitive management. Imaging can identify a physiologic finding or classic benign lesion that can be followed up conservatively. When one of these entities is not present, imaging is used to determine the probability of ovarian cancer prior to surgical consultation. Since the inclusion of imaging in the evaluation of adnexal lesions in the 1970s, the rate of surgery for benign lesions has decreased. More recently, data-driven Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) scoring systems for US and MRI with standardized lexicons have been developed to allow for assignment of a cancer risk score, with the goal of further decreasing unnecessary interventions while expediting the care of patients with ovarian cancer. US is used as the initial modality for the assessment of adnexal lesions, while MRI is used when there is a clinical need for increased specificity and positive predictive value for the diagnosis of cancer. This article will review how the treatment of adnexal lesions has changed due to imaging over the decades; the current data supporting the use of US, CT, and MRI to determine the likelihood of cancer; and future directions of adnexal imaging for the early detection of ovarian cancer.

Comparison of Ultrasound Scores in Differentiating between Benign and Malignant Adnexal Masses

Subjective ultrasound assessment by an expert examiner is meant to be the best option for the differentiation between benign and malignant adnexal masses. Different ultrasound scores can help in the classification, but whether one of them is significantly better than others is still a matter of debate. The main aim of this work is to compare the diagnostic performance of some of these scores in the evaluation of adnexal masses in the same set of patients. This is a retrospective study of a consecutive series of women diagnosed as having a persistent adnexal mass and managed surgically. Ultrasound characteristics were analyzed according to IOTA criteria. Masses were classified according to the subjective impression of the sonographer and other ultrasound scores (IOTA simple rules -SR-, IOTA simple rules risk assessment -SRRA-, O-RADS classification, and ADNEX model -with and without CA125 value-). A total of 122 women were included. Sixty-two women were postmenopausal (50.8%). Eighty-one women had a benign mass (66.4%), and 41 (33.6%) had a malignant tumor. The sensitivity of subjective assessment, IOTA SR, IOTA SRRA, and ADNEX model with or without CA125 and O-RADS was 87.8%, 66.7%, 78.1%, 95.1%, 87.8%, and 90.2%, respectively. The specificity for these approaches was 69.1%, 89.2%, 72.8%, 74.1%, 67.9%, and 60.5%, respectively. All methods with similar AUC (0.81, 0.78, 0.80, 0.88, 0.84, and 0.75, respectively). We concluded that IOTA SR, IOTA SRRA, and ADNEX models with or without CA125 and O-RADS can help in the differentiation of benign and malignant masses, and their performance is similar to the subjective assessment of an experienced sonographer.

Nomogram based on the O-RADS for predicting the malignancy risk of adnexal masses with complex ultrasound morphology

OBJECTIVE

The accurate preoperative differentiation of benign and malignant adnexal masses, especially those with complex ultrasound morphology, remains a great challenge for junior sonographers. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a nomogram based on the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) for predicting the malignancy risk of adnexal masses with complex ultrasound morphology.

METHODS

A total of 243 patients with data on adnexal masses with complex ultrasound morphology from January 2019 to December 2020 were selected to establish the training cohort, while 106 patients with data from January 2021 to December 2021 served as the validation cohort. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to determine independent risk factors for malignant tumors in the training cohort. Subsequently, a predictive nomogram model was developed and validated in the validation cohort. The calibration, discrimination, and clinical net benefit of the nomogram model were assessed separately by calibration curves, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and decision curve analysis (DCA). Finally, we compared this model to the O-RADS.

RESULTS

The O-RADS category, an elevated CA125 level, acoustic shadowing and a papillary projection with color Doppler flow were the independent predictors and were incorporated into the nomogram model. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) of the nomogram model was 0.958 (95% CI, 0.932-0.984) in the training cohort. The specificity and sensitivity were 0.939 and 0.893, respectively. This nomogram also showed good discrimination in the validation cohort (AUC = 0.940, 95% CI, 0.899-0.981), with a sensitivity of 0.915 and specificity of 0.797. In addition, the nomogram model showed good calibration efficiency in both the training and validation cohorts. DCA indicated that the nomogram was clinically useful. Furthermore, the nomogram model had higher AUC and net benefit than the O-RADS.

CONCLUSION

The nomogram based on the O-RADS showed a good predictive ability for the malignancy risk of adnexal masses with complex ultrasound morphology and could provide help for junior sonographers.

External Validation of the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) Lexicon and the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis 2-Step Strategy to Stratify Ovarian Tumors Into O-RADS Risk Groups

Importance

Correct diagnosis of ovarian cancer results in better prognosis. Adnexal lesions can be stratified into the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) risk of malignancy categories with either the O-RADS lexicon, proposed by the American College of Radiology, or the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) 2-step strategy.

Objective

To investigate the diagnostic performance of the O-RADS lexicon and the IOTA 2-step strategy.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Retrospective external diagnostic validation study based on interim data of IOTA5, a prospective international multicenter cohort study, in 36 oncology referral centers or other types of centers. A total of 8519 consecutive adult patients presenting with an adnexal mass between January 1, 2012, and March 1, 2015, and treated either with surgery or conservatively were included in this diagnostic study. Twenty-five patients were excluded for withdrawal of consent, 2777 were excluded from 19 centers that did not meet predefined data quality criteria, and 812 were excluded because they were already in follow-up at recruitment. The analysis included 4905 patients with a newly detected adnexal mass in 17 centers that met predefined data quality criteria. Data were analyzed from January 31 to March 1, 2022.

Exposures

Stratification into O-RADS categories (malignancy risk <1%, 1% to <10%, 10% to <50%, and ≥50%). For the IOTA 2-step strategy, the stratification is based on the individual risk of malignancy calculated with the IOTA 2-step strategy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Observed prevalence of malignancy in each O-RADS risk category, as well as sensitivity and specificity. The reference standard was the status of the tumor at inclusion, determined by histology or clinical and ultrasonographic follow-up for 1 year. Multiple imputation was used for uncertain outcomes owing to inconclusive follow-up information.

Results

Median age of the 4905 patients was 48 years (IQR, 36-62 years). Data on race and ethnicity were not collected. A total of 3441 tumors (70%) were benign, 978 (20%) were malignant, and 486 (10%) had uncertain classification. Using the O-RADS lexicon resulted in 1.1% (24 of 2196) observed prevalence of malignancy in O-RADS 2, 4% (34 of 857) in O-RADS 3, 27% (246 of 904) in O-RADS 4, and 78% (732 of 939) in O-RADS 5; the corresponding results for the IOTA 2-step strategy were 0.9% (18 of 1984), 4% (58 of 1304), 30% (206 of 690), and 82% (756 of 927). At the 10% risk threshold (O-RADS 4-5), the O-RADS lexicon had 92% sensitivity (95% CI, 87%-96%) and 80% specificity (95% CI, 74%-85%), and the IOTA 2-step strategy had 91% sensitivity (95% CI, 84%-95%) and 85% specificity (95% CI, 80%-88%).

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this external diagnostic validation study suggest that both the O-RADS lexicon and the IOTA 2-step strategy can be used to stratify patients into risk groups. However, the observed malignancy rate in O-RADS 2 was not clearly below 1%.

O-RADS MRI After Initial Ultrasound for Adnexal Lesions: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review

The Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) ultrasound (US) and MRI risk stratification systems were developed by an international group of experts in adnexal imaging to aid radiologists in assessing adnexal lesions. The goal of imaging is to appropriately triage patients with adnexal lesions. US is the first-line imaging modality for assessment, whereas MRI can be used as a problem-solving tool. Both US and MRI can accurately characterize benign lesions such as simple cysts, endometriomas, hemorrhagic cysts, and dermoid cysts, avoiding unnecessary or inappropriate surgery. In patients with a lesion that does not meet criteria for one of these benign diagnoses, MRI can further characterize the lesion with an improved specificity for cancer and the ability to provide a probable histologic subtype in the presence of certain MRI features. This allows personalized treatment, including avoiding overly extensive surgery or allowing fertility-sparing procedures for suspected benign, borderline, or low-grade tumors. When MRI findings indicate a risk of an invasive cancer, patients can be expeditiously referred to a gynecologic oncologic surgeon. This narrative review provides expert opinion on the utility of multiparametric MRI when using the O-RADS US and MRI management systems.

O-RADS Ultrasound Version 1: A Scenario-Based Review of Implementation Challenges

The Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) ultrasound (US) risk stratification and management system was first published by the American College of Radiology in 2020. It provides standardized terminology for evaluation of ovarian and adnexal masses, aids risk stratification, and provides management guidelines for different categories of lesions. This system has been validated by subsequent research and found to be a useful diagnostic and management tool. However, as noted in the system's governing concepts, in some clinical scenarios, such as patients with acute symptoms or with a history of ovarian malignancy, O-RADS US does not apply, or the system's standard management may be adjusted. Additional scenarios, such as an adnexal mass in pregnancy, present challenges in the application of O-RADS US to assist diagnosis and management. The purpose of this article is to highlight 10 clinical scenarios in which O-RADS US version 1 may not apply, may be difficult to apply, or may require modified management. Additional scenarios in which O-RADS US can be appropriately applied are also described.