Comparison of three risk of malignancy indices in evaluation of pelvic masses

Comparison of Four Risk of Malignancy Indices for Preoperative Evaluation of Ovarian Masses: A Prospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Ovarian cancer imposes a significant health burden worldwide. Although various tumor markers are available to diagnose ovarian cancer, low-resource countries like India require a humble marker or index. The Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI) has been found to be a simple yet promising tool that can be used for this purpose. In this study, we attempted to validate various RMIs with the help of menopausal status, ultrasonogram score, cancer antigen (CA) 125 value and compare all four RMIs, which would be useful to differentiate benign and malignant ovarian masses. This could be an essential tool, especially in low-resource settings.

METHOD

This prospective study was conducted at Kalinga Institute of Medical Sciences in Odisha, India, from September 2020 to September 2022 involving 191 patients with ovarian mass with histopathology, which was deemed the "gold standard" diagnostic tool. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of RMI 1, 2, 3, and 4 were calculated and compared.  Results: Out of 191 patients, 32 (16%) had malignancy and 159 (83.2%) had benign pathology. It was apparent that RMI 4 was a better tool for the initial assessment of patients with ovarian masses with a sensitivity of 80.6%, specificity of 96.2%, PPV of 81%, NPV of 96% at a cutoff of 334, and an area under the curve value of 0.939.

CONCLUSION

RMI 4 followed by RMI 3 were relatively better indices than RMI 1 and RMI 2 for identifying benign and malignant ovarian masses. RMI 4 was a valuable and applicable method in diagnosing pelvic masses with a high risk of malignancy.

Malignancy Assessment Using Gene Identification in Captured Cells Algorithm for the Prediction of Malignancy in Women With a Pelvic Mass

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the detection of malignancy in women with a pelvic mass by using multiplexed gene expression analysis of cells captured from peripheral blood.

METHODS

This was an IRB-approved, prospective clinical study. Eligible patients had a pelvic mass and were scheduled for surgery or biopsy. Rare cells were captured from peripheral blood obtained preoperatively by using a microfluidic cell capture device. Isolated mRNA from the captured cells was analyzed for expression of 72 different gene transcripts. Serum levels for several commonly assayed biomarkers were measured. All patients had a tissue diagnosis. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses for the prediction of malignancy using gene expression and serum biomarker levels were performed, and receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed and compared.

RESULTS

A total of 183 evaluable patients were enrolled (average age 56 years, range 19-91 years). There were 104 benign tumors, 17 low malignant potential tumors, and 62 malignant tumors. Comparison of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for individual genes and various combinations of genes with or without serum biomarkers to differentiate between benign conditions (excluding low malignant potential tumors) and malignant tumors showed that a multivariate model combining the expression levels of eight genes and four serum biomarkers achieved the highest area under the curve (AUC) (95.1%, 95% CI 92.0-98.2%). The MAGIC (Malignancy Assessment using Gene Identification in Captured Cells) algorithm significantly outperformed all individual genes (AUC 50.2-65.2%; all P <.001) and a multivariate model combining 14 different genes (AUC 88.0%, 95% CI 82.9-93.0%; P =.005). Further, the MAGIC algorithm achieved an AUC of 89.5% (95% CI 81.3-97.8%) for stage I-II and 98.9% (95% CI 96.7-100%) for stage III-IV patients with epithelial ovarian cancer.

CONCLUSION

Multiplexed gene expression evaluation of cells captured from blood, with or without serum biomarker levels, accurately detects malignancy in women with a pelvic mass.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02781272.

FUNDING SOURCE

This study was funded by ANGLE Europe Limited (Surrey Research Park, Guildford, Surrey, United Kingdom).

The Comparison of Pelvic Mass Score and Risk of Malignancy Index-3 in Discrimination of Benign and Malignant Adnexal Masses

Objectives:

Discrimination of benign and malignant adnexal masses is crucial for the follow-up and prognosis of the patient. Since each modality alone does not have enough sensitivity, the combination of all methods called multimodal screening is currently being used. In this study, we aimed to compare pelvic mass score (PMS) and the risk of malignancy index (RMI-3) scoring systems in determining the malignant potential of adnexal masses.

Methods:

In this prospective observational study, 40 patients between the age of 15-79 who were diagnosed as an adnexal mass were included between March and October 2016. Patients were classified as benign (n=20) and malignant (n=20). The age, gravida, parity, findings of a pelvic examination, medical and family history, laboratory parameters, sonographic findings, histopathological results, PMS and RMI-3 scores of the patients were recorded.

Results:

The mean age, CA-125 levels, Sassone scores and ultrasonography scores of patients were higher in malignant cases, whereas the resistance index was lower. Both RMI-3 and PMS scores were higher in the malignant group (1728.14±325.3 vs. 36.27±31.01, p<0.001 and 55.31±40.96 vs. 9.91±5.29, p<0.001, respectively). Receiver operating curve for the predictive value of PMS to diagnose malignancy was performed and a cut-off value of 14 was determined with the area under the curve (AUC) 0.955 (p<0.001). The sensitivity was 95%, specificity was 80%, positive and negative predictive values were 82.6% and 94.1%. Likewise, the discriminative value of RMI-3 to diagnose malignancy was evaluated by the ROC curve. AUC for RMI-3 was 0.930 with a sensitivity of 95%, the specificity of 75%, the positive predictive value of 79.1% and negative predictive value of 93.7% with a cut-off value of >53.2 (p<0.001).

Conclusion:

Age, menopause status, tumor markers and sonographic parameters may be beneficial alone for determining malignancy, whereas the scoring systems integrating all the parameters are more powerful. According to our findings, PMS is more sensitive and more practical than the RMI-3 scoring system.

Risk scores to guide referral decisions for people with suspected ovarian cancer in secondary care: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Ovarian cancer is the sixth most common cancer in UK women and can be difficult to diagnose, particularly in the early stages. Risk-scoring can help to guide referral to specialist centres.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of risk scores to guide referral decisions for women with suspected ovarian cancer in secondary care.

METHODS

Twenty-one databases, including MEDLINE and EMBASE, were searched from inception to November 2016. Review methods followed published guidelines. The meta-analysis using weighted averages and random-effects modelling was used to estimate summary sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The cost-effectiveness analysis considered the long-term costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) associated with different risk-scoring methods, and subsequent care pathways. Modelling comprised a decision tree and a Markov model. The decision tree was used to model short-term outcomes and the Markov model was used to estimate the long-term costs and QALYs associated with treatment and progression.

RESULTS

Fifty-one diagnostic cohort studies were included in the systematic review. The Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) score did not offer any advantage over the Risk of Malignancy Index 1 (RMI 1). Patients with borderline tumours or non-ovarian primaries appeared to account for disproportionately high numbers of false-negative, low-risk ROMA scores. (Confidential information has been removed.) To achieve similar levels of sensitivity to the Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model and the International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) group's simple ultrasound rules, a very low RMI 1 decision threshold (25) would be needed; the summary sensitivity and specificity estimates for the RMI 1 at this threshold were 94.9% (95% CI 91.5% to 97.2%) and 51.1% (95% CI 47.0% to 55.2%), respectively. In the base-case analysis, RMI 1 (threshold of 250) was the least effective [16.926 life-years (LYs), 13.820 QALYs] and the second cheapest (£5669). The IOTA group's simple ultrasound rules (inconclusive, assumed to be malignant) were the cheapest (£5667) and the second most effective [16.954 LYs, 13.841 QALYs], dominating RMI 1. The ADNEX model (threshold of 10%), costing £5699, was the most effective (16.957 LYs, 13.843 QALYs), and compared with the IOTA group's simple ultrasound rules, resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £15,304 per QALY gained. At thresholds of up to £15,304 per QALY gained, the IOTA group's simple ultrasound rules are cost-effective; the ADNEX model (threshold of 10%) is cost-effective for higher thresholds.

LIMITATIONS

Information on the downstream clinical consequences of risk-scoring was limited.

CONCLUSIONS

Both the ADNEX model and the IOTA group's simple ultrasound rules may offer increased sensitivity relative to current practice (RMI 1); that is, more women with malignant tumours would be referred to a specialist multidisciplinary team, although more women with benign tumours would also be referred. The cost-effectiveness model supports prioritisation of sensitivity over specificity. Further research is needed on the clinical consequences of risk-scoring.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016053326.

FUNDING DETAILS

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

A preliminary study: The sequential use of the risk malignancy index and contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in differential diagnosis of adnexal masses

The aim of this study was to explore the sequential use of risk malignancy index (RMI) combined with contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) in identification diagnosis of adnexal masses.This study contained 2 steps: first, 151 patients were analyzed retrospectively with RMI 1, RMI 2, and RMI 3 indices; receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted to analyze area under the curves (AUC), and then RMI cut-off value was obtained according to maximum Youden index (YI, Sensitivity + Specificity - 1) and calculating diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, positive/negative predictive value, and accuracy. Second, 151 cases were divided into 2 groups randomly (105 in study group and 46 in test group); in the study group, the lower cut-off value (LC), upper cut-off value (UC), CEUS cut-off value according to maximum YI, and then these cut-offs were validated in test group.There was no statistical significance in 3 RMI models (P = .35), and RMI1 model was established randomly for following study. When the RMI1 cut-off value was 149, the YI was maximal (0.53), and the sensitivity, specificity, positive/negative predictive value, and accuracy were 71.0%, 81.7%, 77.1%, 75.6%, and 76.2%, respectively. The LC was 15 (sensitivity was 98.0%), the UC was 3000 (specificity was 98.0%), and the CEUS cut-off value was 7 (maximal YI was 0.81). In the test group (46 cases), combining RMI1 LC (15) and UC (3000) with CEUS cut-off value (7), the sensitivity, specificity, positive/negative predictive value, and accuracy were up to 85.7%, 92.0%, 90.0%, 88.5%, and 89.1%, respectively.CEUS can help RMI to make a more effective differential diagnosis of the adnexal mass. Further validation by additional multicenter prospective trials is required.

Evolving Role of Serum Biomarkers in the Management of Ovarian Cancer

The availability of an ideal serum tumor marker would be of great clinical benefit for both the diagnosis and management of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. Serum cancer antigen 125 assay significantly increases the diagnostic reliability of ultrasound in discriminating a malignant from a benign ovarian mass, especially in postmenopausal women, and it is the only well validated tumor marker for monitoring disease course. Several other tumor-associated antigens have been assessed, including glycoprotein antigens other than cancer antigen 125, soluble cytokeratin fragments, kallikreins, cytokines and cytokine receptors, vascular endothelial growth factor, D-dimer, and lisophosphatidic acid. This article assesses the potential diagnostic and prognostic role of these novel biomarkers, both alone and in combination with cancer antigen 125. The future for serum tumor marker research is represented by the emerging technology of proteomics, which may allow scientific advances comparable to those achieved with the introduction of monoclonal antibody technology.

Differentiating between borderline and invasive malignancies in ovarian tumors using a multivariate logistic regression model

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to build a model to differentiate between borderline and invasive ovarian tumors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective study involving 148 patients with borderline or invasive ovarian tumors in our institute between 1997 and 2012. Clinical and pathologic data were collected. Logistic regression was used to build the model.

RESULTS

The model was created based on the following variables (p < 0.05): menopausal status; preoperative serum level of cancer antigen 125; the greatest diameter of the tumor; and the presence of solid parts on ultrasound imaging. The sensitivity and specificity of the model were 94.6% [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.887-1] and 78.3% (95% CI, 0.614-0.952) for patients aged ≥ 50 years, and 76.0% (95% CI, 0.622-0.903) and 60.0% (95% CI, 0.438-0.762) for those aged < 50 years, respectively. The performance of the model was tested using cross-validation.

CONCLUSION

Differentiation between borderline and invasive ovarian tumors can be achieved using a model based on the following criteria: menopausal status; cancer antigen 125 level; and ultrasound parameters. The model is helpful to oncologists and patients in the initial evaluation phase of ovarian tumors.

Diagnostic Value of the Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI) for Detection of Pelvic Malignancies Compared with Pathology

Introduction

Pelvic masses are among most the common causes of patient admission into gynecology clinics and one of the most common reasons for referral to gynecologic oncology departments due to the risk of uterine or ovarian malignancies. The aim of this study is to compare the four indices of the risk of malignancy index (RMI 1–4), as a combination of menstrual status, radiological findings, and serum CA125 concentration, for discrimination of benign from malignant pelvic masses.

Methods

This retrospective descriptive and analytic study was conducted on 200 patients with pelvic mass, post-surgery, and who were referred to the oncology department in Shahid Sadoughi hospital of Yazd (Iran) between June 2007 and September 2011. Data regarding demographics, pathology reports, paraclinical and clinical tests were analyzed. The four RMI indices were separately used for determination of benign vs. malignant masses using the optimized cutoff points, ROC curve, sensitivity, specificity, predictive value of positive and negative, and accuracy. Finally, p value for each index was calculated, and a final discrimination power was measured by using SPSS version 17 software.

Results

The calculated p values in the four RMI indices in ultrasound findings indicated statistical significance, and the RMI 2 showed the highest level of accuracy or diagnostic performance. RMI 2 had a cutoff point of 90, an under-chart area 86.7, 79.36% sensitivity, 78.95% specificity, 58.44%, positive predictive value, 90.08% negative predictive value, and 78.93% accuracy, and a p value of 0.004. However, this relationship was found not to be meaningful using CT scan images.

Conclusions

Using RMI 2 for differentiation of malignant from benign pelvic masses is a reliable method with ultrasound findings.

The role of human epididymis protein 4 in the diagnosis of epithelial ovarian cancer

PURPOSE

Epithelial ovarian cancer is one of the most lethal female genital tract cancers. Early diagnosis of EOC would benefit the patients a lot. Human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) has been regarded as a new powerful biomarker in diagnosis of EOC; we hope to obtain system knowledge of HE4 and understand the role of HE4 in diagnosis of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).

METHODS

We searched Pubmed, Embase, Medline, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) for articles that included HE4's origin, characteristics, detection methods, clinical efficacy alone or combined with CA125, the risk of malignancy index, and the risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm. The diagnostic performance for the EOC and the role in the recurrence and procession in EOC were also discussed.

RESULTS

We got 83 most related articles and found that there were significantly difference existing among the studies, such as the clinical characteristics of patients, the methodology for measuring HE4, the different cut-offs for HE4 and so on.

CONCLUSION

HE4 is a promising biomarker for the early diagnosis of EOC. However, each lab should establish its own reference internal of HE4.

Is Risk Malignancy Index a Useful Tool for Predicting Malignant Ovarian Masses in Developing Countries?

Introduction. Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI) is widely studied for prediction of malignant pelvic masses in Western population. However, little is known regarding its implication in the developing countries. The objective of this study is to determine how accurately the RMI can predict the malignant pelvic masses. Materials and Methods. The study is a retrospective review of patients attending the gynecological clinic between January 2004 and December 2008 with adnexal masses. Information on demographic characteristics, ultrasound findings, menopausal status, CA125, and histopathology was collected. RMI score for each patient in the study group was calculated. Results. The study group included a total of 283 patients. Analysis of the individual parameters of RMI revealed that ultrasound was the best predictor of malignancy with a sensitivity, specificity, and positive likelihood ratio of 78.3%, 81.5%, and 4.2, respectively. At a standard cut-off value of 250, RMI had a positive likelihood ratio of 8.1, while it was 6.8 at a cut-off of 200, albeit with comparable sensitivity and specificity. Conclusion. RMI is a sensitive tool in predicting malignant adnexal masses. A cut-off of 200 may be suitable in developing countries for triaging and early referral to tertiary care centers.

Comparative evaluation of the risk of malignancy index scoring systems (1-4) used in differential diagnosis of adnexal masses

BACKGROUND

To determine the cut-off values of the preoperative risk of malignancy index (RMI) used in differentiating benign or malignant adnexal masses and to determine their significance in differential diagnosis by comparison of different systems.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

191 operated women were assessed retrospectively. RMI of 1, 2, 3 and 4; cut-off values for an effective benign or malignant differentiation together with sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values were calculated.

RESULTS

Cut-off value for RMI 1 was found to be 250; there was significant (p<0.001) compatibility at this level with sensitivity of 60%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 75%, specificity of 93%, negative predictive value (NPV) of 88% and an overall compliance rate of 85%. When RMI 2 and 3 was obtained with a cut-off value of 200, there was significant (p<0.001) compatibility at this level for RMI 2 with sensitivity of 67%, PPV of 67%, specificity of 89%, NPV of 89%, histopathologic correlation of 84% while RMI 3 had significant (p<0.001) compatibility at the same level with sensitivity of 63%, PPV of 69%, specificity of 91%, NPV of 88% and a histopathologic correlation of 84%. Significant (p<0.001) compatibility for RMI 4 with a sensitivity of 67%, PPV of 73%, specificity of 92%, NPV of 89% and a histopathologic correlation of 86% was obtained at the cut-off level 400.

CONCLUSIONS

RMI have a significant predictability in differentiating benign and malignant adnexal masses, thus can effectively be used in clinical practice.

Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI) in Evaluation of Adnexal Mass

BACKGROUND

The discrimination between benign and malignant adnexal masses is central to decisions regarding clinical management and surgical planning in such patients.

PURPOSE OF STUDY

To determine if the RMI (RMI 2) can distinguish between benign and malignant adnexal masses.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study was conducted of 58 women with an adnexal mass referred to a teaching hospital for diagnosis and management.

RESULTS

RMI > 200 had a sensitivity of 70.5 % (95 % CI 46.87-86.72), a specificity of 87.8 % (95 % CI 74.46-94.68), a positive predictive value of 70.5%, and negative predictive value of 87.8 %. ROC showed that cut off value of 25 achieved a sensitivity and specificity of 82.35 and 43.9 %, respectively, and a cut off value of 1,000 gave a sensitivity and specificity of 58.81 and 97.56 %, respectively. The association between RMI and disease status was not statistically significant for mucinous tumors.

CONCLUSION

RMI is a reliable tool in differentiating benign from malignant adnexal masses. It is simple, easy to use and cost effective. However it's predictive accuracy was less for mucinous as compared to serous epithelial ovarian cancers. The study is limited by its small sample size.

Presurgical diagnosis of adnexal tumours using mathematical models and scoring systems: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND Characterizing ovarian pathology is fundamental to optimizing management in both pre- and post-menopausal women. Inappropriate referral to oncology services can lead to unnecessary surgery or overly radical interventions compromising fertility in young women, whilst the consequences of failing to recognize cancer significantly impact on prognosis. By reflecting on recent developments of new diagnostic tests for preoperative identification of malignant disease in women with adnexal masses, we aimed to update a previous systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS An extended search was performed in MEDLINE (PubMed) and EMBASE (OvidSp) from March 2008 to October 2013. Eligible studies provided information on diagnostic test performance of models, designed to predict ovarian cancer in a preoperative setting, that contained at least two variables. Study selection and extraction of study characteristics, types of bias, and test performance was performed independently by two reviewers. Quality was assessed using a modified version of the QUADAS assessment tool. A bivariate hierarchical random effects model was used to produce summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals or plot summary ROC curves for all models considered. RESULTS Our extended search identified a total of 1542 new primary articles. In total, 195 studies were eligible for qualitative data synthesis, and 96 validation studies reporting on 19 different prediction models met the predefined criteria for quantitative data synthesis. These models were tested on 26 438 adnexal masses, including 7199 (27%) malignant and 19 239 (73%) benign masses. The Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI) was the most frequently validated model. The logistic regression model LR2 with a risk cut-off of 10% and Simple Rules (SR), both developed by the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) study, performed better than all other included models with a pooled sensitivity and specificity, respectively, of 0.92 [95% CI 0.88-0.95] and 0.83 [95% CI 0.77-0.88] for LR2 and 0.93 [95% CI 0.89-0.95] and 0.81 [95% CI 0.76-0.85] for SR. A meta-analysis of centre-specific results stratified for menopausal status of two multicentre cohorts comparing LR2, SR and RMI-1 (using a cut-off of 200) showed a pooled sensitivity and specificity in premenopausal women for LR2 of 0.85 [95% CI 0.75-0.91] and 0.91 [95% CI 0.83-0.96] compared with 0.93 [95% CI 0.84-0.97] and 0.83 [95% CI 0.73-0.90] for SR and 0.44 [95% CI 0.28-0.62] and 0.95 [95% CI 0.90-0.97] for RMI-1. In post-menopausal women, sensitivity and specificity of LR2, SR and RMI-1 were 0.94 [95% CI 0.89-0.97] and 0.70 [95% CI 0.62-0.77], 0.93 [95% CI 0.88-0.96] and 0.76 [95% CI 0.69-0.82], and 0.79 [95% CI 0.72-0.85] and 0.90 [95% CI 0.84-0.94], respectively. CONCLUSIONS An evidence-based approach to the preoperative characterization of any adnexal mass should incorporate the use of IOTA Simple Rules or the LR2 model, particularly for women of reproductive age.

Comparison of risk of malignancy indices in evaluating ovarian masses in a Southeast Asian population

INTRODUCTION

The risk of malignancy index (RMI) is a scoring system used to triage benign from malignant ovarian masses. We compared the specificity and sensitivity of the four indices (RMI 1, RMI 2, RMI 3 and RMI 4) to discriminate a benign ovarian mass from a malignant one in a Southeast Asian population.

METHODS

This was a five-year retrospective study of women who were admitted for surgery due to ovarian masses. RMI scores were calculated based on standardised preoperative cancer antigen (CA)-125 levels, ultrasonography findings, menopausal status and tumour size based on ultrasonography. Postoperative histopathologic diagnosis was regarded as the definite outcome. Data were analysed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, and Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the individual RMI scores between the benign and malignant cases.

RESULTS

Out of the 480 patients reviewed, 228 women aged 10-65 years were included in the study. Of these, 17 (7.5%) had malignant disease and 211 (92.5%) had benign pathology. There was no statistical difference in the RMI 1, 2, 3 and 4 scores between the benign and malignant cases. Individual variables that were analysed showed significant differences in median CA-125 level and tumour size (p = 0.044 and p < 0.0005, respectively) between the benign and malignant cases.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that RMI is not a valuable triage tool for our Southeast Asian population. Further prospective validation, with regard to standardising results in different patient populations and centres, is required.

Assessing the risk of ovarian malignancy in asymptomatic women with abnormal CA 125 and transvaginal ultrasound scans in the prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian screening trial

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the risk of ovarian malignancy among asymptomatic women with abnormal transvaginal ultrasound scans or CA 125 and to provide guidance to physicians managing these women.

METHODS

A cohort of women from the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial with abnormal ovarian results at the initial (T0) and subsequent (T1+) screens were analyzed to estimate which findings were associated with high risk of ovarian cancer. Cancer risks more than 10% were designated as high and risks of 3% or less were designated as low.

RESULTS

For the T0 screen, two high-risk categories were identified: CA 125 of 70 or more with negative transvaginal ultrasound scan (positive predictive value [PPV] 15.9%, CI 14.7-17.7%); and positive for both CA 125 and transvaginal ultrasound scan (PPV 25.0%, CI 23.3-27.3%). For T1+ screens, three high-risk categories were identified: negative transvaginal ultrasound scan with change in CA 125 of 45 or more (PPV 29.0%, CI 28.3-30.3%); increase in size of cyst 6 cm or more with negative CA 125 (PPV 13.3%, CI 10.5-18.0%); and positive for both tests (PPV 42.9%, CI 40.0-46.0%). High-risk criteria for T0 provide a sensitivity of 60%, specificity of 96.2%, PPV of 19.7%, and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 99.3%. T1+ criteria yielded a sensitivity of 85.3%, specificity of 95.6%, PPV of 29.6%, and NPV of 99.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

High-risk categories for predicting risk of cancer in women with abnormal CA 125, transvaginal ultrasound scan, or both at initial and subsequent screens have been identified. The large number of women in this study, the 4-year complete follow-up, and small number of invasive cancers in the low-risk categories provide guidance for clinical decisions regarding need for surgery in these women.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

Management of a suspicious adnexal mass: a clinical practice guideline

QUESTIONS

What is the optimal strategy for preoperative identification of the adnexal mass suspicious for ovarian cancer? What is the most appropriate surgical procedure for a woman who presents with an adnexal mass suspicious for malignancy?

PERSPECTIVES

In Canada in 2010, 2600 new cases of ovarian cancer were estimated to have been diagnosed, and of those patients, 1750 were estimated to have died, making ovarian cancer the 7th most prevalent form of cancer and the 5th leading cause of cancer death in Canadian women. Women with ovarian cancer typically have subtle, nonspecific symptoms such as abdominal pain, bloating, changes in bowel frequency, and urinary or pelvic symptoms, making early detection difficult. Thus, most ovarian cancer cases are diagnosed at an advanced stage, when the cancer has spread outside the pelvis. Because of late diagnosis, the 5-year relative survival ratio for ovarian cancer in Canada is only 40%. Unfortunately, because of the low positive predictive value of potential screening tests (cancer antigen 125 and ultrasonography), there is currently no screening strategy for ovarian cancer. The purpose of this document is to identify evidence that would inform optimal recommended protocols for the identification and surgical management of adnexal masses suspicious for malignancy.

OUTCOMES

Outcomes of interest for the identification question included sensitivity and specificity. Outcomes of interest for the surgical question included optimal surgery, overall survival, progression-free or disease-free survival, reduction in the number of surgeries, morbidity, adverse events, and quality of life.

METHODOLOGY

After a systematic review, a practice guideline containing clinical recommendations relevant to patients in Ontario was drafted. The practice guideline was reviewed and approved by the Gynecology Disease Site Group and the Report Approval Panel of the Program in Evidence-based Care. External review by Ontario practitioners was obtained through a survey, the results of which were incorporated into the practice guideline.

PRACTICE GUIDELINE

These recommendations apply to adult women presenting with a suspicious adnexal mass, either symptomatic or asymptomatic. IDENTIFICATION OF AN ADNEXAL MASS SUSPICIOUS FOR OVARIAN CANCER: Sonography (particularly 3-dimensional sonography), magnetic resonance imaging (mri), and computed tomography (ct) imaging are each recommended for differentiating malignant from benign ovarian masses. However, the working group offers the following further recommendations, based on their expert consensus opinion and a consideration of availability, access, and harm: Where technically feasible, transvaginal sonography should be the modality of first choice in patients with a suspicious isolated ovarian mass.To help clarify malignant potential in patients in whom ultrasonography may be unreliable, mri is the most appropriate test.In cases in which extra-ovarian disease is suspected or needs to be ruled out, ct is the most useful technique.Evaluation of an adnexal mass by Doppler technology alone is not recommended. Doppler technology should be combined with a morphology assessment.Ultrasonography-based morphology scoring systems can be used to differentiate benign from malignant adnexal masses. These scoring systems are based on specific ultrasound parameters, each with several scores base on determined features. All evaluated scoring systems were found to have an acceptable level of sensitivity and specificity; the choice of scoring system may therefore be made based on clinician preference.As a standalone modality, serum cancer antigen 125 is not recommended for distinguishing between benign and malignant adnexal masses.Frozen sections for the intraoperative diagnosis of a suspicious adnexal mass is recommended in settings in which availability and patient preference allow. SURGICAL PROCEDURES FOR AN ADNEXAL MASS SUSPICIOUS FOR MALIGNANCY: To improve survival, comprehensive surgical staging with lymphadenectomy is recommended for the surgical management of patients with early-stage ovarian cancer. Laparoscopy is a reasonable alternative to laparotomy, provided that appropriate surgery and staging can be done. The choice between laparoscopy and laparotomy should be based on patient and clinician preference. Discussion with a gynecologic oncologist is recommended. Fertility-preserving surgery is an acceptable alternative to more extensive surgery in patients with low-malignant-potential tumours and those with well-differentiated surgical stage i ovarian cancer. Discussion with a gynecologic oncologist is recommended.

Comparison of risk of malignancy index (RMI), CA125, CA 19-9, ultrasound score, and menopausal status in borderline ovarian tumor

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the prognostic values of risk of malignancy index (RMI IV), ultrasound score, menopausal status, and serum CA125 and CA19-9 level in patients with borderline ovarian tumor (BOT).

METHODS

Fifty women having borderline ovarian tumor (BOT) and 5O individuals with benign adnexal mass were enrolled in this retrospective study. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values, negative predictive values and diagnostic accuracy of preoperative serum levels of the CA125 and CA19-9, ultrasound findings and menopausal status, and RMI IV were calculated for prediction of discrimination between BOTs and benign adnexal masses and the results were compared.

RESULTS

The RMI IV was the best method for discrimination between BOTs and benign adnexal masses and was more accurate than the other parameters. When Receiver Operator Characteristic area under the curves for menopausal status was analyzed, serum CA 125 and CA19-9 level, ultrasound score, RMI IV(CA125), and RMI IV(CA19-9) were, 0.580, 0.625, 0.548, 0.694, 0.734 and 0.711, respectively. The best RMI IV cut-off was found to be 200 for discrimination of benign and BOT lesions. In the RMI formulation, replacing CA125 with CA19-9 didn't affect RMI IV sensitivity and specificity for discrimination.

CONCLUSION

Compared to ultrasound, menopausal status, CA-125, CA19-9, the RMI IV was found to be the best predictive method for differentiation of BOTs from benign adnexal masses. RMI IV cut-off value of 200 is suitable for differentiation of benign and BOT's.

Pediatric risk of malignancy index for preoperative evaluation of childhood ovarian tumors

PURPOSE

This study aimed to develop and provisionally validate a novel scoring index for preoperative cancer-risk prediction in childhood ovarian tumors.

METHODS

Fifty-five girls aged 18 and below underwent surgery for ovarian masses between 2004 and 2009. Benign or non-benign histological diagnoses (the latter including all malignant and borderline tumors and tumors containing immature components) were correlated with clinical and biochemical parameters, and blinded scores of ultrasound and computed-tomography using multivariate logistic regression. Regression coefficients were used as weighting factors to create an additive index. This index was validated prospectively against 23 consecutive adnexal masses operated in 2010.

RESULTS

In total, 67 tumors were benign and 11 non-benign. Non-benign diagnosis was independently associated with the maximum diameter of the largest solid component (score = value in cm), the presence of sex hormone-related symptoms (score = +6), and enhancement or flow in a septum or solid papillary projection (score = +4). The novel scoring index was calculated as the total score of these three parameters. A cutoff score of 7 gave a specificity of 97.9% and sensitivity of 87.5% for the training data set, and specificity and sensitivity of 100% for the pilot testing set.

CONCLUSION

The novel pediatric risk-of-malignancy index is able to accurately discriminate between benign and non-benign ovarian tumors in children and adolescents. Its preoperative application may guide surgical management decisions before the availability of histological confirmation.

Differential diagnosis of adnexal masses: sequential use of the risk of malignancy index and HistoScanning, a novel computer-aided diagnostic tool

OBJECTIVE

To assess the value of ovarian Histo-Scanning(™) , a novel computerized technique for interpreting ultrasound data, in combination with the risk of malignancy index (RMI) in improving triage for women with adnexal masses.

METHODS

RMI indices were assessed in 199 women enrolled in a prospective study to investigate the use of HistoScanning. Ultrasound scores were obtained by blinded analysis of archived images. The following sequential test was developed: HistoScanning was modeled as a second-line test for RMI between a lower cut-off and an upper cut-off. The optimal combination of these cut-offs that together maximized the Youden index (Sensitivity + Specificity - 1) was determined.

RESULTS

Using RMI at the standard cut-off value of 250 resulted in a sensitivity of 74% and a specificity of 86%. When RMI was combined with HistoScanning, the highest accuracy was achieved by using HistoScanning as a sequential second-line test for patients with RMI values between 105 and 2100. At these cut-off values, sequential use of RMI and HistoScanning resulted in mean sensitivity and specificity estimates of 88% and 95%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that HistoScanning may have the potential to improve the diagnostic accuracy of RMI, which could result in better triage for women with adnexal masses. Further prospective validation is warranted.

Adnexal masses suspected to be benign treated with laparoscopy

OBJECTIVE

Guidelines for referring women with pelvic masses suspicious for ovarian cancer to gynecologic oncologists have been developed by the American College of Obstetrician Gynecologists (ACOG). We set out to evaluate the negative predictive value of these guidelines and to assess a modified algorithm involving minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of women with masses suspected to be benign.

METHODS

257 consecutive patients with adnexal masses of 8cm to 13cm on preoperative ultrasound examination meeting Triage Criteria set forth in ACOG Committee Opinion 280. Patients meeting the selection criteria were scheduled for operative laparoscopy, washings, adnexectomy, bagging, and colpotomy. A total of 240 patients successfully completed intended treatment (93.38%), and 234 of these did not require admission (97.5%). There was a low incidence of significant complications: 97.50% of women were successfully treated as outpatients, 97.92% of surgeries lasted <136 minutes, and <97.08% had blood loss <200mL. The negative predictive value of ACOG Committee Opinion 280 Triage Criteria as a deselector for having invasive ovarian malignancy in our population was 95.57% for premenopausal and 90.91% for postmenopausal women.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic adnexectomy, bagging, and colpotomy is a desirable goal for patients with ovarian masses in the 8cm to 13cm range meeting selection criteria affording a minimally invasive approach with attendant benefits including outpatient treatment (97.5%), few complications, low likelihood of iatrogenic rupture of the ovarian capsule (1.25%), and low necessity for reoperation after final pathology is evaluated (6.03%). Negative predictive value of ACOG Committee Opinion 280 is confirmed in a community gynecology practice and is recommended to form the basis of a new treatment algorithm for women with adnexal masses.

Comparison of four malignancy risk indices in the detection of malignant ovarian masses

Objective

The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of four risk of malignancy indices (RMI) to detect malignant ovarian tumors.

Methods

This is a prospective study of 100 women admitted to the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of Gulhane Military Medicine Academy for surgical exploration of pelvic masses. To diagnose malignant ovarian tumors, the sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values and diagnostic accuracy of four RMIs (RMI 1, RMI 2, RMI 3, and RMI 4) were obtained.

Results

In our study we found that there is no statistically significant difference in the performance of four different RMIs in discriminating malignancy. We think that malignancy risk indices is more reliable than the menopausal status, serum CA-125 levels, ultrasound features and tumor size separately in detecting malignancy.

Conclusion

We concluded that any of the four malignancy risk indices described can be used for selection of cases for optimal therapy. These methods are simple techniques that can be used even in less-specialized gynecology clinics to facilitate the selection of cases for referral to an oncological unit.

A nomogram for estimating the probability of ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE

Accurate preoperative estimates of the probability of malignancy in women with adnexal masses are essential for ensuring optimal care. This study presents a new statistical model for combining predictive information and a graphic decision support tool for calculating risk of malignancy.

METHODS

The study included 153 women treated with definitive surgery for adnexal mass between 2001 and 2007 with preoperative ultrasound testing and a serum CA125. Multivariable logistic regression was used to develop a statistical model for estimating the probability of ovarian cancer as a function of age, ultrasound score, and CA125 value, with adjustments for nonlinear and interactive relationships.

RESULTS

A total of 20 cases of pathologically confirmed cancer (13 invasive malignancies, and 7 tumors of low malignant potential) were identified (20/153=13%). The model obtained excellent discrimination (ROC area=0.87), explained nearly half of the observed variation in the risk of malignancy (R²=0.43), and was well calibrated across the full range of malignancy probabilities. The model equation is represented in the form of a nomogram, which can be used to calculate preoperative probability of malignancy. At a 5% risk of malignancy threshold, the model has a sensitivity of 90% and a specificity of 73%.

CONCLUSIONS

Statistical models for estimating the probability of adnexal mass malignancy are substantially improved by including adjustments for non-linear relationships among key variables. A clinically relevant nomogram provides an objective tool to further aid clinicians in counseling patients and ensuring proper referral to surgical sub-specialists when indicated.

Comparison of a novel multiple marker assay vs the Risk of Malignancy Index for the prediction of epithelial ovarian cancer in patients with a pelvic mass

OBJECTIVE

We sought to compare the Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI) to the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) to predict epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) in women with a pelvic mass.

STUDY DESIGN

In all, 457 women with imaging results from ultrasound, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and serum HE4 and CA125 determined prior to surgery for pelvic mass were evaluable. RMI values were determined using CA125, imaging score, and menopausal status. ROMA values were determined using HE4, CA125, and menopausal status.

RESULTS

At a set specificity of 75%, ROMA had a sensitivity of 94.3% and RMI had a sensitivity of 84.6% for distinguishing benign status from EOC (P = .0029). In patients with stage I and II disease, ROMA achieved a sensitivity of 85.3% compared with 64.7% for RMI (P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

The dual marker algorithm utilizing HE4 and CA125 to calculate a ROMA value achieves a significantly higher sensitivity for identifying women with EOC than does RMI.

Evaluation of the Risk of Malignancy Index in daily clinical management of adnexal masses

OBJECTIVE

To verify the effectiveness of the Risk of Malignancy Index in the discrimination between non-invasive (benign and borderline) lesions and invasive malignant adnexal masses in daily clinical practice.

METHODS

This prospective observational study was conducted in a multicentre cooperation of 11 hospitals. A total of 548 women with adnexal masses were included. Ultrasound characteristics, menopausal status and serum CA 125 level were registered preoperatively, and combined into the RMI afterwards. Final diagnosis was based on routine histopathologic examination. The decision to have patients operated by or with a gynecologic oncologist was based on the clinical impression of the gynecologist in the local hospital, based on physical examination, testing of serum samples, and ultrasound examination. This was compared with the hypothetical situation in which the RMI would have been applied as method of selection.

RESULTS

An RMI of 200 achieved a sensitivity of 81% and specificity of 85% in the detection of ovarian cancer. Positive and negative predictive values were 48% and 96% respectively. In current practice, 64% of ovarian cancer patients were operated by a gynecologic oncologist. This percentage would have increased to 80% if the RMI with a cutoff value of 200 would have been used as method of selection.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study population, introduction of the RMI would improve the management of adnexal masses, with a higher percentage of ovarian cancer patients that are operated by a gynecologic oncologist. At the same time, referral of patients with non-invasive (benign and borderline) lesions would be reduced.

Risk of malignancy index in the evaluation of patients with adnexal masses

OBJECTIVE

To determine if the risk of malignancy index (RMI) can distinguish between benign and malignant adnexal masses in a population of women referred to a department of gynaecologic oncology for surgical resection of an adnexal mass.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of the medical of charts of 259 consecutive patients. Ninety-six charts did not have data available to calculate the RMI, leaving a total of 163 for review. Three definitions of RMI were compared; each incorporated menopausal status of the patient, ultrasound characteristics of the adnexal mass, and serum CA-125 level.

RESULTS

Of the masses resected, 105 were benign and 58 were malignant. The area under the ROC curve for all three definitions of RMI was 0.87. Using a cut-off of 120, the first RMI definition (RMI 1) had a sensitivity of 72% and a specificity of 87%; the second (RMI 2) had a sensitivity of 76% and a specificity of 81%; and the third (RMI 3) had a sensitivity of 74% and a specificity of 84%. These results are generally in agreement with published values.

CONCLUSION

We have validated the use of RMI to predict the risk of malignancy in a Nova Scotia population of women with adnexal masses. This will aid in more selective referral of patients to specialized oncology centres for cancer surgery, allowing for appropriate management of health care resources and optimization of treatment for women with gynaecological malignancies.

Adnexal mass vascularity assessed by 3-dimensional power Doppler: does it add to the risk of malignancy index in prediction of ovarian malignancy?: four hundred-case study

The Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI) is used for the prediction of ovarian malignancy. It includes menopausal status, carbohydrate antigen 125 serum levels, and ultrasound criteria. Three-dimensional power Doppler (3-DPD) is a reproducible investigation for assessment of tumor vascularity, classifying vascularity to avascular, parallel, and chaotic patterns. In this study; 3-DPD was added to RMI for prediction of malignancy in 400 cases of ovarian masses. Sensitivity of RMI for prediction of malignancy was 88%, with a cutoff value of 202.5 at 95% confidence interval. Sensitivity of 3-DPD for prediction of malignancy was 75%, adding 3-DPD to RMI increased its sensitivity to 99%. Considering the pilot nature of the study, further studies are needed to corroborate such findings.

The accuracy of risk scores in predicting ovarian malignancy: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review of the literature on the accuracy of prediction models in the preoperative assessment of adnexal masses.

DATA SOURCES

Studies were identified through the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from inception to March 2008. The MEDLINE search was performed using the keywords ["ovarian neoplasms"[MeSH] NOT "therapeutics"[MeSH] AND "model"] and ["ovarian neoplasms"[MeSH] NOT "therapeutics"[MeSH] AND "prediction"]. The Embase search was performed using the keywords [ovary tumor AND prediction], [ovary tumor AND Mathematical model], and [ovary tumor AND statistical model].

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

The search detected 1,161 publications; from the cross-references, another 116 studies were identified. Language restrictions were not applied. Eligible studies contained data on the accuracy of models predicting the risk of malignancy in ovarian masses. Models were required to combine at least two parameters.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

Two independent reviewers selected studies and extracted study characteristics, study quality, and test accuracy. There were 109 accuracy studies that met the selection criteria. Accuracy data were used to form two-by-two contingency tables of the results of the risk score compared with definitive histology. We used bivariate meta-analysis to estimate pooled sensitivities and specificities and to fit summary receiver operating characteristic curves.Studies included in our analysis reported on 83 different prediction models. The model developed by Sassone was the most evaluated prediction model. All models has acceptable sensitivity and specificity. However, the Risk of Malignancy Index I and the Risk of Malignancy Index II, which use the product of the serum CA 125 level, an ultrasound scan result, and the menopausal state, were the best predictors. When 200 was used as the cutoff level, the pooled estimate for sensitivity was 78% for a specificity of 87%.

CONCLUSION

Based on our review, the Risk of Malignancy Index should be the prediction model of choice in the preoperative assessment of the adnexal mass.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Gynecological Oncology

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has become an indispensable tool in the assessment of malignant disease. With increasingly sophisticated systems and technical advancements, MRI has continued to expand its role in providing crucial information regarding cancer diagnosis and management. In gynecological malignancies, this modality has assumed greater responsibility, particularly in the evaluation of cervical and endometrial cancers. In addition to conventional imaging, innovative techniques such as dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and diffusion-weighted MRI show promise in offering early assessment of tumor response. This paper reviews the current role of MRI in gynecological cancers and highlights the potential of novel techniques in improving patient care.

Comparison of the risk of malignancy index and self-constructed logistic regression models in preoperative evaluation of adnexal masses

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate women with adnexal masses in the preoperative period by creating 2 logistic regression models, 1 including sonographic morphologic characteristics and the other including both morphologic and color Doppler characteristics, to compare the diagnostic accuracy of these 2 models with the risk of malignancy index (RMI).

METHODS

This prospective study included 38 malignant, 7 borderline, and 244 benign ovarian masses. The menopausal status, presence of septa, presence of papillary projections, location of the tumor, presence of ascites, presence of metastases, cancer antigen 125 level, tumor volume, septa thickness, and percentage of the solid component were included in the initial analysis. A second regression analysis was performed with the addition of Doppler parameters (location of blood flow and lowest resistive index) in the data set. Diagnostic performance of the 2 regression models and RMI were described and compared by generating receiver operating characteristic curves for each model.

RESULTS

The area under the curve values for the morphologic model (model 1), Doppler model (model 2), and RMI were 0.907, 0.971, and 0.889, respectively. Significance levels of model 1 and the RMI were similar (P = .23), whereas model 2 had a significantly higher area under the curve compared with both model 1 (P = .037) and the RMI (P = .018).

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of Doppler parameters in the regression model significantly increases the predictive performance. Nevertheless, in low-resource settings, the RMI remains the method of choice for distinguishing adnexal masses and referral to gynecologic oncology clinics.

The risk of malignancy index in discrimination of adnexal masses

OBJECTIVE

To assess the ability of the risk of malignancy index (RMI) based on a serum CA125 level, ultrasound findings and menopausal status, to discriminate benign from malignant adnexal masses.

METHOD

Between September 2002 and November 2004, 296 women with adnexal masses were enrolled. The sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) of the CA125 serum level, ultrasound findings and menopausal status in prediction of ovarian cancer were calculated and compared individually or combined into the RMI.

RESULTS

The RMI identified malignant cases more accurately than any individual criterion in diagnosing ovarian cancer. Using a cut-off level of 153 to indicate malignancy, the RMI showed a sensitivity of 76.4%, a specificity of 77.9%, a PPV of 65.9%, a NPV of 85.5% with 79.4% correct diagnosis rate.

CONCLUSION

The RMI is an appropriate method in diagnosing adnexal masses with high risk of malignancy and forwarding to gynecological oncology centers for suitable surgical operations.

Risk of malignancy index in the preoperative evaluation of pelvic masses

OBJECTIVES

To assess the ability of a risk malignancy index (RMI) based on serum levels of CA 125, ultrasound findings, and menopausal status to discriminate between benign and malignant pelvic masses in a particular population.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted of 100 women with pelvic masses admitted for laparotomy. The sensitivity and specificity of serum levels of CA 125, ultrasound findings, and menopausal status were calculated both separately and combined into a RMI to diagnose malignancy.

RESULTS

The RMI was more accurate than any single criterion in diagnosing malignancy. Using a cut-off level of 200 to indicate malignancy, the RMI gave a sensitivity of 90%, specificity of 89%, positive predictive value of 96%, and negative predictive value of 78%.

CONCLUSION

The RMI is able to correctly discriminate between malignant and benign pelvic masses. It is a simple scoring system that can be introduced easily into clinical practice to facilitate the selection of patients who would benefit from primary surgery.

Risk of malignancy index in the preoperative evaluation of patients with adnexal masses

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of a Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI) in primary evaluation of patients with adnexal masses.

METHODS

The RMI is based on menopausal status, ultrasonographic findings, and serum CA 125 level. A cutoff level of 200 was chosen as the threshold for referral for centralized primary surgery. This setup was evaluated by sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive (PPV) and negative predictive (NPV) values with respect to the ability to distinguish malignant from benign pelvic masses.

RESULTS

The sensitivity was 70.6%, specificity 89.3%, PPV 66.1%, and NPV 91.1% for the total material. For the patients undergoing surgery the sensitivity was 70.6%, specificity 87.7%, PPV 66.1%, and NPV 89.8%. If stage I disease is considered "benign" disease, the sensitivity is 95.5%, specificity 87.9%, PPV 57.8%, and NPV 99.1%.

CONCLUSIONS

RMI is a simple, easily applicable method in the primary evaluation of patients with adnexal masses. It is usable as a method for selective referral of relevant patients for centralized primary surgery. The method has significant limitations in borderline ovarian tumors, stage I invasive cancers, and nonepithelial tumors. Other methods should be evaluated to increase diagnostic accuracy in these cases.

Ascites as a predictor of ovarian malignancy

OBJECTIVE

To determine the utility of ascites as a predictor of ovarian malignancy and define its relationship with the histologic type of ovarian tumor (benign, borderline, or malignant) and stage of disease.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study analyzed the clinical and pathological finding of 125 patients from two institutions treated for a pelvic mass. Preoperative data to include: physical examination, imaging studies (USD, CT, or MRI), and operative reports were reviewed for evidence of ascites. This was correlated with final pathologic findings and stage of disease. Collected data were summarized with descriptive statistics. Further statistical analysis was performed using Pearson's chi(2), cross tabulation, and the Median Test. Data were analyzed with SPSS 6.1 for Windows.

RESULTS

One-hundred twenty-five patients were evaluable for this study. The ovarian pathologic findings were as follows: 57 benign (45%), 12 borderline (10%), and 56 malignant (45%). Fifty-three patients (42%) had frank ascites at laparotomy. Seventy-two patients (58%) had no ascites. All patients with ascites diagnosed preoperatively (n = 41) on physical examination or imaging studies were confirmed intraoperatively. Absence of ascites was correctly diagnosed preoperatively in 72/84 patients (86%). Of the 57 benign tumors, only 5 patients (9%) had small amounts of peritoneal effusion. Of the 12 borderline tumors, 7 patients (58%) had ascites. Of the 56 malignant tumors, 41 (73%) had ascites. Using presence or absence of ascites on clinical assessment as the predictor variable and benign or malignant (borderline and invasive histopathology) tumors as the outcome variable, the positive predictive value (PPV) of ascites to detect ovarian malignancy was 95% and the negative predictive value (NPV) was 64%. When borderline tumors were excluded, the PPV and NPV of ascites to detect malignant invasive tumors were 95 and 73%, respectively. Furthermore, a progressive relationship between stage of ovarian malignancy and percentage of cases with ascites was identified. Ovarian malignancies in the early stages (I and II) produced ascites only in 17% of the cases. In advanced stages (III and IV), 89% produced ascites. In addition, for stage I and II disease, all patients possessed <0.5 liters of ascites at surgery, whereas the majority of patients (66%) with stage III and IV disease had >0.5 liters.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate the presence of ascites on preoperative physical examination or imaging study is highly predictive of ovarian malignancy in women with a pelvic mass. The absence of ascites may not always predict benign disease since nearly half of borderline tumors and 83% of early stage malignant ovarian tumors do not produce ascites. A progressive relationship between stage of malignancy and incidence as well as volume of ascites was also observed.

Risk-of-malignancy index in preoperative evaluation of clinically restricted ovarian cancer

CONTEXT

There is no adequate preoperative method for differentiating between benign and malignant pelvic masses. Evaluations of CA 125 serum levels, ultrasonography findings and menstrual state have been tested in isolation as diagnostic methods. The evaluation of these three methods in association with each other could improve diagnostic performance.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the risk-of-malignancy index by combining serum CA 125 levels, ultrasound score and menopausal status in preoperative diagnoses for women with pelvic masses clinically restricted to the ovaries and without clear evidence of malignancy.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Centro de Atenção Integral à Saúde da Mulher, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.

PARTICIPANTS

158 women admitted between January 1996 and March 1998 for surgical exploration of pelvic masses.

PROCEDURES

The risk-of-malignancy index was calculated as US x M x CA 125, performed preoperatively. Ultrasound findings were classified according to the shape, size, multiplicity, presence of wall expansion involvement or ascites, using a score system (US). Menopausal status was considered as 1 for premenopausal and 3 for postmenopausal (M), and CA 125 serum levels were considered in absolute values.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Most relevant variables were included in a logistic multiple regression model, fitted using the ultrasound score, the serum CA 125 level and the menopausal status. The model was used for evaluating the performance of each individual predictor in determining the malignancy of these tumors and identifying the risk-of-malignancy index.

RESULTS

The best individual performance was found in CA 125 levels (sensitivity of 78%, specificity of 75%), followed by ultrasound score (sensitivity of 75%, specificity of 73%) and menopausal status (sensitivity of 73%, specificity of 69%). The performance obtained for the risk-of-malignancy index at the cut-off point of 150 was a sensitivity and specificity of 79%. The area under the ROC curve for the risk-of-malignancy index was 0.90, which was greater than the area for CA 125 levels (0.83) or ultrasound score (0.79).

CONCLUSION

The risk-of-malignancy index using ultrasound morphological score, serum CA 125 levels and menopausal status might be of value in the preoperative assessment of ovarian carcinomas.

Porous polymer implant for repair of meniscal lesions: a preliminary study in dogs

Artificial meniscal lesions extending into the avascular part of the meniscus, which do not heal by any other means, were repaired by suturing either a porous polymer implant or a synovial flap into the defect. The implant guided the ingrowth of vascular repair tissue into the defect. This fibrous tissue later on transformed into fibrocartilage. Reconstruction with a synovial flap was not successful. It appeared that healing can be achieved by implantation of a porous polymer implant in a large number of cases. Future research will be aiming at improvement of the results of meniscal repair and application of this type of polymer for repair of cartilage defects.