Multicentre external validation of IOTA prediction models and RMI by operators with varied training

Clinical Utility and Diagnostic Accuracy of ROMA, RMI, ADNEX, HE4, and CA125 in the Prediction of Malignancy in Adnexal Masses

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare the clinical utility and diagnostic accuracy of the ADNEX model, ROMA score, RMI I, and RMI IV, as well as two serum markers (CA125 and HE4) in preoperative discrimination between benign and malignant adnexal masses (AMs).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study extracting all consecutive patients with AMs seen at our Institution between January 2015 and December 2020. Accuracy metrics included sensitivity (SE), specificity (SP), and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for basic discrimination between AMs. Model performance was evaluated in terms of discrimination ability and clinical utility (net benefit, NB).

RESULTS

A total of 581 women were included; 481 (82.8%) had a benign ovarian tumor and 100 (17.2%) had a malignant tumor. The SE and SP of CA125, HE4, ROMA score, RMI I, RMI IV, and ADNEX model were 0.60 (0.54-0.66) and 0.80 (0.76-0.83); 0.39 (0.30-0.49) and 0.96 (0.94-0.98); 0.59 (0.50-0.68) and 0.92 (0.88-0.95); 0.56 (0.46-0.65) and 0.98 (0.96-0.99); 0.54 (0.44-0.63) and 0.96 (0.94-0.98); 0.82 (0.73-0.88) and 0.91 (0.89-0.94), respectively. The overall AUC was 0.76 (0.74-0.79) for CA125, 0.81 (0.78-0.83) for HE4, 0.82 (0.80-0.85) for ROMA, 0.86 (0.84-0.88) for RMI I, 0.83 (0.81-0.86) for RMI IV, and 0.92 (0.90-0.94) for ADNEX. The NB for ADNEX was higher than other biomarkers and models across all decision thresholds between 5% and 50%.

CONCLUSIONS

The ADNEX model showed a better discrimination ability and clinical utility when differentiating malignant from benign Ams, compared to CA125, HE4, ROMA score, RMI I, and RMI IV.

Prospective external validation of IOTA methods for classifying adnexal masses and retrospective assessment of two-step strategy using benign descriptors and ADNEX model: Portuguese multicenter study

OBJECTIVES

To externally and prospectively validate the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Simple Rules (SRs), Logistic Regression model 2 (LR2) and Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model in a Portuguese population, comparing these approaches with subjective assessment and the risk-of-malignancy index (RMI), as well as with each other. This study also aimed to retrospectively validate the IOTA two-step strategy, using modified benign simple descriptors (MBDs) followed by the ADNEX model in cases in which MBDs were not applicable.

METHODS

This was a prospective multicenter diagnostic accuracy study conducted between January 2016 and December 2021 of consecutive patients with an ultrasound diagnosis of at least one adnexal tumor, who underwent surgery at one of three tertiary referral centers in Lisbon, Portugal. All ultrasound assessments were performed by Level-II or -III sonologists with IOTA certification. Patient clinical data and serum CA 125 levels were collected from hospital databases. Each adnexal mass was classified as benign or malignant using subjective assessment, RMI, IOTA SRs, LR2 and the ADNEX model (with and without CA 125). The reference standard was histopathological diagnosis. In the second phase, all adnexal tumors were classified retrospectively using the two-step strategy (MBDs + ADNEX). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, positive and negative likelihood ratios and overall accuracy were determined for all methods. Receiver-operating-characteristics curves were constructed and corresponding areas under the curve (AUC) were determined for RMI, LR2, the ADNEX model and the two-step strategy. The ADNEX model calibration plots were constructed using locally estimated scatterplot smoothing (LOESS).

RESULTS

Of the 571 patients included in the study, 428 had benign disease and 143 had malignant disease (prevalence of malignancy, 25.0%), of which 42 had borderline ovarian tumor, 93 had primary invasive adnexal cancer and eight had metastatic tumors in the adnexa. Subjective assessment had an overall sensitivity of 97.9% and a specificity of 83.6% for distinguishing between benign and malignant lesions. RMI showed high specificity (95.6%) but very low sensitivity (58.7%), with an AUC of 0.913. The IOTA SRs were applicable in 80.0% of patients, with a sensitivity of 94.8% and specificity of 98.6%. The IOTA LR2 had a sensitivity of 84.6%, specificity of 86.9% and an AUC of 0.939, at a malignancy risk cut-off of 10%. At the same cut-off, the sensitivity, specificity and AUC for the ADNEX model with vs without CA 125 were 95.8% vs 98.6%, 82.5% vs 79.7% and 0.962 vs 0.960, respectively. The ADNEX model gave heterogeneous results for distinguishing between benign masses and different subtypes of malignancy, with the highest AUC (0.991) for discriminating benign masses from primary invasive adnexal cancer Stages II-IV, and the lowest AUC (0.696) for discriminating primary invasive adnexal cancer Stage I from metastatic lesion in the adnexa. The calibration plot suggested underestimation of the risk by the ADNEX model compared with the observed proportion of malignancy. The MBDs were applicable in 26.3% (150/571) of cases, of which none was malignant. The two-step strategy using the ADNEX model in the second step only, with and without CA 125, had AUCs of 0.964 and 0.961, respectively, which was similar to applying the ADNEX model in all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The IOTA methods showed good-to-excellent performance in the Portuguese population, outperforming RMI. The ADNEX model was superior to other methods in terms of accuracy, but interpretation of its ability to distinguish between malignant subtypes was limited by sample size and large differences in the prevalence of tumor subtypes. The IOTA MBDs are reliable in identifying benign disease. The two-step strategy comprising application of MBDs followed by the ADNEX model if MBDs are not applicable, is suitable for daily clinical practice, circumventing the need to calculate the risk of malignancy in all patients. © 2024 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Adnexal Masses in Pregnancy: A Single-Centre Prospective Observational Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To prospectively determine the nature of adnexal masses diagnosed during pregnancy and investigate whether ultrasound was a reliable means of assessing these.

METHODS

A single-centre prospective observational cohort study was conducted in a large tertiary referral hospital in London. Pregnant women with an adnexal mass detected at or prior to the 12-week routine ultrasound received a detailed ultrasound by a level II ultrasound practitioner at the time of detection; at 12 weeks; 20 weeks; and 6 weeks postpartum. The following outcomes were recorded: subjective impression of the mass; International Ovarian Tumor Analysis simple rules classification; resolution and intervention rate; and the incidence of complications related to the mass.

RESULTS

A total of 28,683 pregnant patients were scanned and an adnexal masses was detected in 277 patients, yielding an incidence of 1%. 274 participants were included in the analysis. Subjective impression was as follows: simple 75.9%; dermoid 29.1%; endometrioma 6.6%; haemorrhagic 3.3%; para-ovarian 2.6%; torted simple 0.7%; decidualized endometrioma 0.4%; fibroma 0.4%; theca luteal 0.4%; and borderline ovarian tumour: 0.7%. There was a significant reduction in the volume at each scan (p < 0.0001). Approximately 74.2% of the masses resolved spontaneously. Surgery was performed in 14/274: 2 antenatally, 6 at caesarean section, and 6 postpartum. In 5/247 (2%), there were complications due to the mass. Using IOTA simple rules, 272/274 (99.3%) (p < 0.0001) were classifiable. Only 1/274 (0.4%) had malignant features as per IOTA (p = 0.05). As there were no confirmed malignancies, the accuracy of IOTA simple rules could not be calculated.

CONCLUSIONS

Adnexal masses in pregnancy are uncommon and the majority spontaneously resolve. Malignancy is rare, as are complications. In the absence of concerns regarding malignancy or cyst accident, there is no need for additional monitoring of these masses during pregnancy.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

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

IOTA simple rules: An efficient tool for evaluation of ovarian tumors by non-experienced but trained examiners - A prospective study

Objectives

A simple and efficient tool for evaluating ovarian tumors in general hospitals where radiologists without experience in gynecological ultrasound is necessary. This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic performance of IOTA simple rules in initial classification of ovarian tumors by non-experienced examiners who have received simple training.

Materials and method

A prospective single-center study was conducted at Hanoi Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital. Three resident gynecologists trained themselves for two weeks and then received hands-on practice under the supervision of experts for another two weeks. The examiners performed ultrasound on 424 eligible women scheduled for surgery for ovarian tumors and classified the tumors based on IOTA simple rules. The postoperative pathology of ovarian tumors was used as the gold standard.

Results

90.8 % (385/424) of the tumors were benign. Simple rules were applicable in 399/424 (94.1 %) tumors, with a sensitivity of 84.8 % (95 % CI, 70.2-94.3), specificity of 98.9 % (95 % CI, 97.5-99.7), positive predictive value of 87.5 % (95 % CI, 73.3-95.9), and negative predictive value of 98.6 % (95 % CI, 97.1-99.5). The sensitivity of IOTA simple rules was higher in postmenopausal women (91.7 % vs. 81.0 %), while the specificity was higher in premenopausal women (99.4 % vs. 95.8 %). Accuracy was 100 % in all ten pregnant women were assessed using these rules.

Conclusion

In conclusion, in the hands of non-expert examiners who were trained thoroughly, IOTA simple rules are a simple and efficient tool for clinical practice in centers where expert radiologists in gynecology are not always available. The training program is simple and could be applied widely in other clinical centers. Further studies are necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of the IOTA simple rules in assessing ovarian tumors among pregnant women.

Advantages and Limitations of Ultrasound as a Screening Test for Ovarian Cancer

Ovarian cancer (OC) is the seventh most common malignancy diagnosed among women, the eighth leading cause of cancer mortality globally, and the most common cause of death among all gynecological cancers. Even though recent advances in technology have allowed for more accurate radiological and laboratory diagnostic tests, approximately 60% of OC cases are diagnosed at an advanced stage. Given the high mortality rate of advanced stages of OC, early diagnosis remains the main prognostic factor. Our aim is to focus on the sonographic challenges in ovarian cancer screening and to highlight the importance of sonographic evaluation, the crucial role of the operator΄s experience, possible limitations in visibility, emphasizing the importance and the necessity of quality assurance protocols that health workers have to follow and finally increasing the positive predictive value. We also analyzed how ultrasound can be combined with biomarkers (ex. CA-125) so as to increase the sensitivity of early-stage OC detection or, in addition to the gold standard examination, the CT (Computed tomography) scan in OC follow-up. Improvements in the performance and consistency of ultrasound screening could reduce the need for repeated examinations and, mainly, ensure diagnostic accuracy. Finally, we refer to new very promising techniques such as liquid biopsies. Future attempts in order to improve screening should focus on the identification of features that are unique to OC and that are present in early-stage tumors.

Benign descriptors and ADNEX in two-step strategy to estimate risk of malignancy in ovarian tumors: retrospective validation in IOTA5 multicenter cohort

OBJECTIVE

Previous work has suggested that the ultrasound-based benign simple descriptors (BDs) can reliably exclude malignancy in a large proportion of women presenting with an adnexal mass. This study aimed to validate a modified version of the BDs and to validate a two-step strategy to estimate the risk of malignancy, in which the modified BDs are followed by the Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model if modified BDs do not apply.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis using data from the 2-year interim analysis of the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Phase-5 study, in which consecutive patients with at least one adnexal mass were recruited irrespective of subsequent management (conservative or surgery). The main outcome was classification of tumors as benign or malignant, based on histology or on clinical and ultrasound information during 1 year of follow-up. Multiple imputation was used when outcome based on follow-up was uncertain according to predefined criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 8519 patients were recruited at 36 centers between 2012 and 2015. We excluded patients who were already in follow-up at recruitment and all patients from 19 centers that did not fulfil our criteria for good-quality surgical and follow-up data, leaving 4905 patients across 17 centers for statistical analysis. Overall, 3441 (70%) tumors were benign, 978 (20%) malignant and 486 (10%) uncertain. The modified BDs were applicable in 1798/4905 (37%) tumors, of which 1786 (99.3%) were benign. The two-step strategy based on ADNEX without CA125 had an area under the receiver-operating-characteristics curve (AUC) of 0.94 (95% CI, 0.92-0.96). The risk of malignancy was slightly underestimated, but calibration varied between centers. A sensitivity analysis in which we expanded the definition of uncertain outcome resulted in 1419 (29%) tumors with uncertain outcome and an AUC of the two-step strategy without CA125 of 0.93 (95% CI, 0.91-0.95).

CONCLUSION

A large proportion of adnexal masses can be classified as benign by the modified BDs. For the remaining masses, the ADNEX model can be used to estimate the risk of malignancy. This two-step strategy is convenient for clinical use. © 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

The Value of IOTA Simple Rules Combined With CEUS Scoring System in the Diagnosis of Benign and Malignant Ovarian Masses and Its Correlation With MVD and VEGF: A Preliminary Study

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the diagnostic value of International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) simple rules combined with contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) scoring system in the differential diagnosis of ovarian tumors, and the correlations of the scoring system with microvessel density (MVD) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF).

METHODS

One hundred eighty-nine patients with ovarian tumors were examined by routine ultrasound and CEUS. The enhanced characteristics of CEUS were observed, and the masses were classified by IOTA simple rules. To compare the diagnostic value of IOTA simple rules combined with CEUS scoring system and IOTA simple rules in the diagnosis of ovarian tumors. Immunohistochemistry was used to detect the expression of MVD and VEGF in postoperative tissue samples. The correlations between the new scoring system with MVD and VEGF were analyzed.

RESULTS

The sensitivity (93.98%), specificity (94.34%), positive predictive value (92.86%), negative predictive value (95.24%), and accuracy (94.18%) of IOTA simple rules combined with CEUS scoring system in the diagnosis of ovarian tumors were higher than those of IOTA simple rules alone (all P < .05). The score system was significantly positively correlated with MVD and VEGF, and the r values were 0.77 and 0.63, respectively (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

IOTA simple rules combined with CEUS scoring system was helpful to improve the accuracy of ultrasound diagnosis of ovarian tumors, which was significantly correlated with MVD and VEGF. It could provide important reference information for treatment scheme formulation and prognosis evaluation.

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 nomogram model based on clinical markers for predicting malignancy of ovarian tumors

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to build a nomogram based on clinical markers for predicting the malignancy of ovarian tumors (OTs).

METHOD

A total of 1,268 patients diagnosed with OTs that were surgically removed between October 2017 and May 2019 were enrolled. Clinical markers such as post-menopausal status, body mass index (BMI), serum human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) value, cancer antigen 125 (CA125) value, Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) index, course of disease, patient-generated subjective global assessment (PG-SGA) score, ascites, and locations and features of masses were recorded and analyzed (p 0.05). Significant variables were further selected using multivariate logistic regression analysis and were included in the decision curve analysis (DCA) used to assess the value of the nomogram model for predicting OT malignancy.

RESULT

The significant variables included post-menopausal status, BMI, HE4 value, CA125 value, ROMA index, course of disease, PG-SGA score, ascites, and features and locations of masses (p 0.05). The ROMA index, BMI (≥ 26), unclear/blurred mass boundary (on magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]/computed tomography [CT]), mass detection (on MRI/CT), and mass size and features (on type B ultrasound [BUS]) were screened out for multivariate logistic regression analysis to assess the value of the nomogram model for predicting OT malignant risk (p 0.05). The DCA revealed that the net benefit of the nomogram's calculation model was superior to that of the CA125 value, HE4 value, and ROMA index for predicting OT malignancy.

CONCLUSION

We successfully tailored a nomogram model based on selected clinical markers which showed superior prognostic predictive accuracy compared with the use of the CA125, HE4, or ROMA index (that combines both HE and CA125 values) for predicting the malignancy of OT patients.

Ultrasonographic evaluation of ovarian mass for predicting malignancy in pregnant women

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to compare ultrasonographic ovarian mass scoring systems in pregnant women.

STUDY DESIGN

This multicenter study included women with an ovarian mass during pregnancy who were evaluated using ultrasound and underwent surgery in 11 referral hospitals. The ovarian mass was evaluated and scored using three different scoring systems(International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adnexa[IOTA ADNEX], Sassone, and Lerner). The final diagnosis was made histopathologically. Receiver operating characteristic(ROC) curves were generated for each scoring system.

RESULTS

During the study period, 236 pregnant women underwent surgery for an ovarian mass, including 223 women(94.5%) with a benign ovarian mass and 13 women(5.5%) with a malignant ovarian mass. Among 10 ultrasound image findings, six findings were different between benign and ovarian masses(maximal diameter of mass, maximal diameter of solid mass, wall thickness of mass, inner wall structure, thickness of septations, and papillarity). In all three scoring systems, the ovarian mass scores were significantly higher in malignant masses than in benign masses, with the highest area under the ROC curve(AUROC) in the Sassone scoring system(AUROC: 0.831 for Sassone, 0.710 for Lerner vs 0.709 for IOTA ADNEX; p < 0.05, between the Sassone and Lerner/ IOTA ADNEX). A combined model was developed with the six different ultrasound findings, and the AUROC of the combined model was 0.883(p = not significant between the combined model and Sassone).

CONCLUSION

In pregnant women, malignant ovarian tumors can be predicted with high accuracy using either the Sassone scoring system or the combined model.

ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE Consensus Statement on preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors

The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG), the International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) group and the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE) jointly developed clinically relevant and evidence-based statements on the preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors, including imaging techniques, biomarkers and prediction models. ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE nominated a multidisciplinary international group, including expert practising clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors and management of patients with ovarian cancer (19 experts across Europe). A patient representative was also included in the group. To ensure that the statements were evidence-based, the current literature was reviewed and critically appraised. Preliminary statements were drafted based on the review of the relevant literature. During a conference call, the whole group discussed each preliminary statement and a first round of voting was carried out. Statements were removed when consensus among group members was not obtained. The voters had the opportunity to provide comments/suggestions with their votes. The statements were then revised accordingly. Another round of voting was carried out according to the same rules to allow the whole group to evaluate the revised version of the statements. The group achieved consensus on 18 statements. This Consensus Statement presents these ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE statements on the preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors and the assessment of carcinomatosis, together with a summary of the evidence supporting each statement.

ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE Consensus Statement on pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian tumors

The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG), the International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) group, and the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE) jointly developed clinically relevant and evidence-based statements on the pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian tumors, including imaging techniques, biomarkers, and prediction models. ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE nominated a multidisciplinary international group, including expert practising clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian tumors and management of patients with ovarian cancer (19 experts across Europe). A patient representative was also included in the group. To ensure that the statements were evidence-based, the current literature was reviewed and critically appraised. Preliminary statements were drafted based on the review of the relevant literature. During a conference call, the whole group discussed each preliminary statement and a first round of voting was carried out. Statements were removed when a consensus among group members was not obtained. The voters had the opportunity to provide comments/suggestions with their votes. The statements were then revised accordingly. Another round of voting was carried out according to the same rules to allow the whole group to evaluate the revised version of the statements. The group achieved consensus on 18 statements. This Consensus Statement presents these ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE statements on the pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian tumors and the assessment of carcinomatosis, together with a summary of the evidence supporting each statement.

Comparison of the Diagnostic Performances of Ultrasound-Based Models for Predicting Malignancy in Patients With Adnexal Masses

AIM

This study aimed to compare different ultrasound-based International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) prediction models, namely, the Simple Rules (SRs) the Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) models, and the Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI), for the pre-operative diagnosis of adnexal mass.

METHODS

This single-centre diagnostic accuracy study involved 486 patients. All ultrasound examinations were analyzed and the prediction models were applied. Pathology was the clinical reference standard. The diagnostic performances of prediction models were measured by evaluating receiver-operating characteristic curves, sensitivities, specificities, positive and negative predictive values, positive and negative likelihood ratios, and diagnostic odds ratios.

RESULTS

To discriminate benign and malignant tumors, areas under the ROC curves (AUCs) for ADNEX models were 0.94 (95% CI: 0.92-0.96) with CA125 and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.91-0.96) without CA125, which were significantly higher than the AUCs for RMI I-III: 0.87 (95% CI: 0.83-0.90), 0.83 (95% CI: 0.80-0.86), and 0.82 (95% CI: 0.78-0.86), (all P < 0.0001). At a cut-off of 10%, the ADNEX model with CA125 had the highest sensitivity (0.93; 95% CI: 0.87-0.97) compared with the other models. The SRs model achieved a sensitivity of 0.93 (95% CI: 0.86-0.97) and a specificity of 0.86 (95% CI: 0.82-0.89) when inconclusive diagnoses (11.7%) were classified as malignant.

CONCLUSION

ADNEX and SRs models were excellent at characterising adnexal masses which were superior to the RMI in Chinese patients.

ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE Consensus Statement on preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumours

The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG), the International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) group and the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE) jointly developed clinically relevant and evidence-based statements on the preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumours, including imaging techniques, biomarkers and prediction models. ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE nominated a multidisciplinary international group, including expert practising clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumours and management of patients with ovarian cancer (19 experts across Europe). A patient representative was also included in the group. To ensure that the statements were evidence-based, the current literature was reviewed and critically appraised. Preliminary statements were drafted based on the review of the relevant literature. During a conference call, the whole group discussed each preliminary statement and a first round of voting was carried out. Statements were removed when a consensus among group members was not obtained. The voters had the opportunity to provide comments/suggestions with their votes. The statements were then revised accordingly. Another round of voting was carried out according to the same rules to allow the whole group to evaluate the revised version of the statements. The group achieved consensus on 18 statements. This Consensus Statement presents these ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE statements on the preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumours and the assessment of carcinomatosis, together with a summary of the evidence supporting each statement.

Direct access from general practice to transvaginal ultrasound for early detection of ovarian cancer: a feasibility study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the feasibility of providing general practitioners (GPs) direct and fast referral access to transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS).

DESIGN

A prospective cohort study.

SETTING

A total of 232 Danish general practices in parts of the Central Denmark Region.

SUBJECTS

Women aged ≥40 years who consulted their GP for vague and non-specific symptoms (n = 479).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The feasibility assessment included the GPs' referral rate, indications for referral, management of test results, and findings from TVUS.

RESULTS

A total of 479 women were referred to TVUS. The examinations revealed abnormalities in 104 (21.7%) women. Additional investigations were needed in 68 (14.2%) women of whom seven (1.5%) underwent major surgery. No case of ovarian cancer was diagnosed during the study period or the 6-month follow-up. However, three (0.6%) women with an abnormal transvaginal ultrasound were diagnosed with urogynecological cancer; this yielded a PPV of 4.4% (95% confidence interval: 1.5-12.2) and an NPV of 100.0% (95% confidence interval: 96.7-100.0) for urogynecological cancer.

CONCLUSION

Providing GPs with direct access to transvaginal ultrasound was feasible; 80% of the investigated women were referred back to the GP, 14% were further investigated, 0.6% were diagnosed with urogynecological cancer, and 1.5% had major procedures performed without complications.

IMPLICATIONS

Direct access to TVUS could be an important pathway to ensure fast evaluation of women presenting with vague non-specific symptoms of potential ovarian cancer. Future studies should explore the patient experience, cancer outcomes, and health economics issues.KEY POINTS   Current awareness  • GPs have no fast referral option for women presenting with vague non-specific symptoms that could indicate underlying ovarian cancer.   Key findings  • We offered GPs direct and fast referral access to TVUS; 51.7% of practices used the opportunity.  • The GPs referred 479 women to TVUS; 104 had an abnormal TVUS and 68 needed additional investigations.  • Seven women underwent major surgery, leading to three cases of urogynecological cancer. No woman had a false negative TVUS result.

Sonographic Assessment of Complex Ultrasound Morphology Adnexal Tumors in Pregnant Women with the Use of IOTA Simple Rules Risk and ADNEX Scoring Systems

Background: To evaluate the accuracy of subjective assessment (SA), the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) group Simple Rules Risk (SRR) and the Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model for the preoperative differentiation of adnexal masses in pregnant women. Methods: The study population comprised 36 pregnant women (median age: 28.5 years old, range: 20–42 years old) with a mean gestation age of 13.5 (range: 8–31) weeks at diagnosis. Tumors were prospectively classified by local sonographers as probably benign or probably malignant using SA. Final tumor histological diagnosis was used as the reference standard in all cases. Logistic regression SRR and ADNEX models were used to obtain a risk score for every case. Serum CA125 and human epidydimis protein 4 (HE4) concentrations were also retrieved and the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) value was calculated. The calculated predictive values included positive and negative likelihood ratios of ultrasound and biochemical tests. Results: Final histology confirmed 27 benign and 9 malignant (including 2 borderline) masses. The highest sensitivity (89%) and specificity (70%) were found for the subjective tumor assessment. Although no malignancy was classified as benign using the SRR criteria (sensitivity = 100%), the specificity of this scoring system was only 37%. At the cut-off risk level of >20%, the ADNEX model had a sensitivity of 78% and a specificity of 70%. Serum levels of CA125, HE4 and the ROMA risk model correctly identified adnexal malignant tumors with a sensitivity of 67%, 25% and 25%, respectively. Corresponding specificities were 72%, 100% and 100%, respectively. The highest positive and negative likelihood ratios were found for SA (LR+ = 3.0 and LR− = 0.16, respectively). Overall diagnostic accuracy of all predictive methods used in this study were similar (range: 70–75%) except for SRR (53%). Conclusion: Subjective assessment remains the best predictive method in complex adnexal masses found at prenatal ultrasound in pregnant women. For less experienced sonographers, both the SRR and ADNEX scoring systems may be also used for the characterization of such tumors, while serum tumor markers CA125 and HE4, along with the ROMA algorithm appear to be less accurate.

Performance Characteristics of the Ultrasound Strategy during Incidence Screening in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS)

Randomised controlled trials of ovarian cancer (OC) screening have not yet demonstrated an impact on disease mortality. Meanwhile, the screening data from clinical trials represents a rich resource to understand the performance of modalities used. We report here on incidence screening in the ultrasound arm of UKCTOCS. 44,799 of the 50,639 women who were randomised to annual screening with transvaginal ultrasound attended annual incidence screening between 28 April 2002 and 31 December 2011. Transvaginal ultrasound was used both as the first and the second line test. Participants were followed up through electronic health record linkage and postal questionnaires. Out of 280,534 annual incidence screens, 960 women underwent screen-positive surgery. 113 had ovarian/tubal cancer (80 invasive epithelial). Of the screen-detected invasive epithelial cancers, 37.5% (95% CI: 26.9-49.0) were Stage I/II. An additional 52 (50 invasive epithelial) were diagnosed within one year of their last screen. Of the 50 interval epithelial cancers, 6.0% (95% CI: 1.3-16.5) were Stage I/II. For detection of all ovarian/tubal cancers diagnosed within one year of screen, the sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive values were 68.5% (95% CI: 60.8-75.5), 99.7% (95% CI: 99.7-99.7), and 11.8% (95% CI: 9.8-14) respectively. When the analysis was restricted to invasive epithelial cancers, sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive values were 61.5% (95% CI: 52.6-69.9); 99.7% (95% CI: 99.7-99.7) and 8.3% (95% CI: 6.7-10.3), with 12 surgeries per screen positive. The low sensitivity coupled with the advanced stage of interval cancers suggests that ultrasound scanning as the first line test might not be suitable for population screening for ovarian cancer. Trial registration: ISRCTN22488978. Registered on 6 April 2000.

Diagnostic Added-Value of Serum CA-125 on the IOTA Simple Rules and Derivation of Practical Combined Prediction Models (IOTA SR X CA-125)

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic added-value of serum CA-125 to the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Simple Rules in order to facilitate differentiation between malignant and benign ovarian tumors before surgery. Methods: A secondary analysis of a cross-sectional cohort of women scheduled for surgery in Maharaj Nakorn Chiang Mai Hospital between April 2010 and March 2018 was carried out. Demographic and clinical data were prospectively collected. Histopathologic diagnosis was used as the reference standard. Logistic regression was used for development of the model. Evaluation of the diagnostic added-value was based on the increment of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AuROC). Results: One hundred and forty-five women (30.3%) out of a total of 479 with adnexal masses had malignant ovarian tumors. The model that included information from the IOTA Simple Rules and serum CA-125 was significantly more superior to the model that used only information from the IOTA Simple Rules (AuROC 0.95 vs. 0.89, p < 0.001 for pre-menopause and AuROC 0.98 vs 0.83, p < 0.001 for post-menopause). Conclusions: The IOTA SR X CA-125 model showed high discriminative ability and is potentially useful as a decision tool for guiding patient referrals to oncologic specialists.

Diagnostic accuracy of transvaginal ultrasound examination for assigning a specific diagnosis to adnexal masses: A meta-analysis

Transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS) is a standard imaging modality for differentiating patients with benign or malignant suspected adnexal mass. To date, numerous studies have assessed the diagnostic accuracy of TVUS in various settings but with variable results. Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of TVUS for the differentiation of adnexal masses. An electronic search in the Medline, Scopus, Cochrane and Embase databases from inception till November 2019 was carried out. Meta-analysis was performed to obtain pooled sensitivity and specificity of TVUS to distinguish malignant from benign adnexal masses. The quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies-2 tool was used to assess the quality of trials. A total of 41 studies with 18,391 patients were included. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of TVUS was 92% (95% CI: 90-94%) and 89% (95% CI: 85-92%), respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.96 (95% CI: 0.84-1.00). There was considerable heterogeneity with a statistically significant chi-square test (P<0.001) and I² of 99%. Meta-regression results indicated that index test standards, patient selection bias and study design were potential sources of heterogeneity (P<0.05). The funnel plot was symmetrical and low publication bias was confirmed by an insignificant Deek's test (P=0.90). The present systematic review and meta-analysis indicated that TVUS is useful in differentiating between benign and malignant tumours among patients with suspected adnexal mass with high sensitivity and specificity.

Predicting Malignancy in Adnexal Masses by the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis-Simple Rules

BACKGROUND

Accurate prediction of adnexal tumors preoperatively is critical for optimal management of ovarian cancers. The International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Algorithms (IOTA) is a newer tool to characterize adnexal masses as benign or malignant.

OBJECTIVE

This study is aimed to predict malignancy in adnexal masses and differentiates benign from malignant, applying the sonography features of simple rules given by IOTA.

METHODOLOGY

A prospective study was carried out at AIIMS Jodhpur for 1½ years. Women presenting with adnexal masses planned for surgery were recruited. Ultrasonography-transabdominal combined with transvaginal was done, and pelvic masses were characterized using IOTA simple rules. Patients underwent their planned surgery. Histopathology is considered the gold standard and was compared with the IOTA simple rules. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated.

RESULTS

One hundred and seventy-four women were included in the study, of which the majority (82.75%) were benign, the rest being frankly malignant or borderline cancer. The sensitivity of IOTA is 96.6%, specificity of 92.3%, PPV of 72.5%, NPV of 99.2%, where indeterminate cases were considered malignant.

CONCLUSION

IOTA simple rule is an effective tool for identifying malignant adnexal masses. It also suggests that IOTA-simple rules can be used as a diagnostic criterion for differentiating adnexal masses into benign and malignant on an out-patient department basis.

Validation of models to diagnose ovarian cancer in patients managed surgically or conservatively: multicentre cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the performance of diagnostic prediction models for ovarian malignancy in all patients with an ovarian mass managed surgically or conservatively.

DESIGN

Multicentre cohort study.

SETTING

36 oncology referral centres (tertiary centres with a specific gynaecological oncology unit) or other types of centre.

PARTICIPANTS

Consecutive adult patients presenting with an adnexal mass between January 2012 and March 2015 and managed by surgery or follow-up.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Overall and centre specific discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility of six prediction models for ovarian malignancy (risk of malignancy index (RMI), logistic regression model 2 (LR2), simple rules, simple rules risk model (SRRisk), assessment of different neoplasias in the adnexa (ADNEX) with or without CA125). ADNEX allows the risk of malignancy to be subdivided into risks of a borderline, stage I primary, stage II-IV primary, or secondary metastatic malignancy. The outcome was based on histology if patients underwent surgery, or on results of clinical and ultrasound follow-up at 12 (±2) months. Multiple imputation was used when outcome based on follow-up was uncertain.

RESULTS

The primary analysis included 17 centres that met strict quality criteria for surgical and follow-up data (5717 of all 8519 patients). 812 patients (14%) had a mass that was already in follow-up at study recruitment, therefore 4905 patients were included in the statistical analysis. The outcome was benign in 3441 (70%) patients and malignant in 978 (20%). Uncertain outcomes (486, 10%) were most often explained by limited follow-up information. The overall area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was highest for ADNEX with CA125 (0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.92 to 0.96), ADNEX without CA125 (0.94, 0.91 to 0.95) and SRRisk (0.94, 0.91 to 0.95), and lowest for RMI (0.89, 0.85 to 0.92). Calibration varied among centres for all models, however the ADNEX models and SRRisk were the best calibrated. Calibration of the estimated risks for the tumour subtypes was good for ADNEX irrespective of whether or not CA125 was included as a predictor. Overall clinical utility (net benefit) was highest for the ADNEX models and SRRisk, and lowest for RMI. For patients who received at least one follow-up scan (n=1958), overall area under the receiver operating characteristic curve ranged from 0.76 (95% confidence interval 0.66 to 0.84) for RMI to 0.89 (0.81 to 0.94) for ADNEX with CA125.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study found the ADNEX models and SRRisk are the best models to distinguish between benign and malignant masses in all patients presenting with an adnexal mass, including those managed conservatively.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01698632.

Performance of Selected Models for Predicting Malignancy in Ovarian Tumors in Relation to the Degree of Diagnostic Uncertainty by Subjective Assessment With Ultrasound

OBJECTIVES

The study's main aim was to evaluate the relationship between the performance of predictive models for differential diagnoses of ovarian tumors and levels of diagnostic confidence in subjective assessment (SA) with ultrasound. The second aim was to identify the parameters that differentiate between malignant and benign tumors among tumors initially diagnosed as uncertain by SA.

METHODS

The study included 250 (55%) benign ovarian masses and 201 (45%) malignant tumors. According to ultrasound findings, the tumors were divided into 6 groups: certainly benign, probably benign, uncertain but benign, uncertain but malignant, probably malignant, and certainly malignant. The performance of the risk of malignancy index, International Ovarian Tumor Analysis assessment of different neoplasias in the adnexa model, and International Ovarian Tumor Analysis logistic regression model 2 was analyzed in subgroups as follows: SA-certain tumors (including certainly benign and certainly malignant) versus SA-probable tumors (probably benign and probably malignant) versus SA-uncertain tumors (uncertain but benign and uncertain but malignant).

RESULTS

We found a progressive decrease in the performance of all models in association with the increased uncertainty in SA. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the risk of malignancy index, logistic regression model 2, and assessment of different neoplasias in the adnexa model decreased between the SA-certain and SA-uncertain groups by 20%, 28%, and 20%, respectively. The presence of solid parts and a high color score were the discriminatory features between uncertain but benign and uncertain but malignant tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies are needed that focus on the subgroup of ovarian tumors that are difficult to classify by SA. In cases of uncertain tumors by SA, the presence of solid components or a high color score should prompt a gynecologic oncology clinic referral.

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 International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Simple Rules to Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound Guidelines for Detection of Malignancy in Adnexal Cysts

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) simple rules and the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound (SRU) guidelines for detecting ovarian malignancy in a general population of women presenting to radiology departments with adnexal cystic lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A retrospective multicenter study of ultrasound-detected adnexal cystic lesions with appropriate follow-up was conducted. Lesions were classified into benign, indeterminate, or malignant categories according to criteria based on the IOTA simple rules and the SRU guidelines. The prevalence of nonneoplastic cysts, neoplasms, and malignant tumors was calculated. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were calculated, and ROC analysis for the diagnosis of malignancy was performed. RESULTS. A total of 697 women with 764 cystic lesions were included; 85.2% (651/764) of the lesions were nonneoplastic, 12.2% (93/764) were benign neoplasms, and 2.6% (20/764) were malignant neoplasms. Nearly all malignancies were classified into indeterminate and malignant categories. The prevalence of malignancy in the indeterminate category was 4.8% (7/145) (SRU) to 10.7% (7/65) (IOTA) and in the malignant category was 18.1% (13/72) (SRU) to 34.3% (12/35) (IOTA). Only one malignancy was misclassified as benign by the IOTA simple rules. The sensitivity of the IOTA simple rules for malignancy was 90.0%; specificity, 96.5%; PPV, 29.0%; NPV, 99.8%; and accuracy, 96.4%. The corresponding values for the SRU guidelines were 100%, 89.6%, 14.9%, 100%, and 89.8%. In ROC analysis, the IOTA simple rules were slightly more accurate than the SRU guidelines (AUC, 0.9805 versus 0.9713; p = 0.0003). CONCLUSION. Both imaging characterization methods were sensitive for identifying ovarian malignancies, but the PPV was low among women presenting to radiology departments, and the indeterminate classification harbored one-third of the total malignancies. Exploration of varied clinical settings and inclusion of secondary tests may help to refine these systems.

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.

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.

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.

Improved Detection Rate of Ovarian Cancer Using a 2-Step Triage Model of the Risk of Malignancy Index and Expert Sonography in an Outpatient Screening Setting

OBJECTIVE

Preoperative assessment of adnexal masses with ultrasound has been shown to be time-, cost-effective, and specific. When used in combination with the menopausal status and the tumor marker CA125, the risk of malignancy index (RMI) can be calculated, allowing appropriate preoperative triage of patients to a gynecologist or a gynecological oncologist. Moreover, it allows for accurate planning of the required surgical procedure (laparoscopy vs laparotomy).

METHODS

A large general gynecologic ultrasonic database retrospectively identified 5218 patients for a 14-year period who presented to the outpatient clinic with an adnexal mass. Additional data (menopausal status, histology, CA125 values) were available in 1108 of these patients. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were calculated. The results were then compared with previously published data from a large Australian gynecological cancer center (GCC, n = 204).

RESULTS

With the use of an RMI cutoff of 200, malignant ovarian tumors were correctly triaged to a gynecologic oncologist in 123 of 172 cases, leading to a sensitivity of 72% and specificity of 92% in our general outpatient clinic population compared with a sensitivity of 84% and a specificity of 77% in the GCC high-risk population. The negative predictive value was 95% compared with only 85% in the GCC cohort. We hypothesize that improvement of the overall detection rate of malignancy could be improved from 72% to 85% using a 2-step model, referring patients with an ultrasonic score of 3 to an experienced sonographer who uses pattern recognition.

CONCLUSIONS

The RMI is an easy and reliable tool for the accurate triage of adnexal masses. Its value is higher in an unselected gynecological outpatient setting. Our proposed 2-step model including expert pattern recognition could influence particularly the detection rate in borderline and early-stage ovarian cancers and overcome the limitations of the tumor marker CA125.

Diagnostic accuracy and cost-effectiveness of different strategies to triage women with adnexal masses: a prospective study

OBJECTIVE

Transvaginal sonography (TVS) and serum biomarkers are used widely in clinical practice to triage women with adnexal masses, but the effectiveness of current biomarkers is weak. The aim of this study was to determine the best method of diagnosing patients with adnexal masses, in terms of diagnostic accuracy and economic costs, among four triage strategies: (1) the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis group's simple rules (SR) for interpretation of TVS with subjective assessment (SA) by an experienced ultrasound operator when TVS results are inconclusive (referred to hereafter as SR ± SA), (2) SR ± SA and cancer antigen 125 (CA 125), (3) SR ± SA and human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) and (4) SR ± SA and the risk of malignancy algorithm (ROMA). Our main hypothesis was that the addition of the biomarkers to SR ± SA could improve triaging of these patients in terms of diagnostic accuracy (i.e. malignant vs benign). As secondary analyses, we estimated the cost effectiveness of the four strategies and the diagnostic accuracy of SR ± SA at the study hospitals.

METHODS

Between February 2013 and January 2015, 447 consecutive patients who were scheduled for surgery for an adnexal mass at the S. Anna and Mauriziano Hospitals in Turin were enrolled in this multicenter prospective cohort study. Preoperative TVS was performed and preoperative CA 125 and HE4 levels were measured. Pathology reports were used to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the four triage strategies and the cost of each strategy was calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 391 patients were included in the analysis: 57% (n = 221) were premenopausal and 43% (n = 170) were postmenopausal. The overall prevalence of malignancy was 21%. SR were conclusive in 89% of patients and thus did not require SA; the overall performance of SR ± SA showed a sensitivity of 82%, specificity of 92% and positive and negative predictive values and positive and negative likelihood ratios of 74%, 95%, 10.5 and 0.19, respectively. In premenopausal women, mean cost among the four triage strategies varied from €36.41 for SR ± SA to €70.12 for SR ± SA + ROMA. The addition of biomarkers to SR ± SA showed no diagnostic advantage compared with SR ± SA alone and was more costly. Among postmenopausal women, mean cost among the four triage strategies varied from €39.52 for SR ± SA to €73.23 for SR ± SA + ROMA. Among these women, SR ± SA + CA 125 and SR ± SA + ROMA had a higher sensitivity (both 92% (95% CI, 85-99%)) than SR ± SA (81% (95% CI, 71-91%)), but SR ± SA had a higher specificity (84% (95% CI, 77-91%)). SR ± SA + CA 125 and SR ± SA + ROMA improved diagnostic accuracy, each diagnosing a third more malignant adnexal masses. In postmenopausal women, compared with SR ± SA alone, SR ± SA + CA 125 showed a net reclassification improvement (NRI) of 28.8% at an extra cost of €13.00, while the extra cost for SR ± SA + ROMA was €33.71, with a comparable gain, in terms of NRI, as that of SR ± SA + CA 125.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study sample, SR ± SA seems to be the best strategy to triage women with adnexal masses for surgical management. Among postmenopausal women, SR ± SA + CA 125 increased the NRI at a reasonable extra cost. Our data do not justify the use of HE4 and ROMA in the initial triage of women with adnexal masses. Copyright © 2016 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Validation of the Performance of International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Methods in the Diagnosis of Early Stage Ovarian Cancer in a Non-Screening Population

Background: The aim of this study was to assess and compare the performance of different ultrasound-based International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) strategies and subjective assessment for the diagnosis of early stage ovarian malignancy. Methods: This is a secondary analysis of a prospective multicenter cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study that included 1653 patients recruited at 18 centers from 2009 to 2012. All patients underwent standardized transvaginal ultrasonography by experienced ultrasound investigators. We assessed test performance of the IOTA Simple Rules (SRs), Simple Rules Risk (SRR), the Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model and subjective assessment to discriminate between stage I-II ovarian cancer and benign disease. Reference standard was histology after surgery. Results: 230 (13.9%) patients proved to have stage I–II primary invasive ovarian malignancy, and 1423 (86.1%) had benign disease. Sensitivity and specificity with respect to malignancy (95% confidence intervals) of the original SRs (classifying all inconclusive cases as malignant) were 94.3% (90.6% to 96.7%) and 73.4% (71.0% to 75.6%). Subjective assessment had a sensitivity and specificity of 90.0% (85.4% to 93.2%) and 86.7% (84.9% to 88.4%), respectively. The areas under the receiver operator characteristic curves of SRR and ADNEX were 0.917 (0.902 to 0.933) and 0.905 (0.920 to 0.934), respectively. At a 1% risk cut-off, sensitivity and specificity for SRR were 100% (98.4% to 100%) and 38.0% (35.5% to 40.6%), and for ADNEX were 100% (98.4% to 100%) and 19.4% (17.4% to 21.5%). At a 30% risk cut-off, sensitivity and specificity for SRR were 88.3% (83.5% to 91.8%) and 81.1% (79% to 83%), and for ADNEX were 84.5% (80.5% to 89.6%) and 84.5% (82.6% to 86.3%). Conclusion: This study shows that all three IOTA strategies have good ability to discriminate between stage I-II ovarian malignancy and benign disease.

Clinical Utility of Risk Models to Refer Patients with Adnexal Masses to Specialized Oncology Care: Multicenter External Validation Using Decision Curve Analysis

Purpose: To evaluate the utility of preoperative diagnostic models for ovarian cancer based on ultrasound and/or biomarkers for referring patients to specialized oncology care. The investigated models were RMI, ROMA, and 3 models from the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) group [LR2, ADNEX, and the Simple Rules risk score (SRRisk)].Experimental Design: A secondary analysis of prospectively collected data from 2 cross-sectional cohort studies was performed to externally validate diagnostic models. A total of 2,763 patients (2,403 in dataset 1 and 360 in dataset 2) from 18 centers (11 oncology centers and 7 nononcology hospitals) in 6 countries participated. Excised tissue was histologically classified as benign or malignant. The clinical utility of the preoperative diagnostic models was assessed with net benefit (NB) at a range of risk thresholds (5%-50% risk of malignancy) to refer patients to specialized oncology care. We visualized results with decision curves and generated bootstrap confidence intervals.Results: The prevalence of malignancy was 41% in dataset 1 and 40% in dataset 2. For thresholds up to 10% to 15%, RMI and ROMA had a lower NB than referring all patients. SRRisks and ADNEX demonstrated the highest NB. At a threshold of 20%, the NBs of ADNEX, SRrisks, and RMI were 0.348, 0.350, and 0.270, respectively. Results by menopausal status and type of center (oncology vs. nononcology) were similar.Conclusions: All tested IOTA methods, especially ADNEX and SRRisks, are clinically more useful than RMI and ROMA to select patients with adnexal masses for specialized oncology care. Clin Cancer Res; 23(17); 5082-90. ©2017 AACR.

Clinical Use of Cancer Biomarkers in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: Updated Guidelines From the European Group on Tumor Markers

To present an update of the European Group on Tumor Markers guidelines for serum markers in epithelial ovarian cancer.

Diagnostic Accuracy of B-mode USG and Doppler Scan for Ovarian Lesions

INTRODUCTION

Ultrasonography (USG) is considered as the primary imaging modality for confirmation of ovarian mass and to differentiate them in to benign or malignant.

AIM

The present study was conducted with the aim to evaluate accuracy of B- mode USG and Doppler scan (Colour Doppler + Spectral Doppler) for ovarian lesions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The patients included in the study were from those referred with either palpable adnexal mass or incidentally detected adnexal masses. Total 250 women were evaluated by USG, Doppler scan. Only fifty patients who had true ovarian mass intraoperatively and on histopathology were included in study, rest masses were excluded. Study parameters were morphological indexing on B- Mode USG, flow study, vessel arrangement, and vessel morphology and vessel location in Colour Doppler and resistive index and pulsatility index in spectral Doppler.

RESULTS

Total 50 women were included in present study. Out of these 46% were pre-menopausal while 54% were menopaused women, 66.7% of post-menopausal women had malignant ovarian masses compared to 8.7% of premenopausal. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of B-Mode USG for ovarian masses were 94.44%, 48.15%, 54.84% and 92.86% respectively, with p-value = 0.007, while sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of Doppler scan were 85%, 90%, 85% and 90% respectively, with p-value = 0.0001.

CONCLUSION

USG and its different techniques are accepted as the primary imaging modality for early stage diagnosis of an ovarian malignancy. Statistical analysis suggests that Doppler Scan (Colour + Spectral) was more accurate (88%) than B-Mode USG (67%), but author is in view that both of these modalities should be used in conjunction to screen the ovarian lesions.

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.

Can we predict detrusor overactivity in women with lower urinary tract symptoms? The King's Detrusor Overactivity Score (KiDOS)

OBJECTIVE

Traditionally, urodynamic studies (UDS) have been used to assess lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), but their routine use is now discouraged. While urodynamic stress incontinence is strongly associated with the symptom of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and a positive cough test, there is a weak relationship between symptoms of overactive bladder and detrusor overactivity (DO). The aim of our study was to develop a model to predict DO in women with LUTS.

STUDY DESIGN

This prospective study included consecutive women with LUTS attending a urodynamic clinic. All women underwent a comprehensive clinical and urodynamic assessment. The effect of each variable on the odds of DO was estimated both by univariate analysis and adjusted analysis using logistic regression.

RESULTS

1006 women with LUTS were included in the study with 374 patients (37%) diagnosed with DO. The factors considered to be the best predictors of DO were urgency urinary incontinence, urge rating/void and parity (p-value<0.01). The absence of SUI, vaginal bulging and previous continence surgery were also good predictors of DO (p-value<0.01). We have created a prediction model for DO based on our best predictors. In our scoring system, presence of UUI scores 5; mean urge rating/void≥3 scores 3; parity≥2 scores 2; previous continence surgery scores -1; presence of SUI scores -1; and the complaint of vaginal bulging scores -1. If a criterion is absent, then the score is 0 and the total score can vary from a value of -3 to +10. The Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis for the overall cut-off points revealed an area under the curve of 0.748 (95%CI 0.741, 0.755).

CONCLUSION

This model is able to predict DO more accurately than a symptomatic diagnosis alone, in women with LUTS. The introduction of this scoring system as a screening tool into clinical practice may reduce the need for expensive and invasive tests to diagnose DO, but cannot replace UDS completely.

Past, present and future ultrasonographic techniques for analyzing ovarian masses

Ultrasonography is today the method of choice for distinguishing between benign and malignant adnexal pathologies. Using pattern recognition several types of tumors can be recognized according to their characteristic appearance on gray-scale imaging. Color Doppler imaging should be used only to perform a semiquantitative color score or evaluate the flow location. International Ovarian Tumor Analysis group had standardized definitions characterizing adnexal masses and suggested the use of 'simple rules' in premenopausal women. Recently, the use of 3D vascular indices has been proposed but its potential use in clinical practice is debated. Also computerized aided diagnosis algorithms showed encouraging results to be confirmed in the future.

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.

Performance of the Risk of Malignancy Index for Discriminating Malignant Tumors in Women With Adnexal Masses

OBJECTIVES

We examined the performance of 4 risk of malignancy index (RMI) variants in a medium-resource gynecologic cancer center.

METHODS

A total of 158 women referred for adnexal masses were evaluated before surgery by the 4 RMI variants. Physicians with varied experience in ultrasound assessment of adnexal masses performed ultrasound examinations. We compared the performance of the 4 RMI variants using receiver operating characteristic curve analyses followed by calculation of sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios using the pathologic diagnosis of the masses as the reference standard.

RESULTS

Among the 158 women with adnexal masses included in this study, 51 (32%) had malignant tumors; 26 (51%) of them were stage I. All RMI variants performed similarly (accuracy range, 74%-83%), regardless of menopausal status. Considering all women included, the positive likelihood ratios of the 4 RMI variants ranged from 3.52 to 4.41. In subset analyses, all RMI variants had decreased sensitivity for stage I malignant tumors and for those of nonepithelial histologic types.

CONCLUSIONS

The 4 RMI variants performed acceptably in a medium-resource setting where ultrasound examiners were physicians with varied experience. This finding indicates a good tradeoff between performance and feasibility, since ultrasound RMI protocols are of low complexity.

Clinical Use of Cancer Biomarkers in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: Updated Guidelines From the European Group on Tumor Markers

OBJECTIVE

To present an update of the European Group on Tumor Markers guidelines for serum markers in epithelial ovarian cancer.

METHODS

Systematic literature survey from 2008 to 2013. The articles were evaluated by level of evidence and strength of recommendation.

RESULTS

Because of its low sensitivity (50-62% for early stage epithelial ovarian cancer) and limited specificity (94-98.5%), cancer antigen (CA) 125 (CA125) is not recommended as a screening test in asymptomatic women. The Risk of Malignancy Index, which includes CA125, transvaginal ultrasound, and menopausal status, is recommended for the differential diagnosis of a pelvic mass. Because human epididymis protein 4 has been reported to have superior specificity to CA125, especially in premenopausal women, it may be considered either alone or as part of the risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm, in the differential diagnosis of pelvic masses, especially in such women. CA125 should be used to monitor response to first-line chemotherapy using the previously published criteria of the Gynecological Cancer Intergroup, that is, at least a 50% reduction of a pretreatment sample of 70 kU/L or greater. The value of CA125 in posttherapy surveillance is less clear. Although a prospective randomized trial concluded that early administration of chemotherapy based on increasing CA125 levels had no effect on survival, European Group on Tumor Markers state that monitoring with CA125 in this situation should occur, especially if the patient is a candidate for secondary cytoreductive surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

At present, CA125 remains the most important biomarker for epithelial ovarian cancer, excluding tumors of mucinous origin.