Menopausal status, ultrasound and biomarker tests in combination for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer in symptomatic women

CA-125:CA72-4 ratio - towards a promising cost-effective tool in ovarian cancer diagnosis and monitoring of post-menopausal women under hormone treatment

Ovarian cancer (OC) is the most lethal gynecological cancer in the developed world. Most cases are diagnosed at late stage III-IV with a very low 5-year overall survival rate. Several studies revealed an elevated risk of OC in users of hormone treatment (HT) compared with non-users. The extended duration of HT is a statistically significant risk factor. Carbohydrate antigen or cancer antigen 125 (CA-125) remains the best screening tool for OC; however, its value is limited due to low specificity, leading to unnecessary interventions, surgeries, and psychological harm. Additionally, the variability of ultrasound interpretation highlights the urgent need to develop a univariate index with higher sensitivity and specificity for early diagnosis of OC in women under HT. Herein we critically review the limitations of biomarkers for the detection of OC aiming to suggest an accurate and cost-effective diagnostic ratio that eliminates the impact of body mass index, age, HT, smoking, and benign ovarian diseases on measurements. Numerous studies combine biomarkers such as CA-125, human epididymis protein 4, and thymidine kinase 1 into diagnostic algorithms. Data suggest that the expression of estrogen receptors may have diagnostic and prognostic value, as the estrogen receptor α (ERα):estrogen receptor β (ERβ) ratio is significantly higher in OC than in normal tissue due to ERβ downregulation. A high positive correlation between expression of CA-125 and carbohydrate antigen or cancer antigen 72 - 4 (CA72-4) with ERα and ERβ, respectively, poses that a novel ratio CA-125:CA72-4 could be nodal for monitoring post-menopausal women under HT.

Comparing Four Different Risk Malignancy Indices in Differentiating Benign and Malignant Ovarian Masses

Background

Accurate prediction of ovarian masses preoperatively is crucial for optimal management of ovarian cancers.

Objective

The objective of this study was to identify the risk of malignancy index (RMI) incorporating menopausal status, serum carbohydrate antigen 125 levels, and imaging findings for presurgical differentiation of benign from malignant ovarian masses and to evaluate the diagnostic ability of four different RMIs.

Materials and Methods

Women presenting with ovarian masses from August 2018 to January 2020 were evaluated preoperatively with detailed history, examination, imaging, and tumor markers. RMI 1-4 was calculated for all patients. Evaluation of the diagnostic utility of four different RMIs for preoperative identification of malignancy was based on the increment of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Histopathological diagnosis was used as the gold standard test.

Results

One hundred and twenty-one patients fulfilling the eligibility criteria were enrolled in this study. Benign tumors constituted 61 (50.4%) out of 121 cases, followed by malignant tumors and borderline tumors constituting 49 (40.49%) cases and 11 (9.09%) cases, respectively. The sensitivity of RMIs 1, 2, 3, and 4 was 77.0%, 63%, 77.0%, and 77.0%, respectively, and the specificity was 84%, 86%, 77%, and 71%, respectively. The RMI 2 had higher specificity at predicting malignancy than other RMIs while diagnostic accuracy was highest in RMI 1.

Conclusion

The RMI method is a simple and cost-effective technique in preoperative differentiation of ovarian masses.

ADNEX risk prediction model for diagnosis of ovarian cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of external validation studies

Objectives

To conduct a systematic review of studies externally validating the ADNEX (Assessment of Different Neoplasias in the adnexa) model for diagnosis of ovarian cancer and to present a meta-analysis of its performance.

Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis of external validation studies.

Data sources

Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Europe PMC, from 15 October 2014 to 15 May 2023.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies

All external validation studies of the performance of ADNEX, with any study design and any study population of patients with an adnexal mass. Two independent reviewers extracted the data. Disagreements were resolved by discussion. Reporting quality of the studies was scored with the TRIPOD (Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis) reporting guideline, and methodological conduct and risk of bias with PROBAST (Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool). Random effects meta-analysis of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity and specificity at the 10% risk of malignancy threshold, and net benefit and relative utility at the 10% risk of malignancy threshold were performed.

Results

47 studies (17 007 tumours) were included, with a median study sample size of 261 (range 24-4905). On average, 61% of TRIPOD items were reported. Handling of missing data, justification of sample size, and model calibration were rarely described. 91% of validations were at high risk of bias, mainly because of the unexplained exclusion of incomplete cases, small sample size, or no assessment of calibration. The summary AUC to distinguish benign from malignant tumours in patients who underwent surgery was 0.93 (95% confidence interval 0.92 to 0.94, 95% prediction interval 0.85 to 0.98) for ADNEX with the serum biomarker, cancer antigen 125 (CA125), as a predictor (9202 tumours, 43 centres, 18 countries, and 21 studies) and 0.93 (95% confidence interval 0.91 to 0.94, 95% prediction interval 0.85 to 0.98) for ADNEX without CA125 (6309 tumours, 31 centres, 13 countries, and 12 studies). The estimated probability that the model has use clinically in a new centre was 95% (with CA125) and 91% (without CA125). When restricting analysis to studies with a low risk of bias, summary AUC values were 0.93 (with CA125) and 0.91 (without CA125), and estimated probabilities that the model has use clinically were 89% (with CA125) and 87% (without CA125).

Conclusions

The results of the meta-analysis indicated that ADNEX performed well in distinguishing between benign and malignant tumours in populations from different countries and settings, regardless of whether the serum biomarker, CA125, was used as a predictor. A key limitation was that calibration was rarely assessed.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO CRD42022373182.

Comparative diagnostic accuracy of the IOTA SRR and LR2 scoring systems for discriminating between malignant and Benign Adnexal masses by junior physicians in Chinese patients: a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

The accuracy of ultrasound in distinguishing benign from malignant adnexal masses is highly correlated with the experience of ultrasound physicians. In China, most of ultrasound differentiation is done by junior physicians.

PURPOSE

To compare the diagnostic performance of the International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) Simple Rules Risk (SRR) and IOTA Logistic Regression Model 2 (LR2) scoring systems in Chinese patients with adnexal masses.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of ovarian cancer tumor patients who underwent surgery at a hospital in China from January 2016 to December 2021. Screening patients with at least one adnexal mass on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Two trained junior physicians evaluated each mass using the two scoring systems. A receiver operating characteristic curve was used to test the diagnostic performance of each system.

RESULTS

A total of 144 adnexal masses were retrospectively collected. Forty masses were histologically diagnosed as malignant. Compared with premenopausal women, postmenopausal women had a much higher rate of malignant masses. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) of the SRR was 97.5% (95% CI: 86.8 -99.9%), 82.7% (95% CI: 74.0 -89.4%), 68.4% (95% CI: 58.7 -76.8%) and 98.9% (95% CI: 92.5 -99.8%). The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV of the LR2 were 90.0% (95% CI: 76.5 -97.2%), 89.4% (95% CI: 81.9 -94.6%), 76.6% (95% CI: 65.0 -85.2%), and 95.9% (95% CI: 90.2 -98.3%). There was good agreement between two scoring systems, with 84.03% total agreement and a kappa value of 0.783 (95% CI: 0.70-0.864). The areas under the curve for predicting malignant tumours using SRR and LR2 were similar for all patients (P > 0.05 ).

CONCLUSION

The two scoring systems can effectively distinguish benign from malignant adnexal masses. Both scoring systems have high diagnostic efficacy, and diagnostic efficacy is stable, which can provide an important reference for clinical decision making.

[68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT in the evaluation of epithelial ovarian cancer: comparison with [18F]F-FDG PET/CT

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy of [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT in primary or recurrent tumors and metastatic lesions of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) with that of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose ([18F]F-FDG) PET/CT.

METHODS

Forty-nine patients (median age, 57 years; IQR, 51-66 years) with histologically proven primary or relapsed EOC were enrolled. Participants underwent [18F]F-FDG and [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT. The detection rate, diagnostic accuracy, semiquantitative parameters, tumor staging, and clinical management of the tracers were compared. The diagnostic performance of [18F]F-FDG and [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT was evaluated and compared using surgical pathology. Differences between methods regarding the peritoneal cancer index (PCI) using preoperative imaging, surgical PCI, and tumor markers (CA125, HE4) were also assessed regarding peritoneal metastases.

RESULTS

Among the 49 patients, 28 had primary EOC; 21 had relapsed EOC. [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT outperformed [18F]F-FDG PET/CT in detecting peritoneal metastases (96.8% vs. 83.0%; p < 0.001), retroperitoneal (99.5% vs. 91.4%; p < 0.001), and supradiaphragmatic lymph node metastases (100% vs. 80.4%; p < 0.001). Compared with [18F]F-FDG, [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 showed higher SUVmax for peritoneal metastases (17.31 vs. 13.68; p = 0.026) and retroperitoneal (8.72 vs. 6.56; p < 0.001) and supradiaphragmatic lymph node metastases (6.39 vs. 4.20; p < 0.001). Moreover, [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT showed higher sensitivity compared with [18F]F-FDG PET/CT for detecting metastatic lymph nodes (80.6% vs. 61.3%; p = 0.031) and peritoneal metastases (97.5% vs. 75.9%; p < 0.001), using surgical pathology as the gold standard. Compared with [18F]F-FDG PET/CT, [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT led to an upgrade in 14.3% and 33.3% of treatment-naive and relapse participants, resulting in management changes in 10.7% and 19.0% of the patients, respectively. The median PCIFAPI scores were significantly higher than PCIFDG (15 vs. 11; p < 0.001) and positively correlated with CA125 and HE4 levels and surgical PCI.

CONCLUSION

[68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT achieved higher sensitivity than [18F]F-FDG PET/CT in the detection and diagnosis of lymph node and peritoneal metastases, suggesting advantages regarding the preoperative staging of patients with EOC and, thereby, improving treatment decision-making.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT05034146. Registered February 23, 2021.

A single-cell landscape of pre- and post-menopausal high-grade serous ovarian cancer ascites

High-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) is a hormone-related cancer with high mortality and poor prognosis. Based on the transcriptome of 57,444 cells in ascites from 10 patients with HGSOC (including 5 pre-menopausal and 5 post-menopausal patients), we identified 14 cell clusters which were further classified into 6 cell types, including T cells, B cells, NK cells, myeloid cells, epithelial cells, and stromal cells. We discovered an increased proportion of epithelial cells and a decreased proportion of T cells in pre-menopausal ascites compared with post-menopausal ascites. GO analysis revealed the pre-menopausal tumor microenvironments (TME) are closely associated with viral infection, while the post-menopausal TME are mostly related to the IL-17 immune pathway. SPP1/CD44-mediated crosstalk between myeloid cells and B cells, NK cells, and stromal cells mainly present in the pre-menopausal group, while SPP1/PTGER4 -mediated crosstalk between myeloid cells and epithelial cells mostly present in the post-menopausal group.

Extracellular vesicles in gastric cancer: role of exosomal lncRNA and microRNA as diagnostic and therapeutic targets

Extracellular vesicles (EVs), including exosomes, play a crucial role in intercellular communication and have emerged as important mediators in the development and progression of gastric cancer. This review discusses the current understanding of the role of EVs, particularly exosomal lncRNA and microRNA, in gastric cancer and their potential as diagnostic and therapeutic targets. Exosomes are small membrane-bound particles secreted by both cancer cells and stromal cells within the tumor microenvironment. They contain various ncRNA and biomolecules, which can be transferred to recipient cells to promote tumor growth and metastasis. In this review, we highlighted the importance of exosomal lncRNA and microRNA in gastric cancer. Exosomal lncRNAs have been shown to regulate gene expression by interacting with transcription factors or chromatin-modifying enzymes, which regulate gene expression by binding to target mRNAs. We also discuss the potential use of exosomal lncRNAs and microRNAs as diagnostic biomarkers for gastric cancer. Exosomes can be isolated from various bodily fluids, including blood, urine, and saliva. They contain specific molecules that reflect the molecular characteristics of the tumor, making them promising candidates for non-invasive diagnostic tests. Finally, the potential of targeting exosomal lncRNAs and microRNAs as a therapeutic strategy for gastric cancer were reviewed as wee. Inhibition of specific molecules within exosomes has been shown to suppress tumor growth and metastasis in preclinical models. In conclusion, this review article provides an overview of the current understanding of the role of exosomal lncRNA and microRNA in gastric cancer. We suggest that further research into these molecules could lead to new diagnostic tools and therapeutic strategies for this deadly disease.

Cancer Loyalty Card Study (CLOCS): feasibility outcomes for an observational case-control study focusing on the patient interval in ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVES

Ovarian cancer symptoms are often non-specific and can be normalised before patients seek medical help. The Cancer Loyalty Card Study investigated self-management behaviours of patients with ovarian cancer prior to their diagnosis using loyalty card data collected by two UK-based high street retailers. Here, we discuss the feasibility outcomes for this novel research.

DESIGN

Observational case-control study.

SETTING

Control participants were invited to the study using social media and other sources from the general public. Once consented, control participants were required to submit proof of identification (ID) for their loyalty card data to be shared. Cases were identified using unique National Health Service (NHS) numbers (a proxy for ID) and were recruited through 12 NHS tertiary care clinics.

PARTICIPANTS

Women in the UK, 18 years or older, with at least one of the participating high street retailers' loyalty cards. Those with an ovarian cancer diagnosis within 2 years of recruitment were considered cases, and those without an ovarian cancer diagnosis were considered controls.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Recruitment rates, demographics of participants and identification of any barriers to recruitment.

RESULTS

In total, 182 cases and 427 controls were recruited with significant differences by age, number of people in participants' households and the geographical region in the UK. However, only 37% (n=160/427) of control participants provided sufficient ID details and 81% (n=130/160) matched retailers' records. The majority of the participants provided complete responses to the 24-Item Ovarian Risk Questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings show that recruitment to a study aiming to understand self-care behaviours using loyalty card data is challenging but feasible. The general public were willing to share their data for health research. Barriers in data sharing mechanisms need to be addressed to maximise participant retention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN14897082, CPMS 43323, NCT03994653.

TOMAS-R: A template to identify and plan analysis for clinically important variation and multiplicity in diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews

The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy (DTA) provides guidance on important aspects of conducting a test accuracy systematic review. In this paper we present TOMAS-R (Template of Multiplicity and Analysis in Systematic Reviews), a structured template to use in conjunction with current Cochrane DTA guidance, to help identify complexities in the review question and to assist planning of data extraction and analysis when clinically important variation and multiplicity is present. Examples of clinically important variation and multiplicity could include differences in participants, index tests and test methods, target conditions and reference standards used to define them, study design and methodological quality. Our TOMAS-R template goes beyond the broad topic headings in current guidance that are sources of potential variation and multiplicity, by providing prompts for common sources of heterogeneity encountered from our experience of authoring over 100 reviews. We provide examples from two reviews to assist users. The TOMAS-R template adds value by supplementing available guidance for DTA reviews by providing a tool to facilitate discussions between methodologists, clinicians, statisticians and patient/public team members to identify the full breadth of review question complexities early in the process. The use of a structured set of prompting questions at the important stage of writing the protocol ensures clinical relevance as a main focus of the review, while allowing identification of key clinical components for data extraction and later analysis thereby facilitating a more efficient review process.

Diagnostic Models Combining Clinical Information, Ultrasound and Biochemical Markers for Ovarian Cancer: Cochrane Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Ovarian cancer (OC) is a diagnostic challenge, with the majority diagnosed at late stages. Existing systematic reviews of diagnostic models either use inappropriate meta-analytic methods or do not conduct statistical comparisons of models or stratify test performance by menopausal status. Methods: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CDSR, DARE, Health Technology Assessment Database and SCI Science Citation Index, trials registers, conference proceedings from 1991 to June 2019. Cochrane collaboration review methods included QUADAS-2 quality assessment and meta-analysis using hierarchical modelling. RMI, ROMA or ADNEX at any test positivity threshold were investigated. Histology or clinical follow-up was the reference standard. We excluded screening studies, studies restricted to pregnancy, recurrent or metastatic OC. 2 × 2 diagnostic tables were extracted separately for pre- and post-menopausal women. Results: We included 58 studies (30,121 patients, 9061 cases of ovarian cancer). Prevalence of OC ranged from 16 to 55% in studies. For premenopausal women, ROMA at a threshold of 13.1 (+/−2) and ADNEX at a threshold of 10% demonstrated significantly higher sensitivity compared to RMI I at 200 (p < 0.0001) 77.8 (72.5, 82.4), 94.9 (92.5, 96.6), and 57.1% (50.6 to 63.4) but lower specificity (p < 0.002), 92.5 (90.0, 94.4), 84.3 (81.3, 86.8), and 78.2 (75.8, 80.4). For postmenopausal women, ROMA at a threshold of 27.7 (+/−2) and AdNEX at a threshold of 10% demonstrated significantly higher sensitivity compared to RMI I at a threshold of 200 (p < 0.001) 90.4 (87.4, 92.7), 97.6 (96.2, 98.5), and 78.7 (74.3, 82.5), specificity of ROMA was comparable, whilst ADneX was lower, 85.5 (81.3, 88.9), 81.3 (76.9, 85.0) (p = 0.155), compared to RMI 55.2 (51.2, 59.1) (p < 0.001). Conclusions: In pre-menopausal women, ROMA and ADNEX offer significantly higher sensitivity but significantly decreased specificity. In post-menopausal women, ROMA demonstrates significantly higher sensitivity and comparable specificity to RMI I, ADNEX has the highest sensitivity of all models, but with significantly reduced specificity. RMI I has poor sensitivity compared to ROMA or ADNEX. Choice between ROMA and ADNEX as a replacement test will depend on cost effectiveness and resource implications.

Menopausal status, ultrasound and biomarker tests in combination for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer in symptomatic women

BACKGROUND

Ovarian cancer (OC) has the highest case fatality rate of all gynaecological cancers. Diagnostic delays are caused by non-specific symptoms. Existing systematic reviews have not comprehensively covered tests in current practice, not estimated accuracy separately in pre- and postmenopausal women, or used inappropriate meta-analytic methods.

OBJECTIVES

To establish the accuracy of combinations of menopausal status, ultrasound scan (USS) and biomarkers for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer in pre- and postmenopausal women and compare the accuracy of different test combinations.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), five other databases and three trial registries from 1991 to 2015 and MEDLINE (Ovid) and Embase (Ovid) form June 2015 to June 2019. We also searched conference proceedings from the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology, International Gynecologic Cancer Society, American Society of Clinical Oncology and Society of Gynecologic Oncology, ZETOC and Conference Proceedings Citation Index (Web of Knowledge). We searched reference lists of included studies and published systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included cross-sectional diagnostic test accuracy studies evaluating single tests or comparing two or more tests, randomised trials comparing two or more tests, and studies validating multivariable models for the diagnosis of OC investigating test combinations, compared with a reference standard of histological confirmation or clinical follow-up in women with a pelvic mass (detected clinically or through USS) suspicious for OC.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed quality using QUADAS-2. We used the bivariate hierarchical model to indirectly compare tests at commonly reported thresholds in pre- and postmenopausal women separately. We indirectly compared tests across all thresholds and estimated sensitivity at fixed specificities of 80% and 90% by fitting hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) models in pre- and postmenopausal women separately.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 59 studies (32,059 women, 9545 cases of OC). Two tests evaluated the accuracy of a combination of menopausal status and USS findings (IOTA Logistic Regression Model 2 (LR2) and the Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa model (ADNEX)); one test evaluated the accuracy of a combination of menopausal status, USS findings and serum biomarker CA125 (Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI)); and one test evaluated the accuracy of a combination of menopausal status and two serum biomarkers (CA125 and HE4) (Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA)). Most studies were at high or unclear risk of bias in participant, reference standard, and flow and timing domains. All studies were in hospital settings. Prevalence was 16% (RMI, ROMA), 22% (LR2) and 27% (ADNEX) in premenopausal women and 38% (RMI), 45% (ROMA), 52% (LR2) and 55% (ADNEX) in postmenopausal women. The prevalence of OC in the studies was considerably higher than would be expected in symptomatic women presenting in community-based settings, or in women referred from the community to hospital with a suspicion of OC. Studies were at high or unclear applicability because presenting features were not reported, or USS was performed by experienced ultrasonographers for RMI, LR2 and ADNEX. The higher sensitivity and lower specificity observed in postmenopausal compared to premenopausal women across all index tests and at all thresholds may reflect highly selected patient cohorts in the included studies. In premenopausal women, ROMA at a threshold of 13.1 (± 2), LR2 at a threshold to achieve a post-test probability of OC of 10% and ADNEX (post-test probability 10%) demonstrated a higher sensitivity (ROMA: 77.4%, 95% CI 72.7% to 81.5%; LR2: 83.3%, 95% CI 74.7% to 89.5%; ADNEX: 95.5%, 95% CI 91.0% to 97.8%) compared to RMI (57.2%, 95% CI 50.3% to 63.8%). The specificity of ROMA and ADNEX were lower in premenopausal women (ROMA: 84.3%, 95% CI 81.2% to 87.0%; ADNEX: 77.8%, 95% CI 67.4% to 85.5%) compared to RMI 92.5% (95% CI 90.3% to 94.2%). The specificity of LR2 was comparable to RMI (90.4%, 95% CI 84.6% to 94.1%). In postmenopausal women, ROMA at a threshold of 27.7 (± 2), LR2 (post-test probability 10%) and ADNEX (post-test probability 10%) demonstrated a higher sensitivity (ROMA: 90.3%, 95% CI 87.5% to 92.6%; LR2: 94.8%, 95% CI 92.3% to 96.6%; ADNEX: 97.6%, 95% CI 95.6% to 98.7%) compared to RMI (78.4%, 95% CI 74.6% to 81.7%). Specificity of ROMA at a threshold of 27.7 (± 2) (81.5, 95% CI 76.5% to 85.5%) was comparable to RMI (85.4%, 95% CI 82.0% to 88.2%), whereas for LR2 (post-test probability 10%) and ADNEX (post-test probability 10%) specificity was lower (LR2: 60.6%, 95% CI 50.5% to 69.9%; ADNEX: 55.0%, 95% CI 42.8% to 66.6%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In specialist healthcare settings in both premenopausal and postmenopausal women, RMI has poor sensitivity. In premenopausal women, ROMA, LR2 and ADNEX offer better sensitivity (fewer missed cancers), but for ROMA and ADNEX this is off-set by a decrease in specificity and increase in false positives. In postmenopausal women, ROMA demonstrates a higher sensitivity and comparable specificity to RMI. ADNEX has the highest sensitivity in postmenopausal women, but reduced specificity. The prevalence of OC in included studies is representative of a highly selected referred population, rather than a population in whom referral is being considered. The comparative accuracy of tests observed here may not be transferable to non-specialist settings. Ultimately health systems need to balance accuracy and resource implications to identify the most suitable test.