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

The International Ovarian Tumor Analysis-Assessment of Different Neoplasias in the Adnexa (IOTA-ADNEX) Model Assessment for Risk of Ovarian Malignancy in Adnexal Masses

Ovarian cancers are one of the major leading causes of death across the world. In addition to many challenges to diagnose the disease, it is also hard to predict the type of cancer with effective tools and technology. Many attempts have been made to diagnose ovarian malignancies using ultrasonography, MRI, and CT scans, but seldom will they give the clinician a clear understanding of cancer's type and stage. It is of utmost importance to understand the mass peri-operatively, which will help the clinicians to decide on the course of management mortality. With technological advancements, many predictive models have come into the picture. Many of those were dependent on the Serum CA-125 markers. With ultrasonography machine usage, the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) group has developed a Simple Rules model, Logistic Regression (LR) models, and, most recently, the IOTA-assessment of different neoplasias in the adnexa (IOTA-ADNEX) model. It has been found to be effective and reliable among all the tools developed in the past. The ADNEX predicts the type of cancer (benign or malignant) and stages of cancer (borderline, Stage I, Stages II-IV, and secondary metastatic). These models can be used for people who are coming with persistent adnexal masses in the ovarian region, para ovarian region, or in the tubes and are recommended for the surgeries. The model is developed by a team of clinicians and statisticians, based on ultrasound and clinical data. This article reviews the IOTA-ADNEX model as a tool for predicting ovarian malignancies in people coming with adnexal masses, especially in comparison with other methods and models. It also tests its effectiveness in the hands of experienced technicians and non-expert technicians.

The contribution and perspectives of proteomics to uncover ovarian cancer tumor markers

Despite all the advances in understanding the mechanisms involved in ovarian cancer (OC) development, many aspects still need to be unraveled and understood. Tumor markers (TMs) are of special interest in this disease. Some aspects of clinical management of OC might be improved by the use of validated TMs, such as differentiating subtypes, defining the most appropriate treatment, monitoring the course of the disease, or predicting clinical outcome. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved a few TMs for OC: CA125 (cancer antigen 125; monitoring), HE4 (Human epididymis protein; monitoring), ROMA (Risk Of Malignancy Algorithm; HE4+CA125; prediction of malignancy) and OVA1 (Vermillion's first-generation Multivariate Index Assay [MIA]; prediction of malignancy). Proteomics can help advance the research in the field of TMs for OC. A variety of biological materials are being used in proteomic analysis, among them tumor tissues, interstitial fluids, tumor fluids, ascites, plasma, and ovarian cancer cell lines. However, the discovery and validation of new TMs for OC is still very challenging. The enormous heterogeneity of histological types of samples and the individual variability of patients (lifestyle, comorbidities, drug use, and family history) are difficult to overcome in research protocols. In this work, we sought to gather relevant information regarding TMs, OC, biological samples for proteomic analysis, as well as markers and algorithms approved by the FDA for use in clinical routine.

A prospective study to evaluate the risk malignancy index and its diagnostic implication in patients with suspected ovarian mass

Background

There is no universal screening method for discrimination between benign and malignant adnexal masses yet. Various authors have tried tumor markers, imaging studies, cytology but no one yet is a definite method for screening of cancer ovary, for which a combined diagnostic modality has come to practice in form of RMI. With this background we conducted our study “Evaluation of risk malignancy index and its diagnostic value in patients with adnexal masses”.

Methods

The aim of the study was to determine the effectiveness of risk of malignancy index (RMI-3) in preoperative discrimination between benign and malignant masses and also to reveal the most suitable cut off value. We have conducted a prospective study between November 2014 to October 2016. We included the parameters like menopausal status, ultrasound features, and serum levels of tumor marker like CA-125 for calculating RMI 3. Then RMI was compared with the histopathological report which was taken as gold standard.

Results

In the present study malignant tumors constitute 54.76% (69/126) & benign tumors 45.24% (57/126). Bilaterality in adnexal masses and multilocularity is higher in malignant tumors than benign tumor, but a P –value >0.005 failed to be proved significant in our study. Solid area is seen in 24.69% (20/81) of benign and 75.30% (61/81) of malignant tumor. Similarly ascites was found in 38.09% (48/126) of cases. Out of which 18.75% (9/48) cases were found to be benign and malignancy was confirmed in 81.25% (39/48) patients. There is statistically significant number of malignant ovarian cancer patients where ascites and solid area is seen in USG findings (p = 0.000). Risk of Malignancy Index compared with individual parameters of Ultrasound score, CA-125 or menopausal score and a cut-off point of 236 shows a very high sensitivity (72.5%), specificity (98.2%), positive predictive value (98.1%), negative predictive value (74.7%) and diagnostic accuracy (84.13%) for discriminating malignant and benign pelvic masses.

Conclusion

Simplicity and applicability of the method in the primary evaluation of patients with pelvic masses makes it a good option in daily clinical practice in non-specialized gynecologic departments and also in developing countries where access to a gynaecologist oncologist is limited.

Current clinical application of serum biomarkers to detect ovarian cancer

For the last decades, hundreds of potential serum biomarkers have been assessed in diagnosing of ovarian cancer including the wide spectrum of cytokines, growth factors, adhesion molecules, proteases, hormones, coagulation factors, acute phase reactants, and apoptosis factors but except CA125 none of them have been applied to everyday clinical practice. Nowadays, the growing number of evidence suggests that the classic marker CA125 should be accompanied by HE4 and in fact, Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) is becoming more and more widespread in clinical practice for the evaluation of adnexal masses. Early ovarian cancer is often asymptomatic, so the challenge still exists to develop serum markers suitable for early diagnosis and screening. Current knowledge strongly points to different mechanisms of pathogenesis, genetic disturbances and clinical course of major histological subtypes of ovarian cancer. Thus, future biomarker/multimarker panels should take into consideration the implications of different molecular patterns and biological behavior of various subtypes of ovarian cancer. Very promising are studies on miRNAs – small non-protein coding gene-regulatory RNA molecules functionally involved in the pathogenesis of cancers acting as oncogenes (oncomirs) or tumor suppressors. The studies devoted to ovarian cancer tissue miRNA profiling have shown that miRNAs could be useful in diagnosing and predicting the OC outcome. They also confirmed that OC is a highly heterogeneous disease, gathering four distinct histological tumor subtypes characterized not only by distinct origin, behavior and response to chemotherapy but also by different patterns of miRNA expression.

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

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

Criteria for selection of laparoscopy for women with adnexal mass

Objectives:

We compared the indication of laparoscopy for treatment of adnexal masses based on the risk scores and tumor diameters with the indication based on gynecology-oncologists' experience.

Methods:

This was a prospective study of 174 women who underwent surgery for adnexal tumors (116 laparotomies, 58 laparoscopies). The surgeries begun and completed by laparoscopy, with benign pathologic diagnosis, were considered successful. Laparoscopic surgeries that required conversion to laparotomy, led to a malignant diagnosis, or facilitated cyst rupture were considered failures. Two groups were defined for laparoscopy indication: (1) absence of American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG) guideline for referral of high-risk adnexal masses criteria (ACOG negative) associated with 3 different tumor sizes (10, 12, and 14 cm); and (2) Index of Risk of Malignancy (IRM) with cutoffs at 100, 200, and 300, associated with the same 3 tumor sizes. Both groups were compared with the indication based on the surgeon's experience to verify whether the selection based on strict rules would improve the rate of successful laparoscopy.

Results:

ACOG-negative and tumors ≤10 cm and IRM with a cutoff at 300 points and tumors ≤10cm resulted in the same best performance (78% success = 38/49 laparoscopies). However, compared with the results of the gynecology-oncologists' experience, those were not statistically significant.

Discussion:

The selection of patients with adnexal mass to laparoscopy by the use of the ACOG guideline or IRM associated with tumor diameter had similar performance as the experience of gynecology-oncologists. Both methods are reproducible and easy to apply to all women with adnexal masses and could be used by general gynecologists to select women for laparoscopic surgery; however, referral to a gynecology-oncologist is advisable when there is any doubt.

Discovery of specific metastasis-related N-glycan alterations in epithelial ovarian cancer based on quantitative glycomics

Generally, most of ovarian cancer cannot be detected until large scale and remote metastasis occurs, which is the major cause of high mortality in ovarian cancer. Therefore, it is urgent to discover metastasis-related biomarkers for the detection of ovarian cancer in its occult metastasis stage. Altered glycosylation is a universal feature of malignancy and certain types of glycan structures are well-known markers for tumor progressions. Thus, this study aimed to reveal specific changes of N-glycans in the secretome of the metastatic ovarian cancer. We employed a quantitative glycomics approach based on metabolic stable isotope labeling to compare the differential N-glycosylation of secretome between an ovarian cancer cell line SKOV3 and its high metastatic derivative SKOV3-ip. Intriguingly, among total 17 N-glycans identified, the N-glycans with bisecting GlcNAc were all significantly decreased in SKOV3-ip in comparison to SKOV3. This alteration in bisecting GlcNAc glycoforms as well as its corresponding association with ovarian cancer metastatic behavior was further validated at the glycotransferase level with multiple techniques including real-time PCR, western blotting, transwell assay, lectin blotting and immunohistochemistry analysis. This study illustrated metastasis-related N-glycan alterations in ovarian cancer secretome in vitro for the first time, which is a valuable source for biomarker discovery as well. Moreover, N-glycans with bisecting GlcNAc shed light on the detection of ovarian cancer in early peritoneal metastasis stage which may accordingly improve the prognosis of ovarian cancer patients.

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

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

Ultrasound criteria and CA 125 as predictive variables of ovarian cancer in women with adnexal tumors

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the capacity to predict malignancy in women with adnexal tumors using CA 125 measurement and ultrasound criteria.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study including 103 women with a total of 110 adnexal tumors. CA 125 level was measured in a sample of peripheral blood. Lesions were classified by ultrasound, using standardized predetermined criteria, as benign (B) or malignant (M). Those that could not be classified by these criteria were assessed subjectively. Histopathologic examination of surgical specimens was used as the gold standard.

RESULTS

Of 110 tumors, 79 (71.8%) were benign and 31 (28.2%) were malignant on histopathology. Ultrasound criteria could be applied to 91 (82.7%) tumors, resulting in a sensitivity of 90%, specificity of 87%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 69% and negative predictive value (NPV) of 97%. In tumors not classifiable according to ultrasound criteria, subjective sonographic assessment gave a sensitivity of 67%, specificity of 80%, PPV of 75% and NPV of 73%. At a cut-off point of 37.4 U/mL, CA 125 had a sensitivity of 69%, a specificity of 87.8%, a PPV of 69% and a NPV of 88% for detection of malignancy. When CA 125 was associated with age and ultrasound criteria in a logistic regression model, the sensitivity and specificity increased in the subset of sonographically malignant tumors.

CONCLUSION

The majority of tumors were correctly classified using ultrasound criteria. CA 125 alone performed worse than did ultrasound in discriminating malignant from benign adnexal tumors. CA 125 measurement contributed to the diagnosis of malignancy, improving overall specificity, only in sonographically malignant tumors.

Management of a suspicious adnexal mass: a clinical practice guideline

QUESTIONS

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

PERSPECTIVES

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

OUTCOMES

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

METHODOLOGY

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

PRACTICE GUIDELINE

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

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

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

Preoperative evaluation and triage of women with suspicious adnexal masses using risk of malignancy index

AIMS

To test the accuracy of risk of malignancy index (RMI) in preoperative prediction of malignancy and treatment of adnexal masses.

METHODS

A total of 302 women with ultrasound diagnosed adnexal masses, and serum measurement of cancer-associated antigen CA-125 levels, were studied. They all had surgical exploration between October 2001 and September 2005 at the Friedrich-Alexander University Women's Hospital, Erlangen, Germany. The RMI was based on menopausal status, ultrasound morphology of adnexal masses and absolute level of serum CA-125. A cut-off of 250 was chosen as the threshold for determining the type of surgical operations (laparotomy versus laparoscopy) and the skill of the surgeons (gynecological oncologist versus general gynecologist). The data obtained were analyzed for baseline characteristics using chi(2) test and analysis of variance (ANOVA). P < 0.05 were statistically significant. The various testing methods were evaluated for sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values.

RESULTS

The best individual performance was found in RMI at a cut-off of 250 with a sensitivity of 88.2%, specificity of 74.3%, positive predictive value of 71.3% and negative predictive value of 90%. When RMI was used to triage patient treatment, 81.5% of patients who had laparoscopy had histological diagnosis of benign ovarian tumor and 7.5% had malignant tumor. In contrast, 74.4% of patients who had laparotomy had histological diagnosis of malignant ovarian tumor and 16% had benign tumor.

CONCLUSION

Risk of malignant index is a reliable, cheap, readily available and cost-effective method of preoperative discrimination of benign from malignant adnexal masses. It is also helpful in triaging patients to different treatment groups.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

DATA SOURCES

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

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

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

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

The risk of malignancy index in discrimination of adnexal masses

OBJECTIVE

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

METHOD

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Tumeurs de l'ovaire et CA 125 en 2006

The authors propose to report progress on the use of the CA 125 serum assay. It affects three situations: screening, diagnosis and the follow-up of the patients dealt with ovarian tumour either of benign or malignant nature. For each situation the interest and the relevance of CA 125 assay will be approached.