A multicenter prospective external validation of the diagnostic performance of IOTA simple descriptors and rules to characterize ovarian masses

Evaluating use of two-step International Ovarian Tumor Analysis strategy to classify adnexal masses identified in pregnancy: pilot study

OBJECTIVES

The primary aim was to validate the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) benign simple descriptors (BDs) followed by the Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model, if BDs cannot be applied, in a two-step strategy to classify adnexal masses identified during pregnancy. The secondary aim was to describe the natural history of adnexal masses during pregnancy.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from women with an adnexal mass identified on ultrasonography during pregnancy between 2017 and 2022 at Queen Charlotte's and Chelsea Hospital, London, UK. Clinical and ultrasound data were extracted from medical records and ultrasound software. Adnexal masses were classified and managed according to expert subjective assessment (SA). Borderline ovarian tumors (BOTs) were classified as malignant. BDs were applied retrospectively to classify adnexal masses, and if BDs were not applicable, the ADNEX model (using a risk- of-malignancy threshold ≥ 10%) was used, in a two-step strategy. The reference standard was histology (where available) or expert SA at the postnatal ultrasound scan.

RESULTS

A total of 291 women with a median age of 33 (interquartile range (IQR), 29-36) years presented with an adnexal mass during pregnancy, at a median gestational age of 12 (IQR, 8-17) weeks. Of those, 267 (91.8%) were followed up to the postnatal period. Based on the reference standard, 4.1% (11/267) of adnexal masses were classified as malignant (all BOTs) and 95.9% (256/267) as benign. BDs were applicable in 68.9% (184/267) of adnexal masses; of these, only one (0.5%) BOT was misclassified as benign. The ADNEX model was used to classify the 83 residual masses and misclassified 3/10 (30.0%) BOTs as benign and 25/73 (34.2%) benign masses as malignant, of which 13/25 (52.0%) were classified as decidualized endometrioma on expert SA. The two-step strategy had a specificity of 90.2%, sensitivity of 63.6%, negative predictive value of 98.3% and positive predictive value of 21.9%. A total of 56 (21.0%) women underwent surgical intervention: four (1.5%) as an emergency during pregnancy, four (1.5%) electively during Cesarean section and 48 (18.0%) postnatally. During follow-up, 64 (24.0%) adnexal masses resolved spontaneously. Cyst-related complications occurred in four (1.5%) women during pregnancy (ovarian torsion, n = 2; cyst rupture, n = 2) and six (2.2%) women in the postnatal period (all ovarian torsion). Overall, 196/267 (73.4%) women had a persistent adnexal mass at postnatal ultrasound. Presumed decidualization occurred in 31.1% (19/61) of endometriomas and had resolved in 89.5% (17/19) by the first postnatal ultrasound scan.

CONCLUSIONS

BDs apply to most adnexal masses during pregnancy. However, the small number of malignant tumors in this cohort (4.1%) restricted the evaluation of the ADNEX model, so expert SA should be used to classify adnexal masses during pregnancy when BDs do not apply. A larger multicenter prospective study is required to evaluate the use of the ADNEX model to classify adnexal masses during pregnancy. Our data suggest that most adnexal masses can be managed expectantly during pregnancy, given the high rate of spontaneous resolution and low risk of complications. © 2024 The Author(s). Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Machine learning and radiomics for segmentation and classification of adnexal masses on ultrasound

Ultrasound-based models exist to support the classification of adnexal masses but are subjective and rely upon ultrasound expertise. We aimed to develop an end-to-end machine learning (ML) model capable of automating the classification of adnexal masses. In this retrospective study, transvaginal ultrasound scan images with linked diagnoses (ultrasound subjective assessment or histology) were extracted and segmented from Imperial College Healthcare, UK (ICH development dataset; n = 577 masses; 1444 images) and Morgagni-Pierantoni Hospital, Italy (MPH external dataset; n = 184 masses; 476 images). A segmentation and classification model was developed using convolutional neural networks and traditional radiomics features. Dice surface coefficient (DICE) was used to measure segmentation performance and area under the ROC curve (AUC), F1-score and recall for classification performance. The ICH and MPH datasets had a median age of 45 (IQR 35-60) and 48 (IQR 38-57) years old and consisted of 23.1% and 31.5% malignant cases, respectively. The best segmentation model achieved a DICE score of 0.85 ± 0.01, 0.88 ± 0.01 and 0.85 ± 0.01 in the ICH training, ICH validation and MPH test sets. The best classification model achieved a recall of 1.00 and F1-score of 0.88 (AUC:0.93), 0.94 (AUC:0.89) and 0.83 (AUC:0.90) in the ICH training, ICH validation and MPH test sets, respectively. We have developed an end-to-end radiomics-based model capable of adnexal mass segmentation and classification, with a comparable predictive performance (AUC 0.90) to the published performance of expert subjective assessment (gold standard), and current risk models. Further prospective evaluation of the classification performance of this ML model against existing methods is required.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Biomarkers and International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Simple Rules in Diagnosis of Ovarian Cancer

This study investigated whether combining International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Simple Rules with tumor biomarkers would improve the diagnostic accuracy for early detection of adnexal malignancies. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of suspected adnexal tumors was performed in 226 women admitted for surgery at the University Clinical Center of Kosovo. Primary outcome was the diagnostic accuracy of the combination of adnexal mass biomarkers and IOTA Simple Rules. IOTA Simple Rules combined with biomarker indications increased the diagnostic accuracy of classifying adnexal masses. Data analysis of individual measures showed that ferritin had the lowest rate of sensitivity.

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.

Copenhagen index (CPH-I) is more favorable than CA125, HE4, and risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm (ROMA): Nomogram prediction models with clinical-ultrasonographic feature for diagnosing ovarian neoplasms

Background

We aimed to analyze the benign and malignant identification efficiency of CA125, HE4, risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm (ROMA), Copenhagen Index (CPH-I) in ovarian neoplasms and establish a nomogram to improve the preoperative evaluation value of ovarian neoplasms.

Methods

A total of 3,042 patients with ovarian neoplasms were retrospectively classified according to postoperative pathological diagnosis [benign, n = 2389; epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), n = 653]. The patients were randomly divided into training and test cohorts at a ratio of 7:3. Using CA125, HE4, ROMA, and CPH-I, Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves corresponding to different truncation values were calculated and compared, and optimal truncation values were selected. Clinical and imaging risk factors were calculated using univariate regression, and significant variables were selected for multivariate regression analysis combined with ROMA and CPH-I. Nomograms were constructed to predict the occurrence of EOC, and the accuracy was assessed by external validation.

Results

When the cutoff value of CA125, HE4, ROMA, and CPH-I was 100 U/ml, 70 pmol/L, 12.5/14.4% (premenopausal/postmenopausal) and 5%, respectively, the AUC was 0.674, 0.721, 0.750 and 0.769, respectively. From univariate regression, the clinical risk factors were older age, menopausal status, higher birth rate, hypertension, and diabetes; imaging risk factors were multilocular tumors, solid nodules, bilateral tumors, larger tumor diameter, and ascites. The AUC of the nomogram containing ROMA and CPH-I was 0.8914 and 0.9114, respectively, which was better than the prediction accuracies of CA125, HE4, ROMA, and CPH-I alone. The nomogram with CPH-I was significantly better than that with ROMA (P < 0.001), and a nomogram decision curve analysis (DCA) containing CPH-I seemed to have better clinical benefits than ROMA. For external validation of this nomogram containing ROMA and CPH-I, the C-indices were 0.889 and 0.900, and the calibration curves were close to 45°, showing good agreement with the predicted values.

Conclusion

We conclude that CPH-I and ROMA have higher diagnostic values in the preoperative diagnosis of EOC than other single tumor markers like CA125 or HE4. A nomogram based on CPH-I and ROMA with clinical and ultrasonic indicators had a better diagnostic value, and the CPH-I nomogram had the highest diagnostic efficacy.

Diagnostic Performance of Ultrasound-Based International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Simple Rules and Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa Model for Predicting Malignancy in Women with Ovarian Tumors: A Prospective Cohort Study

Background

Comparative performance of various ultrasound models in diagnosing ovarian lesions has not been adequately studied. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) simple rules and Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) models in women with ovarian lesions.

Methods

Women 18-80 years, with an ovarian lesion planned for surgery were recruited in this prospective observational cohort study. Preoperative risk stratification was done by both IOTA simple rules and the ADNEX model. The diagnostic performance of both models was estimated using histopathology as the gold standard.

Results

A total of 90 women were recruited into the study. The IOTA simple rules were applicable to 77 (85.5%) participants and the ADNEX model on 100% women. Both the simple rules and the ADNEX model had good diagnostic performance. The sensitivity and specificity of the IOTA simple rules for predicting malignancy was 66.6% and 91%, while that of the ADNEXA model was 80% and 94%, respectively. The maximum diagnostic accuracy for prediction of both benign and malignant tumors was obtained when cancer antigen-125 (CA-125) was combined with the IOTA ADNEX model (91.0%), but for Stage I malignancy, the maximum diagnostic accuracy was for ADNEX without CA-125 (91.0%).

Conclusion

Both the IOTA models have a good diagnostic accuracy and are of paramount importance in differentiating benign from malignant tumors and predicting the stage of the malignant disease.

Expert opinion on the use of transvaginal sonography for presurgical staging and classification of endometriosis

Gynecological ultrasonography plays a central role in the management of endometriosis. The rapid technical development as well as the currently increasing evidence for non-invasive diagnostic methods require an updated compilation of recommendations for the use of ultrasound in the management of endometriosis. The present work aims to highlight the accuracy of sonography for diagnosing and classifying endometriosis and will formulate the present list of key messages and recommendations. This paper aims to demonstrate the accuracy of TVS in the diagnosis and classification of endometriosis and to discuss the clinical applications and consequences of TVS findings for indication, surgical planning and assessment of associated risk factors. (1) Sophisticated ultrasound is the primary imaging modality recommended for suspected endometriosis. The examination procedure should be performed according to the IDEA Consensus. (2) Surgical intervention to confirm the diagnosis alone is not recommended. A preoperative imaging procedure with TVS and/or MRI is strongly recommended. (3) Ultrasound examination does not allow the definitive exclusion of endometriosis. (4) The examination is primarily transvaginal and should always be combined with a speculum and a bimanual examination. (5) Additional transabdominal ultrasonography may enhance the accuracy of the examination in case of extra pelvic disease, extensive findings or limited transvaginal access. (6) Sonographic assessment of both kidneys is mandatory when deep endometriosis (DE) and endometrioma are suspected. (7) Endometriomas are well defined by sonographic criteria. When evaluating the ovaries, the use of IOTA criteria is recommended. (8) The description of sonographic findings of deep endometriosis should be systematically recorded and performed using IDEA terminology. (9) Adenomyosis uteri has sonographically well-defined criteria (MUSA) that allow for detection with high sensitivity and specificity. MRI is not superior to differentiated skilled ultrasonography. (10) Classification of the extent of findings should be done according to the #Enzian classification. The current data situation proves the best possible prediction of the intraoperative situs of endometriosis (exclusive peritoneum) for the non-invasive application of the #Enzian classification. (11) Transvaginal sonographic examination by an experienced examiner is not inferior to MRI diagnostics regarding sensitivity and specificity in the prediction of the extent of deep endometriosis. (12) The major advantage of non-invasive imaging and classification of endometriosis is the differentiated planning or possible avoidance of surgical interventions. The recommendations represent the opinion of experts in the field of non-invasive and invasive diagnostics as well as therapy of endometriosis. They were developed with the participation of the following national and international societies: DEGUM, ÖGUM, SGUM, SEF, AGEM/DGGG, and EEL.

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.

Performance of IOTA Simple Rules, Simple Rules risk assessment, ADNEX model and O-RADS in differentiating between benign and malignant adnexal lesions in North American women

OBJECTIVES

To apply the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Simple Rules (SR), the IOTA Simple Rules risk assessment (SRR), the IOTA Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model and the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) in the same cohort of North American patients and to compare their performance in preoperative discrimination between benign and malignant adnexal lesions.

METHODS

This was a single-center diagnostic accuracy study, performed between March 2018 and February 2021, which included 150 women with an adnexal lesion. Using the ADNEX model, lesions were classified prospectively, whereas the SR, SRR assessment and O-RADS were applied retrospectively. Surgery with histological analysis was performed within 6 months of the ultrasound exam. Sensitivity and specificity were determined for each testing modality and the performance of the different modalities was compared.

RESULTS

Of the 150 women, 110 (73.3%) had a benign ovarian tumor and 40 (26.7%) had a malignant tumor. The mean risk of malignancy generated by the ADNEX model without CA 125 was significantly higher in malignant vs benign lesions (63.3% vs 11.8%) and the area under the receiver-operating-characteristics curve (AUC) of the ADNEX model for differentiating between benign and malignant adnexal masses at the time of ultrasound examination was 0.937. The mean risk of malignancy generated by SRR assessment was also significantly higher in malignant vs benign lesions (74.1% vs 15.9%) and the AUC was 0.941. To compare the ADNEX model, SRR assessment and O-RADS, the malignancy risk threshold was set at ≥ 10%. This cut-off differentiates O-RADS low-risk categories (Category ≤ 3) from intermediate-to-high-risk categories (Categories 4 and 5). At this cut-off, the sensitivity of the ADNEX model was 97.5% (95% CI, 85.3%-99.9%) and the specificity was 63.6% (95% CI, 53.9%-72.4%), and, for the SRR model, the sensitivity was 100% (95% CI, 89.1%-100%) and the specificity was 51.8% (95% CI, 42.1%-61.4%). In the 113 cases to which the SR could be applied, the sensitivity was 100% (95% CI, 81.5%-100%) and the specificity was 95.6% (95% CI, 88.5%-98.6%). If the remaining 37 cases, which were inconclusive under SR, were designated 'malignant', the sensitivity remained at 100% but the specificity was reduced to 79.1% (95% CI, 70.1%-86.0%). The 150 cases fell into the following O-RADS categories: 17 (11.3%) lesions in Category 2, 34 (22.7%) in Category 3, 66 (44.0%) in Category 4 and 33 (22.0%) in Category 5. There were no histologically proven malignant lesions in Category 2 or 3. There were 14 malignant lesions in Category 4 and 26 in Category 5. The sensitivity of O-RADS using a malignancy risk threshold of ≥ 10% was 100% (95% CI, 89.1%-100.0%) and the specificity was 46.4% (95% CI, 36.9%-56.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

When IOTA terms and techniques are used, the performance of IOTA models in a North American patient population is in line with published IOTA results in other populations. The IOTA SR, SRR assessment and ADNEX model and O-RADS have similar sensitivity in the preoperative discrimination of malignant from benign pelvic tumors; however, the IOTA models have higher specificity and the algorithm does not require the use of magnetic resonance imaging. © 2022 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

A comparison of the diagnostic performance of the O-RADS, RMI4, IOTA LR2, and IOTA SR systems by senior and junior doctors

Purpose

This study compared the diagnostic performance of the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS), the Risk of Malignancy Index 4 (RMI4), the International Ovarian of Tumor Analysis Logistic Regression Model 2 (IOTA LR2), and the IOTA Simple Rules (IOTA SR) in predicting the malignancy of adnexal masses (AMs).

Methods

This retrospective study included 575 women with AMs between 2017 and 2020. All clinical messages, ultrasound images, and pathological findings were collected. Two senior doctors (group I) and two junior doctors (group II) used the four systems to classify AMs. The postoperative pathological diagnosis was used as the gold standard to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency. A receiver operating characteristic curve was used to test the diagnostic performance. The interrater agreement between the two groups was tested using kappa values.

Results

Of all 592 AMs, 447 (75.5%) were benign, 123 (20.8%) were malignant, and 22 (3.7%) were borderline. The intergroup consistency test yielded kappa values of 0.71, 0.92, 0.68, and 0.77 for the O-RADS, RMI4, IOTA LR2, and IOTA SR, respectively. To predict malignant lesions, the areas under the curve of the O-RADS, RMI4, IOTA LR2, and IOTA SR systems were 0.90, 0.89, 0.90, and 0.86 for group I and 0.89, 0.87, 0.88, and 0.84 for group II, respectively. The O-RADS had the highest sensitivity (91.0% in group I and 84.8% in group II).

Conclusion

The four diagnostic systems could compensate for junior doctors’ inexperience in predicting malignant adnexal lesions. The O-RADS performed best and showed the highest sensitivity.

EANM guideline on the role of 2-[18F]FDG PET/CT in diagnosis, staging, prognostic value, therapy assessment and restaging of ovarian cancer, endorsed by the American College of Nuclear Medicine (ACNM), the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (SNMMI) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)

In most patients with ovarian carcinoma, the diagnosis is reached when the disease is long past the initial stages, presenting already an advanced stage, and they usually have a very bad prognosis. Cytoreductive or debulking surgical procedures, platinum-based chemotherapy and targeted agents are key therapeutic elements. However, around 7 out of 10 patients present recurrent disease within 36 months from the initial diagnosis. The metastatic spread in ovarian cancer follows three pathways: contiguous dissemination across the peritoneum, dissemination through the lymphatic drainage and, although less importantly in this case, through the bloodstream. Radiological imaging, including ultrasound, CT and MRI, are the main imaging techniques in which management decisions are supported, CT being considered the best available technique for presurgical evaluation and staging purposes. Regarding 2-[¹⁸F]FDG PET/CT, the evidence available in the literature demonstrates efficacy in primary detection, disease staging and establishing the prognosis and especially for relapse detection. There is limited evidence when considering the evaluation of therapeutic response. This guideline summarizes the level of evidence and grade of recommendation for the clinical indications of 2-[¹⁸F]FDG PET/CT in each disease stage of ovarian carcinoma.

External Validation of the IOTA Classification in Women with Ovarian Masses Suspected to Be Endometrioma

The study aimed to perform external validation of the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) classification of adnexal masses as benign or malignant in women with suspected endometrioma. A retrospective study including women referred to an endometriosis tertiary referral center for dedicated transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS). Adnexal masses were evaluated using the IOTA classification simple descriptors, simple rules and expert opinion. The reference standard was definitive histology after mass removal at laparoscopy. In total, 621 women were evaluated and divided into four groups: endometrioma on TVUS and confirmed on surgery (Group 1 = 181), endometrioma on TVUS but other benign cysts on surgery (Group 2 = 9), other cysts on TVUS but endometrioma on surgery (Group 3 = 2), masses classified as other findings or suspicious for malignancy on TVUS and confirmed on surgery (Group 4 = 5 potentially malignant, 11 benign). This gave a sensitivity 98.9%, specificity 64%, positive 95.3% and negative 88.9% predictive values, positive 2.74 and negative 0.02 likelihood ratios and 94.7% overall accuracy. The surgical diagnosis for the five masses suspected to be malignant was: borderline serous tumor (2), borderline mucinous tumor (2), and endometrioid lesion with complex hyperplasia without atypia (1). The conclusions were that the IOTA classification simple descriptors, simple rules and expert opinion performs well for classifying adnexal masses suspected to be endometrioma. The most common potentially malignant masses in these women were borderline ovarian tumors.

Estradiol/nomegestrol acetate as a first-line and rescue therapy for the treatment of ovarian and deep infiltrating endometriosis

PURPOSE

Estradiol valerate/nomegestrol acetate (E2V/NOMAC) is a new combined oral contraceptive with a good tolerability profile and low drop-out rates, which was shown to improve menstrual-related symptoms. This study aims to evaluate its effectiveness in the control of symptoms and progression of disease in women with ovarian endomestriomas and deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study on 39 women with pelvic endometriosis treated with E2V/NOMAC. We assessed for each patient, at the beginning of treatment and after 6 months, the painful symptoms, through a global VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) index and the size of the greatest ovarian and/or deep infiltrating endometriotic lesions.

RESULTS

After 6 months of treatment, a significant reduction was observed for the global VAS score for pain symptoms and for the mean size of ovarian endometriomas, whereas DIE lesions did not present significant changes in mean size.

CONCLUSIONS

E2/NOMAC was effective in reducing pain symptoms associated with pelvic endometriosis and the size of ovarian endometriomas, whereas DIE lesions remained stable. This therapy could provide good results in the control of symptoms and disease progression in women with pelvic endometriosis.

Guideline No. 403: Initial Investigation and Management of Adnexal Masses

OBJECTIVES

To aid primary care physicians, emergency medicine physicians, and gynaecologists in the initial investigation of adnexal masses, defined as lumps that appear near the uterus or in or around ovaries, fallopian tubes, or surrounding connective tissue, and to outline recommendations for identifying women who would benefit from a referral to a gynaecologic oncologist for further management.

INTENDED USERS

Gynaecologists, obstetricians, family physicians, general surgeons, emergency medicine specialists, radiologists, sonographers, nurses, medical learners, residents, and fellows.

TARGET POPULATION

Adult women 18 years of age and older presenting for the evaluation of an adnexal mass.

OPTIONS

Women with adnexal masses should be assessed for personal risk factors, history, and physical findings. Initial evaluation should also include imaging and laboratory testing to triage women for management of their care either by a gynaecologic oncologist or as per SOGC guideline no. 404 on the initial investigation and management of benign ovarian masses.

EVIDENCE

A search of PubMed, Cochrane Wiley, and the Cochrane systematic reviews was conducted in January 2018 for English-language materials involving human subjects published since 2000 using three sets of terms: (i) ovarian cancer, ovarian carcinoma, adnexal disease, ovarian neoplasm, adnexal mass, fallopian tube disease, fallopian tube neoplasm, ovarian cyst, and ovarian tumour; (ii) the above terms in combination with predict neoplasm staging, follow-up, and staging; and (iii) the above two sets of terms in combination with ultrasound, tumour marker, CA 125, CEA, CA19-9, HE4, multivariable-index-assay, risk-of-ovarian-malignancy-algorithm, risk-of-malignancy-index, diagnostic imaging, CT, MRI, and PET. Relevant evidence was selected for inclusion in descending order of quality of evidence as follows: meta-analyses, systematic reviews, guidelines, randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, observational studies, non-systematic reviews, case series, and reports. Additional articles were identified through cross-referencing the identified reviews. The total number of studies identified was 2350, with 59 being included in this review.

VALIDATION METHODS

The content and recommendations were drafted and agreed upon by the authors. The Executive and Board of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology of Canada reviewed the content and submitted comments for consideration. The Board of Directors of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada approved the final draft for publication. The quality of evidence was rated using the criteria described in the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology framework (Table A1 of Online Appendix A). See Table A2 of Online Appendix A for the interpretation of strong and weak recommendations. The summary of findings is available upon request.

BENEFITS, HARMS, COSTS

Adnexal masses are common, and guidelines on how to triage them and manage the care of patients presenting with adnexal masses will continue to guide the practice of primary care providers and gynaecologists. Ovarian cancer outcomes are improved when initial surgery is performed by a gynaecologic oncologist, likely as a result of complete surgical staging and optimal cytoreduction. Given these superior outcomes, guidelines to assist in the triage of adnexal masses and the referral and management of the care of patients with an adnexal mass are critical.

SUMMARY STATEMENTS (GRADE RATINGS IN PARENTHESES)

RECOMMENDATIONS (GRADE RATINGS IN PARENTHESES).

Ultrasound evaluation of ovarian masses and assessment of the extension of ovarian malignancy

The current review sums up the literature on the diagnostic performance of models to predict malignancy in adnexal masses and the ability of ultrasound to make a specific diagnosis in adnexal masses. A summary of the role of ultrasound in assessing the extension of malignant ovarian disease is also provided.

Prospective revalidation of IOTA "two-step", "alternative two-step" and "three-step" strategies for characterization of adnexal masses - An Indian study focussing the radiology context

Objectives:

The purpose of this study was to revalidate the diagnostic performance of IOTA “two step” (Simple Descriptors and Simple Rules), “ alternative two step” (Simple Rules Risk Calculation tool / SRrisk score), and three step (two step with subjective assessment) strategies, for characterization of adnexal masses as benign or malignant, using histopathology as gold standard.

Materials and Methods:

This prospective, study comprised of 100 patients with newly diagnosed adnexal masses, who underwent ultrasound evaluation first by a level I and then by a level III investigator (EFSUMB criteria). Initially, the level I investigator evaluated each adnexal mass, applying IOTA “two-step” strategy and simultaneously assigned a risk category, by applying the simple rules risk score (SRrisk score) or performing the “alternative two step” strategy. Subsequently the inconclusive masses were evaluated by the level III investigator using “real time subjective assessment”, thereby performing the third step. Following histopathology diagnosis, the performance of each strategy was evaluated using diagnostic tests.

Results:

The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and diagnostic accuracy of “two-step” strategy were 87.5%, 79.2%, 89.4%, 76%, and 84.7%, respectively; those of “alternative two-step” strategy were 91.5%, 75.6%, 84.4%, 86.1% and 88%; and those of “three-step” strategy were 98.2%, 93.3%, 94.7%, 97.7% and 96%, respectively.

Conclusion:

All IOTA strategies showed good diagnostic performance for characterization of adnexal masses and the “three-step” strategy performed best. We believe this is the first ever prospective re-validation and comparative evaluation of all three IOTA strategies by Indian Radiologists. Since ultrasound is the primary modality for evaluation of adnexal masses, based on the good results of our study, a recommendation for henceforth standard application, of the three-step IOTA strategy in routine Radiology practice appears justified. Although, IOTA strategies been proposed and validated mainly by Gynaecologists and Oncology surgeons, based on the results of our study, this paradigm can now be made to shift back to the arena of Radiology and Radiologists, the imaging experts.

Improving the performance of IOTA simple rules: sonographic assessment of adnexal masses with resource-effective use of a magnetic resonance scoring (ADNEX MR scoring system)

PURPOSE

To compare the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) simple rules, simple rules risk ultrasound models, alone or in combination with magnetic resonance (MR) score to predict malignancy in women with adnexal masses.

METHODS

171 women with adnexal masses were included from February 2014 to February 2016. 120 women had histopathological diagnosis obtained from surgery or percutaneous biopsy. The other 51 women were submitted to surveillance with ultrasound (US) for at least 1 year. Patients were examined with US and MR. US reports were rendered using IOTA systems. We compared five diagnostic approaches, aimed at diagnosing women with malignant tumors among those with adnexal masses: We calculated the performance and net benefits (decision curve analysis) for five distinct diagnostic approaches: (1) US simple rules (SR), (2) simple rules risk score (SRRisk), (3) US SR followed by subjective assessment (SA) of indeterminate cases, (4) SR followed by MR score for the indeterminate cases, and (5) MR score for all women.

RESULTS

The MR score for all patients was the approach that yielded the best-standardized net benefit regardless of the risk threshold. However, referring women with indeterminate masses on SR to MR score yielded the second-best net benefit.

CONCLUSION

Although this study leaves no doubt about the superiority of MR score over US-based methods for the discrimination of malignant tumors in women with adnexal masses, restricting the use of MR score only to women with indeterminate masses on US SR is a safe, appropriate way to triage women with adnexal masses.

Microcystic pattern and shadowing are independent predictors of ovarian borderline tumors and cystadenofibromas in ultrasound

OBJECTIVES

To determine the sonographic characteristics of borderline tumors (BoTs) and cystadenofibromas (CAFs).

METHODS

Preoperative sonograms from consecutive patients who had at least one primary epithelial tumor in the adnexa were retrospectively collected. All tumors were described using the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis terminology. Ultrasound variables were tested using multinomial logistic regression after univariate analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 650 patients were included in this study. Of these, 110 had a CAF, 128 had a BoT, 249 had a cystadenoma (CAD), and 163 had a cystadenocarcinoma (CAC). Nearly half of CAFs and more than half of BoTs and CACs appeared to be unilocular and multilocular solid on the ultrasound images, while CADs were predominantly uni- or multilocular (p < 0.001). Overall, shadowing was identified in 82/650 cases. Sixty-five of 110 (59.1%) CAFs exhibited an acoustic shadow, compared with only 4/249 (1.6%) in CADs, 7/128 (5.5%) in BoTs, and 6/163 (3.7%) in CACs (p < 0.001). Furthermore, 112/650 cases demonstrated microcystic pattern (MCP). Sixty-eight of 128 (53.1%) BoTs exhibited MCP, compared with only 5/249 (2.0%) in CADs, 19/163 (11.7%) in CACs, and 20/110 (18.2%) in CAFs (p < 0.001). Logistic regression analysis revealed that shadowing is an independent predictor of CAFs, while MCP is an independent predictor of BoTs.

CONCLUSIONS

Sonographic findings for CAFs and BoTs were complex and partly overlapped with those for CACs. However, proper recognition and utilization of shadowing or MCP may help to correctly discriminate CAFs and BoTs.

KEY POINTS

• Sonographic findings for borderline tumors and cystadenofibromas are complex and mimic malignancy. • Microcystic pattern and shadowing are independent predictors of borderline tumors and cystadenofibromas respectively.

The ADNEX model to triage adnexal masses: An external validation study and comparison with the IOTA two-step strategy and subjective assessment by an experienced ultrasound operator

OBJECTIVES

The ADNEX (Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa) model was developed using parameters collected by experienced (level III) ultrasound examiners. Our primary aim was to externally validate the ADNEX model. Then, the discriminatory performance of ADNEX was compared with the two-step strategy and subjective assessment by an experienced ultrasound operator.

METHODS

Between February 2013 and January 2017, all patients who were scheduled for surgery for an adnexal mass at the Sant'Anna Hospital in Turin were enrolled in this study. Preoperative transvaginal sonography was performed, and the two-step strategy was applied for triage of the adnexal mass. Two ultrasound examiners, IOTA certified, applied the ADNEX model to all the collected masses based on the ultrasound reports. Finally, an experienced operator assigned the subjective assessment based on recorded ultrasound images. The discrimination and calibration performance of ADNEX were evaluated. The AUC was calculated for the basic discrimination between benign and malignant tumours. In addition, AUCs were computed for each pair of tumour types using the conditional risk method.

RESULTS

A total of 577 patients were included in the analysis: the overall prevalence of malignancy was 25 %. With ADNEX, the AUC to differentiate between benign and malignant masses was 0.9111 (95 % CI 0. 8788-0.9389). At risk cut-offs of 1%, 10 % and 30 %, sensitivities were 100 %, 89.6 % and 79.2 %, respectively, and specificities were 2.8 %, 76.2 % and 89.6 %, respectively. Discrimination between benign and stage II-IV tumours was good (AUC 0.935). The model had the most difficulties discriminating between borderline and stage I tumours (AUC 0.666), and between stages II-IV invasive and secondary metastatic tumours (AUC 0.736). The polytomous discrimination index (PDI) was 0.61 for ADNEX, whereas PDI for random performance would be 0.25. ADNEX proved to be equally or more accurate than the subjective assessment or the two-step strategy in the discrimination between benign and malignant adnexal masses.

CONCLUSIONS

the ADNEX model could probably be successfully applied when an expert examiner is not available and, therefore both a subjective assessment and the two-step strategy cannot be performed.

Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of International Ovarian Tumor Analysis simple rules and the risk of malignancy index to discriminate between benign and malignant adnexal masses

OBJECTIVE

To compare the diagnostic accuracy of International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) simple rules and risk of malignancy index (RMI 1/RMI 2) scoring to discriminate between benign and malignant adnexal masses.

METHODS

Secondary analysis of a cohort of patients scheduled for surgery for adnexal masses in a tertiary center between April 2010 and March 2018. Ultrasound examinations were performed by general gynecologists within 24 hours prior to surgery to evaluate sonographic features. Demographic data and preoperative CA 125 levels were recorded. IOTA rules and RMI scoring were applied to predict malignancy and prospectively recorded. Final diagnosis was based on pathological or intraoperative diagnosis.

RESULTS

A total of 479 masses met the inclusion criteria and were retrieved from the database: 334 (69.7%) benign and 145 (30.3%) malignant. IOTA rules could be applied to 392 (81.8%) masses and were inconclusive in 87 (18.2%). Sensitivity and specificity of IOTA rules (83.8% and 92.0%, respectively) were significantly higher than RMI 1 (77.2% and 86.8%, respectively) and RMI 2 (82.1% and 82.6%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

IOTA simple rules had higher diagnostic accuracy compared with RMI to discriminate between benign and malignant adnexal masses; however, nearly 20% of IOTA results were inconclusive and needed expert consultation.

IOTA Simple Ultrasound Rules for Triage of Adnexal Mass: Experience from South India

Objective

To assess the diagnostic performance of International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) simple ultrasound rules to discriminate adnexal masses as benign or malignant.

Methods

A cross-sectional prospective study was conducted on women scheduled for elective surgery due to adnexal masses. Ultrasound examiner systematically assessed the tumors according to the IOTA simple rules to determine the risk of the tumor being malignant. If the simple rules yielded inconclusive result, pattern recognition was used to categorize the mass. Results were then compared with histologic findings after surgery. Diagnostic performance was assessed by calculating sensitivity and specificity.

Results

Two hundred and five women undergoing surgery were included. The rules were applicable in 183 (89.3%) of the tumors; and for these tumors, sensitivity was 92.8% (95% CI 77-99%) and specificity was 92.9% (95% CI 88-96.4%). Of the tumors, 144 were benign and 39 were malignant. The simple rules yielded inconclusive results in 22 masses which were analyzed by pattern recognition.

Conclusion

IOTA simple rules provide excellent discrimination between benign and malignant adnexal masses.

Prospective external validation of IOTA three-step strategy for characterizing and classifying adnexal masses and retrospective assessment of alternative two-step strategy using simple-rules risk

OBJECTIVES

To perform an external validation of the diagnostic performance of the three-step strategy proposed by the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) group for classifying adnexal masses as benign or malignant, when ultrasound is performed by non-expert sonographers in the first two steps. The second objective was to assess the diagnostic performance of an alternative strategy using simple-rules risk (SRR), instead of simple rules (SR), in the second step.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational study conducted at two university hospitals, from September 2015 to August 2017, of consecutive patients diagnosed with an adnexal mass. All women were evaluated by ultrasound using the IOTA three-step strategy. Non-expert sonographers performed the first step (use of simple descriptors to classify the masses) and the second step (use of SR if the mass could not be classified in the first step); masses that could not be classified in the first two steps were categorized by an expert sonographer based on their subjective assessment (third step). The reference standard was histological diagnosis in patients who underwent surgery or at least 12 months of follow-up in cases managed expectantly. The sensitivity, specificity, positive (LR+) and negative (LR-) likelihood ratios and overall accuracy of the IOTA three-step strategy were estimated. Furthermore, we evaluated retrospectively an alternative two-step strategy using SRR in the second step to categorize the masses not classifiable with simple descriptors, classifying the lesions as being of low, intermediate or high risk for malignancy. The diagnostic performance of this strategy was estimated by calculating its sensitivity and specificity, assuming surgical intervention for intermediate- or high-risk lesions.

RESULTS

The study included 283 patients (median age, 48 (range, 18-90) years), of whom 165 (58.3%) were premenopausal and 118 (41.7%) postmenopausal. Two hundred and sixteen (76.3%) women underwent surgery (154 benign and 62 malignant masses) and 67 (23.7%) were managed expectantly with serial ultrasound follow-up for at least 12 months. All expectantly managed masses were considered benign because no sonographic changes suggestive of malignancy were observed during follow-up. Simple descriptors could be applied in 126 (44.5%) masses. Of the remaining 157 lesions, 112 (39.6%) could be characterized using SR. Therefore, 238 (84.1%) masses could be classified by non-expert sonographers in the first two steps. Of the remaining 45 (15.9%) masses, all could be classified by an expert sonographer. Overall sensitivity, specificity, LR+ and LR- of the IOTA three-step strategy were 95.2%, 97.7%, 42.1 and 0.05, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy was 97.2%. Following the two-step strategy using SRR in the second step, of the 157 lesions not classified with simple descriptors, 42, 38 and 77 presented low, intermediate or high risk for malignancy, respectively. Based on this method, 210 women would have undergone surgical treatment. The sensitivity and specificity of this two-step strategy were 98.4% and 63.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The IOTA three-step strategy shows high accuracy for discriminating between benign and malignant adnexal lesions when used by non-expert sonographers. An alternative strategy using the SRR calculator in the second step might improve on this diagnostic performance by decreasing the number of surgical interventions and increasing sensitivity. Copyright © 2018 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

[Diagnostic value of imaging (ultrasonography, doppler, CT, MR, PET-CT) for the diagnosis of a suspicious ovarian mass and staging of ovarian, tubal or primary peritoneal cancer: Article drafted from the French Guidelines in oncology entitled "Initial management of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer" developed by FRANCOGYN, CNGOF, SFOG, GINECO-ARCAGY under the aegis of CNGOF and endorsed by INCa]

Transvaginal ultrasound is the first-line examination allowing characterizing 80 to 90% of adnexal masses (LP1). If performed by an expert, a subjective analysis is optimal. If performed by a non-expert, combining the use of Simple Rules with subjective analysis can achieve the diagnostic performance of an expert (LP1). Whichever the chosen model (subjective analysis by an expert or combination of the Simple Rules with a subjective analysis by a non-expert), a second-line examination will have to be proposed in the complex or indeterminate cases (about 20% of the masses) (grade A). The best-performing second-line test for characterization is pelvic MRI (LP1). If read by an expert, a pathological hypothesis can or should be suggested (grade D). In case of non-expert reading, the use of the ADNEXMR score allows a reliable assessment of the positive predictive value of malignancy to guide the patient towards the best management (gradeC). For preoperative assessment and evaluation of resectability of ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer, it is recommended to perform a chest abdomen and pelvis CT with contrast agent injection (LP2, grade B). In the event of a contraindication to the injection of iodinated contrast agent (severe renal insufficiency, GFR <30mL/min), an abdomen and pelvis MRI completed with a non-injected chest CT may be proposed (LP3, grade C). By analogy, the same examinations are recommended to evaluate the disease after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (LP3, Recommendation grade C). Further studies will be required to determine whether PET-CT provides better lymph node assessment before retroperitoneal and pelvic lymphadenectomy. PET-CT may be used to eliminate lymph node involvement in the absence of suspicious lymph nodes on morphological examination (LP3, grade C). The report should specify the localizations leading to a risk of incomplete cytoreductive surgery and lesions outside the field explored during surgery.

Economic evaluation of an expert examiner and different ultrasound models in the diagnosis of ovarian cancer

The Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI) is commonly used to diagnose adnexal masses. The aim of the present study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of the RMI compared with subjective assessment (SA) by an expert and the following novel ultrasound models: Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses were performed from a societal perspective. A decision tree was constructed, and short-term costs and effects were examined in women with adnexal masses. Sensitivity, specificity and the costs of diagnostic strategies were incorporated. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were expressed as costs/additional percentage of correctly diagnosed patients. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed. Effectiveness was highest for SA (90.7% [95% confidence interval = 77.3-100]), with a cost saving of 5.0% (-€398 per patient [-€1403 to 549]) compared with the RMI. The costs of SR + SA were the lowest (€7180 [6072-8436]), resulting in a cost saving of 9.0% (-€709 per patient [-€1628 to 236]) compared with the RMI, with an effectiveness of 89.6% (75.8-100). SR + SA showed the highest probability of being the most cost-effective when willingness-to-pay was <€350 per additional percentage of correctly diagnosed patients. The RMI had low cost-effectiveness probabilities (<3%) and was inferior to SA, SR + SA and LR2. Budget impact in the Netherlands compared with that of the RMI varied between a cost saving of €4.67 million for SR + SA and additional costs of €3.83 million when implementing ADNEX (cut-off: 10%). The results were robust when tested in sensitivity analyses. Although SA is the best strategy in terms of diagnostic accuracy, SR + SA might be preferred from a cost-effectiveness perspective.

Sonographic Diagnosis of Tubal Cancer with IOTA Simple Rules Plus Pattern Recognition

Objective:

To evaluate diagnostic performance of IOTA simple rules plus pattern recognition in predicting tubal cancer.

Methods:

Secondary analysis was performed on prospective database of our IOTA project. The patients recruited in the project were those who were scheduled for pelvic surgery due to adnexal masses. The patients underwent ultrasound examinations within 24 hours before surgery. On ultrasound examination, the masses were evaluated using the well-established IOTA simple rules plus pattern recognition (sausage-shaped appearance, incomplete septum, visible ipsilateral ovaries) to predict tubal cancer. The gold standard diagnosis was based on histological findings or operative findings.

Results:

A total of 482 patients, including 15 cases of tubal cancer, were evaluated by ultrasound preoperatively. The IOTA simple rules plus pattern recognition gave a sensitivity of 86.7% (13 in 15) and specificity of 97.4%. Sausage-shaped appearance was identified in nearly all cases (14 in 15). Incomplete septa and normal ovaries could be identified in 33.3% and 40%, respectively.

Conclusion:

IOTA simple rules plus pattern recognition is relatively effective in predicting tubal cancer. Thus, we propose the simple scheme in diagnosis of tubal cancer as follows. First of all, the adnexal masses are evaluated with IOTA simple rules. If the B-rules could be applied, tubal cancer is reliably excluded. If the M-rules could be applied or the result is inconclusive, careful delineation of the mass with pattern recognition should be performed.

Evaluation of IOTA Simple Ultrasound Rules to Distinguish Benign and Malignant Ovarian Tumours

INTRODUCTION

IOTA stands for International Ovarian Tumour Analysis group. Ovarian cancer is one of the common cancers in women and is diagnosed at later stage in majority. The limiting factor for early diagnosis is lack of standardized terms and procedures in gynaecological sonography. Introduction of IOTA rules has provided some consistency in defining morphological features of ovarian masses through a standardized examination technique.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of IOTA simple ultrasound rules in distinguishing benign and malignant ovarian tumours and establishing their use as a tool in early diagnosis of ovarian malignancy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A hospital based case control prospective study was conducted. Patients with suspected ovarian pathology were evaluated using IOTA ultrasound rules and designated as benign or malignant. Findings were correlated with histopathological findings. Collected data was statistically analysed using chi-square test and kappa statistical method.

RESULTS

Out of initial 55 patients, 50 patients were included in the final analysis who underwent surgery. IOTA simple rules were applicable in 45 out of these 50 patients (90%). The sensitivity for the detection of malignancy in cases where IOTA simple rules were applicable was 91.66% and the specificity was 84.84%. Accuracy was 86.66%. Classifying inconclusive cases as malignant, the sensitivity and specificity was 93% and 80% respectively. High level of agreement was found between USG and histopathological diagnosis with Kappa value as 0.323.

CONCLUSION

IOTA simple ultrasound rules were highly sensitive and specific in predicting ovarian malignancy preoperatively yet being reproducible, easy to train and use.

Imaging of Adnexal Masses

We review and emphasize the importance of gynecologic ultrasound scan for the preoperative evaluation of adnexal masses. Transvaginal ultrasound performed by a trained clinician has a good sensitivity and specificity for discriminating benign and malignant adnexal masses. In conjunction with a carefully obtained history, assessment of risk factors, a focused physical examination and serum markers, the information obtained by a gynecologic ultrasound evaluation can assist the clinician in the diagnosis and treatment of adnexal masses.

External validation of IOTA simple descriptors and simple rules for classifying adnexal masses

OBJECTIVE

To assess the diagnostic performance of a three-step strategy proposed by the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Group for discriminating between benign and malignant adnexal masses.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational study, performed at two tertiary-care university hospitals, of women diagnosed with an adnexal mass on transvaginal or transabdominal ultrasound between December 2012 and December 2014. Women were scheduled for an ultrasound evaluation, which was initially performed by non-expert examiners. The examiner had to classify the mass using 'simple descriptors' (first step) and, if not possible, using 'simple rules' (second step). For inconclusive masses, an expert examiner classified the mass according to their subjective impression (third step). Masses were managed expectantly, with serial follow-up examinations, or surgically, according to ultrasound findings and clinical symptoms. Histology was used as the reference standard. Masses that were managed expectantly with at least 1 year of follow-up were considered as benign for analytical purposes. Women with less than 1 year of follow-up were not included in the study.

RESULTS

Six hundred and sixty-six women were included (median age, 41 (range, 18-81) years) of whom 514 were premenopausal and 152 were postmenopausal. Based on the three-step strategy, 362 women had surgical removal of the mass (53 malignant and 309 benign), 71 masses resolved spontaneously and 233 persisted. Four hundred and forty-eight (67.3%) of 666 masses could be classified using simple descriptors and, of the 218 that could not, 147 (67.4%) were classified using simple rules. Of the remaining 71 masses, the expert examiner classified 45 as benign, 12 as malignant and 14 as uncertain. Overall sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio of the three-step strategy were 94.3%, 94.9%, 18.6 and 0.06, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The IOTA three-step strategy, based on the sequential use of simple descriptors, simple rules and expert evaluation, performs well for classifying adnexal masses as benign or malignant. Copyright © 2016 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Evaluating the risk of ovarian cancer before surgery using the ADNEX model: a multicentre external validation study

BACKGROUND

The International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) group have developed the ADNEX (The Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa) model to predict the risk that an ovarian mass is benign, borderline, stage I, stages II-IV or metastatic. We aimed to externally validate the ADNEX model in the hands of examiners with varied training and experience.

METHODS

This was a multicentre cross-sectional cohort study for diagnostic accuracy. Patients were recruited from three cancer centres in Europe. Patients who underwent transvaginal ultrasonography and had a histological diagnosis of surgically removed tissue were included. The diagnostic performance of the ADNEX model with and without the use of CA125 as a predictor was calculated.

RESULTS

Data from 610 women were analysed. The overall prevalence of malignancy was 30%. The area under the receiver operator curve (AUC) for the ADNEX diagnostic performance to differentiate between benign and malignant masses was 0.937 (95% CI: 0.915-0.954) when CA125 was included, and 0.925 (95% CI: 0.902-0.943) when CA125 was excluded. The calibration plots suggest good correspondence between the total predicted risk of malignancy and the observed proportion of malignancies. The model showed good discrimination between the different subtypes.

CONCLUSIONS

The performance of the ADNEX model retains its performance on external validation in the hands of ultrasound examiners with varied training and experience.

Refining Ovarian Cancer Test accuracy Scores (ROCkeTS): protocol for a prospective longitudinal test accuracy study to validate new risk scores in women with symptoms of suspected ovarian cancer

INTRODUCTION

Ovarian cancer (OC) is associated with non-specific symptoms such as bloating, making accurate diagnosis challenging: only 1 in 3 women with OC presents through primary care referral. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines recommends sequential testing with CA125 and routine ultrasound in primary care. However, these diagnostic tests have limited sensitivity or specificity. Improving accurate triage in women with vague symptoms is likely to improve mortality by streamlining referral and care pathways. The Refining Ovarian Cancer Test Accuracy Scores (ROCkeTS; HTA 13/13/01) project will derive and validate new tests/risk prediction models that estimate the probability of having OC in women with symptoms. This protocol refers to the prospective study only (phase III).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

ROCkeTS comprises four parallel phases. The full ROCkeTS protocol can be found at http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/ROCKETS. Phase III is a prospective test accuracy study. The study will recruit 2450 patients from 15 UK sites. Recruited patients complete symptom and anxiety questionnaires, donate a serum sample and undergo ultrasound scored as per International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) criteria. Recruitment is at rapid access clinics, emergency departments and elective clinics. Models to be evaluated include those based on ultrasound derived by the IOTA group and novel models derived from analysis of existing data sets. Estimates of sensitivity, specificity, c-statistic (area under receiver operating curve), positive predictive value and negative predictive value of diagnostic tests are evaluated and a calibration plot for models will be presented. ROCkeTS has received ethical approval from the NHS West Midlands REC (14/WM/1241) and is registered on the controlled trials website (ISRCTN17160843) and the National Institute of Health Research Cancer and Reproductive Health portfolios.

Predicting the risk of malignancy in adnexal masses based on the Simple Rules from the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis group

BACKGROUND

Accurate methods to preoperatively characterize adnexal tumors are pivotal for optimal patient management. A recent metaanalysis concluded that the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis algorithms such as the Simple Rules are the best approaches to preoperatively classify adnexal masses as benign or malignant.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to develop and validate a model to predict the risk of malignancy in adnexal masses using the ultrasound features in the Simple Rules.

STUDY DESIGN

This was an international cross-sectional cohort study involving 22 oncology centers, referral centers for ultrasonography, and general hospitals. We included consecutive patients with an adnexal tumor who underwent a standardized transvaginal ultrasound examination and were selected for surgery. Data on 5020 patients were recorded in 3 phases from 2002 through 2012. The 5 Simple Rules features indicative of a benign tumor (B-features) and the 5 features indicative of malignancy (M-features) are based on the presence of ascites, tumor morphology, and degree of vascularity at ultrasonography. Gold standard was the histopathologic diagnosis of the adnexal mass (pathologist blinded to ultrasound findings). Logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the risk of malignancy based on the 10 ultrasound features and type of center. The diagnostic performance was evaluated by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR-), positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and calibration curves.

RESULTS

Data on 4848 patients were analyzed. The malignancy rate was 43% (1402/3263) in oncology centers and 17% (263/1585) in other centers. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve on validation data was very similar in oncology centers (0.917; 95% confidence interval, 0.901-0.931) and other centers (0.916; 95% confidence interval, 0.873-0.945). Risk estimates showed good calibration. In all, 23% of patients in the validation data set had a very low estimated risk (<1%) and 48% had a high estimated risk (≥30%). For the 1% risk cutoff, sensitivity was 99.7%, specificity 33.7%, LR+ 1.5, LR- 0.010, PPV 44.8%, and NPV 98.9%. For the 30% risk cutoff, sensitivity was 89.0%, specificity 84.7%, LR+ 5.8, LR- 0.13, PPV 75.4%, and NPV 93.9%.

CONCLUSION

Quantification of the risk of malignancy based on the Simple Rules has good diagnostic performance both in oncology centers and other centers. A simple classification based on these risk estimates may form the basis of a clinical management system. Patients with a high risk may benefit from surgery by a gynecological oncologist, while patients with a lower risk may be managed locally.

IOTA Simple Rules in Differentiating between Benign and Malignant Adnexal Masses by Non-expert Examiners

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the diagnostic performance of IOTA simple rules in predicting malignant adnexal tumors by non-expert examiners.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Five obstetric/gynecologic residents, who had never performed gynecologic ultrasound examination by themselves before, were trained for IOTA simple rules by an experienced examiner. One trained resident performed ultrasound examinations including IOTA simple rules on 100 women, who were scheduled for surgery due to ovarian masses, within 24 hours of surgery. The gold standard diagnosis was based on pathological or operative findings. The five-trained residents performed IOTA simple rules on 30 patients for evaluation of inter-observer variability.

RESULTS

A total of 100 patients underwent ultrasound examination for the IOTA simple rules. Of them, IOTA simple rules could be applied in 94 (94%) masses including 71 (71.0%) benign masses and 29 (29.0%) malignant masses. The diagnostic performance of IOTA simple rules showed sensitivity of 89.3% (95%CI, 77.8%; 100.7%), specificity 83.3% (95%CI, 74.3%; 92.3%). Inter-observer variability was analyzed using Cohen's kappa coefficient. Kappa indices of the four pairs of raters are 0.713-0.884 (0.722, 0.827, 0.713, and 0.884).

CONCLUSIONS

IOTA simple rules have high diagnostic performance in discriminating adnexal masses even when are applied by non-expert sonographers, though a training course may be required. Nevertheless, they should be further tested by a greater number of general practitioners before widely use.

Simple descriptors and simple rules of the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Group: a prospective study of combined use for the description of adnexal masses

OBJECTIVE

External validation of the IOTA group's three-step diagnostic model (Strategy 1) and comparison with assessment by an expert sonographer (Strategy 2).

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective study in patients with persistent adnexal masses, in which an inexperienced sonographer performed transvaginal ultrasound applying simple descriptors (SD) and rules (SR) for classifying as benign or malignant. Any non-classifiable mass was then submitted to an expert examiner for subjective assessment (SA).

RESULTS

Eighty-one patients (mean age, 43; 27.2% postmenopausal) were included in this prospective study. Surgery was performed for 30 (8 malignant and 22 benign) masses; 51 masses were considered as benign and managed expectantly (they were assumed to be benign for statistical purposes). Diagnostic performance for Strategy 1 (SD+SR+SA) was sensitivity (SN): 87.5% (7/8, 95% CI, 47.3-99.7%) and specificity (SP): 100% (73/73, 95% CI, 95.1-100%). For Strategy 2 (SA only) it was SN 87.5% (7/8, 95% CI, 47.3-99.7%), SP 98.6% (72/73, 95% CI, 92.6-100%).

CONCLUSIONS

The three-step diagnostic strategy designed by the IOTA group for adnexal masses has a diagnostic performance comparable to that of subjective expert assessment and could be used as a triage method by nonexpert sonographers.

Performance of three-dimensional power Doppler angiography as third-step assessment in differential diagnosis of adnexal masses

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the contribution of three-dimensional (3D) power Doppler angiography (3D-PDA) to the differential diagnosis of adnexal masses.

METHODS

This was a prospective study in women diagnosed with a persistent adnexal mass and subsequently scheduled for surgery in a tertiary university hospital. All women were evaluated by transvaginal/transrectal ultrasound according to a predetermined three-step protocol, with transabdominal ultrasound being performed in some cases. First, morphological evaluation of the mass was performed using gray-scale 'pattern recognition' (first step). Lesions diagnosed as having a benign pattern were considered as being at low risk of malignancy whereas tumors with solid components, ascites and/or signs of carcinomatosis were considered as being at high risk of malignancy. In both cases no further test was performed and a decision regarding clinical management, either for follow-up or surgery, was taken. Tumors with solid components but without signs of ascites or carcinomatosis were considered as being at intermediate risk of malignancy. These lesions were assessed by two-dimensional (2D) PDA to evaluate tumor vascularity (color score) (second step). Solid tumors with a color score of 1 or 2 were considered as benign and no further test was performed, while tumors with a color score of 2, 3 or 4 within solid components or a color score of 3 or 4 in the case of a solid tumor were considered as malignant. The latter group underwent 3D-PDA assessment (third step). Vascularization index (VI) was calculated in a 1-mL sphere of the most vascularized area of the tumor. When a VI ≥ 24.015% was found, the tumor was considered as malignant. All masses were removed surgically and definitive histological diagnosis was used as the gold standard. Sensitivity and specificity for each strategy were calculated and compared. In the case of bilateral tumors, only the more suspicious one was used for analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 367 adnexal masses diagnosed in 367 women (mean age, 46.5 (range, 18-80) years) were evaluated during the study period. Of these, 86 masses were malignant and 281 were benign. The sensitivity and specificity for each assessment strategy were as follows: one-step, 97.7% and 78.6%; two-step, 94.2% and 97.9% (P < 0.001 for specificity when compared with that of one-step); three-step, 90.7% and 98.9% (not statistically significant when compared with that of two-step).

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of 2D-PDA in the differential diagnosis of an adnexal mass significantly increases specificity while sensitivity remains high; however performing subsequent 3D-PDA does not provide additional information or further improve diagnostic performance subsequent to 2D-PDA.

Consider ultrasound first for imaging the female pelvis

Ultrasound technology has evolved dramatically in recent years and now includes applications such as 3-dimensional volume imaging, real-time evaluation of pelvic organs (simultaneous with the physical examination), and Doppler blood flow mapping without the need for contrast, which makes ultrasound imaging unique for imaging the female pelvis. Among the many cross-sectional imaging techniques, we should use the most informative, less invasive, and less expensive modality to avoid radiation when possible. Hence, ultrasound imaging should be the first imaging modality used in women with pelvic symptoms.

Use of IOTA simple rules for diagnosis of ovarian cancer: meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To present data on prospective evaluation of the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) 'simple-rules' tool for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer and to perform a meta-analysis of studies that utilized the same diagnostic method.

METHODS

In the present study a level-II ultrasound operator systematically assessed the tumors of women with an ultrasound diagnosis of adnexal tumor(s) according to the IOTA simple-rules protocol to determine the risk of the tumor being malignant. The results of simple rules were compared with the 'pattern recognition' method and with histological findings. This validation study was included in the subsequent meta-analysis, for which we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane from the publication of the first study in 2008. The terms used were 'simple rules', 'simple rules ovarian', 'ovar tumor' and 'ultrasound'. Quality assessment was performed using the modified Quality Assessment of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Studies (QUADAS-2) checklist. Random effects meta-analysis was used to calculate pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity for the simple-rules tool, and meta-regression was used to investigate heterogeneity across the studies.

RESULTS

Three hundred and three women were included in the validation study with 168 (55.4%) benign, 19 (6.3%) borderline and 116 (38.3%) malignant tumors on histological examination. The rules were applicable in 237 (78.2%) of the tumors and for these tumors, sensitivity was 96.2% (95% CI, 90.5-99.0%) and specificity was 88.6% (95% CI, 82.0-93.5%). Six of the 88 discovered studies were included in the meta-analysis along with the current validation study, which resulted in inclusion of a total of 3568 patients. When the meta-analysis was performed the pooled sensitivity (when the rules were applicable) was 93% (95% CI, 90-96%) (I(2)  = 32.1%) and the pooled specificity was 95% (95% CI, 93-97%) (I(2)  = 78.1%). Heterogeneity was observed across the studies. Sensitivity was higher and specificity lower in the study populations in which the prevalence of malignant tumors was greatest.

CONCLUSION

The simple rules protocol could be used in 76-89% of tumors and is an accurate test for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Assessment by an ultrasound expert is required when the protocol cannot be applied.

Interobserver agreement in describing adnexal masses using the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis simple rules in a real-time setting and using three-dimensional ultrasound volumes and digital clips

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the agreement between an expert and a non-expert examiner using the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) simple rules for classifying adnexal masses on real-time ultrasound and when using three-dimensional (3D) ultrasound volumes and digital clips.

METHODS

Forty-two non-consecutive women diagnosed as having an adnexal mass were evaluated by transvaginal power Doppler ultrasound as part of their diagnostic work-up. In each woman, examination was first performed by a non-expert examiner (a trainee) and immediately afterwards by an expert examiner. Both used the IOTA simple rules to describe the mass, blinded to each other's results. After finishing the examination, each examiner classified the mass as benign, malignant or inconclusive, according to the IOTA simple rules. Additionally, the expert recorded a short videoclip and acquired a static 3D volume of each mass, which were subsequently assessed by four trainees in obstetrics and gynecology with different levels of training, who also classified the mass as benign, malignant or inconclusive according to the IOTA simple rules. Agreement was assessed by calculating weighted and standard kappa index values with 95% CI and the percentage of agreement between observers.

RESULTS

Agreement between the observers who performed real-time ultrasound examination was good (weighted kappa = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.61-0.90; agreement = 78.6%). Agreement between trainees using videoclips plus 3D volumes was moderate (kappa values ranged from 0.45 to 0.58, depending on pair comparison).

CONCLUSION

Interobserver agreement of the IOTA simple rules for classifying adnexal masses as benign, malignant or inconclusive using real-time ultrasound, between an expert and a non-expert examiner, might be considered good. Agreement using a videoclip plus a 3D volume was moderate for trainees with different degrees of training.

Strategies to diagnose ovarian cancer: new evidence from phase 3 of the multicentre international IOTA study

Background:

To compare different ultrasound-based international ovarian tumour analysis (IOTA) strategies and risk of malignancy index (RMI) for ovarian cancer diagnosis using a meta-analysis approach of centre-specific data from IOTA3.

Methods:

This prospective multicentre diagnostic accuracy study included 2403 patients with 1423 benign and 980 malignant adnexal masses from 2009 until 2012. All patients underwent standardised transvaginal ultrasonography. Test performance of RMI, subjective assessment (SA) of ultrasound findings, two IOTA risk models (LR1 and LR2), and strategies involving combinations of IOTA simple rules (SRs), simple descriptors (SDs) and LR2 with and without SA was estimated using a meta-analysis approach. Reference standard was histology after surgery.

Results:

The areas under the receiver operator characteristic curves of LR1, LR2, SA and RMI were 0.930 (0.917–0.942), 0.918 (0.905–0.930), 0.914 (0.886–0.936) and 0.875 (0.853–0.894). Diagnostic one-step and two-step strategies using LR1, LR2, SR and SD achieved summary estimates for sensitivity 90–96%, specificity 74–79% and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) 32.8–50.5. Adding SA when IOTA methods yielded equivocal results improved performance (DOR 57.6–75.7). Risk of Malignancy Index had sensitivity 67%, specificity 91% and DOR 17.5.

Conclusions:

This study shows all IOTA strategies had excellent diagnostic performance in comparison with RMI. The IOTA strategy chosen may be determined by clinical preference.

Ovarian cancer: risk factors, treatment and management

Ovarian cancer is the fifth most common cancer affecting women in the UK today, with associated statistics illustrating a steadily increasing rate, particularly in women aged 65 and over (Cancer Research UK, 2013). There are no recognised preventative measures and no effective screening tool. Although evidence suggests that the majority of women experience a variety of non-specific symptoms in the year before diagnosis, the disease it is not commonly recognised until an advanced stage, leading to increased mortality and morbidity. This highlights the need to raise awareness among health professionals and women as a whole, as early recognition undoubtedly improves ovarian cancer survival. Best clinical practice in the UK for the recognition and initial management of ovarian cancer is provided by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Clinical guideline CG 122 (NICE, 2011) and quality standard QS 18 (NICE, 2012) use relevant clinical evidence to define high-quality care standards for ovarian cancer management. Accurate staging of ovarian cancer is essential to the provision of individualised care and management. However, there is currently no single test that provides a reliable indicator of ovarian malignancy. At present, risk-of-malignancy scores are calculated by serum cancer antigen 125 (CA 125) levels, ultrasound score and menopausal status. These are widely used to identify women who are at high risk and require referral to a specialised gynaecological oncology service. Women diagnosed with ovarian cancer require information and support. The clinical nurse specialist acts as a key worker, providing communication, support and holistic care throughout a woman's cancer journey. The value of this role cannot be underestimated. Surgery followed by platinum-based chemotherapy is the usual standard treatment pathway, although individualised assessment and management may deviate from it. Early disease may be successfully treated with surgery alone; advanced disease may require complex management and treatment. New treatments such as bevacizumab show promise of improving ovarian cancer outcomes.

Are serum HE4 or ROMA scores useful to experienced examiners for improving characterization of adnexal masses after transvaginal ultrasonography?

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether serum human-epididymis protein-4 (HE4) levels or Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) scores are useful second-stage tests for tumors thought to be difficult to characterize as benign or malignant on the basis of ultrasound findings by experienced examiners, and to investigate whether adding information on serum HE4 levels or ROMA scores to ultrasound findings improves diagnostic performance.

METHODS

This was a prospective cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study conducted in a tertiary referral center that enrolled consecutive women with a known adnexal mass scheduled for surgery. Experienced level III examiners classified each mass as certainly or probably benign, difficult to classify, or probably or certainly malignant after preoperative ultrasound examination. Serum HE4 and CA 125 levels were measured before surgery.

RESULTS

The final database comprised 360 women, of whom 216 (60%) had benign and 144 (40%) had malignant disease. Examiners were highly confident in 196 cases (54%), moderately confident in 135 (38%) and completely uncertain about their diagnosis in 29 (8%) cases. With a sensitivity of 67% and specificity of 70%, subjective assessment outperformed HE4 and ROMA in the subgroup of difficult tumors. Both tests had low discriminatory capacity with poor areas under the receiver-operating characteristics curve of 0.536 (95% CI, 0.302-0.771) and 0.565 (95% CI, 0.294-0.836), respectively. A strategy that incorporates sequential testing of serum HE4 or ROMA scores after transvaginal ultrasonography resulted in a deterioration in overall test performance.

CONCLUSION

Measurement of serum HE4 or calculating scores using the ROMA as secondary tests does not seem useful for classifying adnexal tumors after subjective assessment with transvaginal ultrasonography.

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.