Gynecologic oncologists involvement on ovarian cancer standard of care receipt and survival

Executive Summary of the Ovarian Cancer Evidence Review Conference

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention awarded funding to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists to develop educational materials for clinicians on gynecologic cancers. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists convened a panel of experts in evidence review from the Society for Academic Specialists in General Obstetrics and Gynecology and content experts from the Society of Gynecologic Oncology to review relevant literature, best practices, and existing practice guidelines as a first step toward developing evidence-based educational materials for women's health care clinicians about ovarian cancer. Panel members conducted structured literature reviews, which were then reviewed by other panel members and discussed at a virtual meeting of stakeholder professional and patient advocacy organizations in February 2022. This article is the executive summary of the relevant literature and existing recommendations to guide clinicians in the prevention, early diagnosis, and special considerations of ovarian cancer. Substantive knowledge gaps are noted and summarized to provide guidance for future research.

Current Issues in the Management of Patients With Newly Diagnosed Advanced-Stage High-Grade Serous Carcinoma of the Ovary

Ovarian cancer is the most common cause of mortality in patients with gynecologic malignancies. Advanced-stage high-grade serous carcinoma accounts for most ovarian cancer cases. Current issues in the management of patients with newly diagnosed advanced-stage high-grade serous ovarian cancer include decisions on primary versus interval cytoreduction, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, maintenance therapy, incorporation of bevacizumab, and germline and somatic genetic testing. Evidence and guidelines regarding these topics are addressed in this review.

Healthcare Access Domains Mediate Racial Disparities in Ovarian Cancer Treatment Quality in a US Patient Cohort: A Structural Equation Modelling Analysis

BACKGROUND

Ovarian cancer survival disparities have persisted for decades, driven by lack of access to quality treatment. We conducted structural equation modeling (SEM) to define latent variables representing three healthcare access (HCA) domains: affordability, availability, and accessibility, and evaluated the direct and indirect associations between race and ovarian cancer treatment mediated through the HCA domains.

METHODS

Patients with ovarian cancer ages 65 years or older diagnosed between 2008 and 2015 were identified from the SEER-Medicare dataset. Generalized SEM was used to estimate latent variables representing HCA domains by race in relation to two measures of ovarian cancer-treatment quality: gynecologic oncology consultation and receipt of any ovarian cancer surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 8,987 patients with ovarian cancer were included in the analysis; 7% were Black. The affordability [Ω: 0.876; average variance extracted (AVE) = 0.689], availability (Ω: 0.848; AVE = 0.636), and accessibility (Ω: 0.798; AVE = 0.634) latent variables showed high composite reliability in SEM analysis. Black patients had lower affordability and availability, but higher accessibility compared with non-Black patients. In fully adjusted models, there was no direct effect observed between Black race to receipt of surgery [β: -0.044; 95% confidence interval (CI), -0.264 to 0.149]; however, there was an inverse total effect (β: -0.243; 95% CI, -0.079 to -0.011) that was driven by HCA affordability (β: -0.025; 95% CI, -0.036 to -0.013), as well as pathways that included availability and consultation with a gynecologist oncologist.

CONCLUSIONS

Racial differences in ovarian cancer treatment appear to be driven by latent variables representing healthcare affordability, availability, and accessibility.

IMPACT

Strategies to mitigate disparities in multiple HCA domains will be transformative in advancing equity in cancer treatment.

Rationale and Methodologic Approach for Assessing Ovarian Cancer Treatment and Gynecologic Oncologist Involvement in the Midwest Region of the United States

Introduction

A study was conducted to examine treatment patterns and outcomes among women with a primary ovarian cancer diagnosis in the Midwest region of the United States, an area that has relatively fewer gynecologic oncologists (GOs) and diverse geography with respect to urban and rural areas. In this paper, we examine the methodology of working with central cancer registries (CCRs) to collect additional data items, including those related to GO involvement and detailed treatment.

Methods

Westat recruited 3 state CCRs from the Midwest to participate in the study. Cases were randomly selected from 2010-2012 ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer diagnoses in participating registry databases that met the selection criteria. CCRs abstracted additional information for selected cases, including study-specific data items regarding surgery and chemotherapy, GO involvement, and recurrence, where applicable.

Results

Abstracts with study-specific data items were collected among a total of 1,003 incidence ovarian cancer cases, with 432 additional abstracts for those cases identified as having recurrence. Variables with the highest frequency of unknowns were mostly for patients who had chemotherapy. While data were available for whether the patient received chemotherapy, the specifics about that chemotherapy were not always available, with dosing and unit being unknown in 27% of cases. There were several challenges with initiating and completing this study associated with recruitment, the data collection timeline, and the collection of study-specific data items.

Conclusion

This paper outlines the methodologic approach and experience of collecting additional surgical and chemotherapy treatment variables and data on GO involvement in care from medical records. Experiences from this study provide critical lessons that can be applied to future data collection in this area. Ultimately, the accurate collection of these elements enables researchers to identify groups of women who are not receiving the benefit of optimal surgery or GO care and provides critical data on interventions for improved outcomes and survival in ovarian cancer patients.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02781272.

FUNDING SOURCE

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

Increased expression of MMP17 predicts poor clinical outcomes in epithelial ovarian cancer patients

Ovarian cancer has the highest fatality rate among female reproductive system cancers, which is due to lack of biomarker for diagnosis and prognosis. We aimed to evaluate the role of matrix metalloproteinase 17 (MMP17) in ovarian cancer tumorigenesis and prognosis. Based on the epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) in The Cancer Genome Atlas database, we determined the expression of MMP17 using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. The biological functions of MMP17 were evaluated using the Metascape database and Gene Set Enrichment Analysis. The association between MMP17 and immune cell infiltration was investigated by single sample Gene Set Enrichment Analysis. Logistic analysis was applied to study the correlation between MMP17 expression and clinicopathological characteristics. Finally, Cox regression analysis, Kaplan-Meier analysis, and nomograms were used to determine the predictive value of MMP17 on clinical outcomes in EOC patients. The expression of MMP17 was much higher in EOC patients than in pericarcinomatous tissues (P < .001). MMP17-associated differentially expressed genes were significantly enriched in cell extracellular matrix (ECM) degrading and corresponding pathways in the high MMP17 expression phenotype. MMP17 has a high sensitivity and specificity for EOC diagnosis, with an area under the curve of 0.988. MMP17 expression was found to be an independent risk factor for overall survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.488, P < .001), progression-free interval (HR: 1.347, P < .01), and disease-specific survival (HR: 1.548, P < .01). Increased MMP17 expression in EOC may contribute to carcinogenesis by degrading ECM and provide diagnostic and prognostic value for clinical outcomes.

Clinical Performance of a Multivariate Index Assay in Detecting Early-Stage Ovarian Cancer in Filipino Women

This study evaluated the clinical performance and overall utility of a multivariate index assay in detecting early-stage ovarian cancer in a Filipino population. This is a prospective cohort study among Filipino women undergoing assessment for an ovarian mass in a tertiary center. Patients diagnosed with early-stage ovarian cancer and who underwent a physical examination before level III specialist ultrasonographic and Doppler evaluation, multivariate index assay (MIA2G), and surgery for an adnexal mass were included in this study. Ovarian tumors were classified as high-risk for malignancy based on the IOTA-LR2 score. The ovarian imaging and biomarker results were correlated with the reference standard: surgico-pathologic findings. The MIA2G exhibited the best overall performance among individual classifiers with a sensitivity of 91.7% and NPV of 84.7%, with a concomitant higher sensitivity in early-stage disease, whether as an individual classifier (93.5%) or in serial combination with ultrasound (85.5%). The performance of biomarkers (specificity, positive predictive values, and AUROC) such as MIA2G and CA-125 significantly improved when combined with an ultrasound risk scoring approach (p < 0.01). MIA2G showed a higher sensitivity for detecting lesions among EOC and late-stage ovarian cancers than otherwise. The application of biomarkers for evaluating ovarian masses in our local setting is secondary to ultrasound but adopting multivariate index assays rather than CA-125 would increase the detection of early-stage ovarian cancers regardless of menopausal status. This is most relevant in areas where level III sonographers or gynecologic oncologists are limited and preoperative referrals to these specialists can improve the survival of our patients.

Analytical Validation of a Deep Neural Network Algorithm for the Detection of Ovarian Cancer

Early detection of ovarian cancer, the deadliest gynecologic cancer, is crucial for reducing mortality. Current noninvasive risk assessment measures include protein biomarkers in combination with other clinical factors, which vary in their accuracy. Machine learning can be applied to optimizing the combination of these features, leading to more accurate assessment of malignancy. However, the low prevalence of the disease can make rigorous validation of these tests challenging and can result in unbalanced performance.

Gynecologic oncologist impact on adjuvant chemotherapy care for stage II-IV ovarian cancer patients

OBJECTIVE

We aim to evaluate the impact gynecologic oncologists have on ovarian cancer adjuvant chemotherapy care from their role as surgeons recommending adjuvant chemotherapy care and their role as adjuvant chemotherapy providers while considering rural-urban differences.

METHODS

Multivariable adjusted logistic regressions and Cox proportional hazards models were developed using a population-based, retrospective cohort of stage II-IV and unknown stage ovarian cancer patients diagnosed in Iowa, Kansas, and Missouri in 2010-2012 whose medical records were abstracted in 2017-2018.

RESULTS

Gynecologic oncologist surgeons (versus other type of surgeon) were associated with increased odds of adjuvant chemotherapy initiation (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 2.18; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.10-4.33) and having a gynecologic oncologist adjuvant chemotherapy provider (OR 10.0; 95% CI 4.58-21.8). Independent of type of surgeon, rural patients were less likely to have a gynecologic oncologist chemotherapy provider (OR 0.52; 95% CI 0.30-0.91). Gynecologic oncologist adjuvant chemotherapy providers (versus other providers) were associated with decreased surgery-to-chemotherapy time (rural: 6 days; urban: 8 days) and increased distance to chemotherapy (rural: 22 miles; urban: 11 miles). Rural women (versus urban) traveled 38 miles farther when their chemotherapy provider was a gynecologic oncologist and 27 miles farther when it was not.

CONCLUSION

Gynecologic oncologist surgeons may impact adjuvant chemotherapy initiation. Gynecologic oncologists serving as adjuvant chemotherapy providers were associated with some care benefits, such as reduced time from surgery-to-chemotherapy, and some care barriers, such as travel distance. The barriers and benefits of having a gynecologic oncologist involved in adjuvant chemotherapy care, including rural-urban differences, warrant further research in other populations.

Association of gynecologic oncology versus medical oncology specialty with survival, utilization, and spending for treatment of gynecologic cancers

BACKGROUND

We examined the association of gynecologic oncology (GYO) versus medical oncology (MEDONC) based care with survival, health care utilization and spending outcomes in women undergoing chemotherapy for advanced gynecologic cancers.

METHODS

Women with newly diagnosed stage III-IV uterine, ovarian, and cervical cancers from 2000 to 2015 were identified in SEER-Medicare. We assessed the association of provider specialty with overall survival, emergency department utilization, admissions, and spending. Outcomes were assessed using unadjusted and Inverse Treatment Probability Weighted propensity-score applied, multi-variable cox modeling, Poisson regression, and generalized models of log-transformed data.

RESULTS

We identified 7930 gynecologic cancer patients (4360 ovarian, 2934 uterine, 643 cervix). 37% were treated by GYO and 63% by MEDONC. For ovarian patients, GYO care was associated with improved OS (median OS 3.3 v. 2.9 years; HR 0.85, 95%CI 0.80, 0.91, p < .0001) and similar mean spending per month ($4015 v. $4316, mean ratio 0.97 (95% CI 0.93, 1.02), p = .19), compared to MEDONC in adjusted analyses. For uterine patients, GYO care was associated with similar OS, but decreased spending ($3573 v. $4081, mean ratio 0.87 (95% CI.81, 0.93), p < .0001), and decreased ED utilization (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.69, 0.85, p < .0001). For cervical patients, GYO care was associated with similar OS, and similar spending. Admissions were more likely in ovarian (RR 1.23, 95%CI 1.11, 1.37, p = .0001) and cervical patients (RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.05, 1.51, p = .015) treated by GYO, in adjusted analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

GYO based care was associated with improved OS and equal spending for patients with advanced stage ovarian cancer. Uterine and cervix patients had similar OS, and less or equal spending respectively, when treated by GYO compared to MEDONC.

European Society of Gynaecological Oncology quality indicators for the surgical treatment of endometrial carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Quality of surgical care as a crucial component of a comprehensive multi-disciplinary management improves outcomes in patients with endometrial carcinoma, notably helping to avoid suboptimal surgical treatment. Quality indicators (QIs) enable healthcare professionals to measure their clinical management with regard to ideal standards of care.

OBJECTIVE

In order to complete its set of QIs for the surgical management of gynecological cancers, the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) initiated the development of QIs for the surgical treatment of endometrial carcinoma.

METHODS

QIs were based on scientific evidence and/or expert consensus. The development process included a systematic literature search for the identification of potential QIs and documentation of the scientific evidence, two consensus meetings of a group of international experts, an internal validation process, and external review by a large international panel of clinicians and patient representatives. QIs were defined using a structured format comprising metrics specifications, and targets. A scoring system was then developed to ensure applicability and feasibility of a future ESGO accreditation process based on these QIs for endometrial carcinoma surgery and support any institutional or governmental quality assurance programs.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine structural, process and outcome indicators were defined. QIs 1-5 are general indicators related to center case load, training, experience of the surgeon, structured multi-disciplinarity of the team and active participation in clinical research. QIs 6 and 7 are related to the adequate pre-operative investigations. QIs 8-22 are related to peri-operative standards of care. QI 23 is related to molecular markers for endometrial carcinoma diagnosis and as determinants for treatment decisions. QI 24 addresses the compliance of management of patients after primary surgical treatment with the standards of care. QIs 25-29 highlight the need for a systematic assessment of surgical morbidity and oncologic outcome as well as standardized and comprehensive documentation of surgical and pathological elements. Each QI was associated with a score. An assessment form including a scoring system was built as basis for ESGO accreditation of centers for endometrial cancer surgery.

Improving the quality of care for patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: Program components, implementation barriers, and recommendations

The high lethality of ovarian cancer in the United States and associated complexities of the patient journey across the cancer care continuum warrant an assessment of current practices and barriers to quality care in the United States. The objectives of this study were to identify and assess key components in the provision of high‐quality care delivery for patients with ovarian cancer, identify challenges in the implementation of best practices, and develop corresponding quality‐related recommendations to guide multidisciplinary ovarian cancer programs and practices. This multiphase ovarian cancer quality‐care initiative was guided by a multidisciplinary expert steering committee, including gynecologic oncologists, pathologists, a genetic counselor, a nurse navigator, social workers, and cancer center administrators. Key partnerships were also established. A collaborative approach was adopted to develop comprehensive recommendations by identifying ideal quality‐of‐care program components in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer management. The core program components included: care coordination and patient education, prevention and screening, diagnosis and initial management, treatment planning, disease surveillance, equity in care, and quality of life. Quality‐directed recommendations were developed across 7 core program components, with a focus on ensuring high‐quality ovarian cancer care delivery for patients through improved patient education and engagement by addressing unmet medical and supportive care needs. Implementation challenges were described, and key recommendations to overcome barriers were provided. The recommendations emerging from this initiative can serve as a comprehensive resource guide for multidisciplinary cancer practices, providers, and other stakeholders working to provide quality‐directed cancer care for patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer and their families.

Quality‐directed recommendations for ovarian cancer care delivery are developed across 7 core program components, with a focus on ensuring high‐quality care delivery by addressing unmet medical and supportive care needs. These recommendations can serve as a comprehensive resource guide for multidisciplinary cancer practices, providers, and other stakeholders working to provide quality‐directed cancer care for patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer and their families.

Impact of Surgeon Type and Rurality on Treatment and Survival of Ovarian Cancer Patients

BACKGROUND

National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend ovarian cancer patients receive cancer-directed surgery from a gynecologic oncologist surgeon. We aimed to determine if rurality impacts type of surgeon and estimate if the interaction between rurality and type of surgeon impacts cytoreductive surgery, chemotherapy initiation, and survival.

METHODS

Our population-based cohort of Iowan (N=675) ovarian cancer patients included women diagnosed with histologically confirmed stages IB-IV cancer in 2010 to 2016 at the ages of 18 to 89 years old and who received cancer-directed surgery in Iowa. Multivariable logistic regression analysis and Cox proportional hazards models were used.

RESULTS

Rural (vs. urban) patients were less likely to receive surgery from a gynecologic oncologist (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.30-0.78). Rural patients with a gynecologic oncologist (vs. nongynecologic oncologist) surgeon were more likely to receive cytoreduction (OR: 2.84; 95% CI: 1.31-6.14) and chemotherapy (OR: 4.22; 95% CI: 1.82-9.78). Gynecologic oncologist-provided surgery conferred a 3-year cause-specific survival advantage among rural patients (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.33-0.97) and disadvantage among urban patients (hazard ratio: 1.77; 95% CI: 1.02-3.06) in the model without treatment covariates. Significance dissipated in models with treatment variables.

DISCUSSION

The variation in the gynecologic oncologist survival advantage may be because of treatment, referral, volume, or nongynecologic oncologist surgeons' specialty difference by rurality. This is the first study to investigate the ovarian cancer survival advantage of having a gynecologic oncologist surgeon by rurality.

Primary treatment of advanced ovarian cancer: how does the 'real world' practice?

Aims: This study evaluated primary treatment modalities in advanced ovarian cancer according to sociodemographic characteristics and characterized chemotherapy regimens used. Methods: This was a retrospective study of newly diagnosed advanced ovarian, tubal or peritoneal cancer patients at two hospitals from 2011 to 2016. Results: Of 175 women, 41% received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and 59% received primary cytoreductive surgery. Within the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group, 23% did not have a surgical consultation prior to initiating treatment. Women receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy lived closer to an academic center and more frequently received carboplatin/paclitaxel every 3 weeks. Cytoreductive surgery patients more frequently received intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Conclusion: The authors identified disparities in age, insurance, distance from treatment center and chemotherapy choice in the primary treatment for ovarian cancer.

Salvaging Detection of Early-Stage Ovarian Malignancies When CA125 Is Not Informative

Background: Ovarian cancer is the deadliest gynecologic cancer, with no recommended screening test to assist with early detection. Cancer antigen 125 (CA125) is a serum biomarker commonly used by clinicians to assess preoperative cancer risk, but it underperforms in premenopausal women, early-stage malignancies, and several histologic subtypes. OVA1 is a multivariate index assay that combines CA125 and four other serum proteins to assess the malignant risk of an adnexal mass. Objective: To evaluate the performance of OVA1 in a cohort of patients with low-risk serum CA125 values. Study Design: We analyzed patient data from previous collections (N = 2305, prevalence = 4.5%) where CA125 levels were at or below 67 units/milliliter (U/mL) for pre-menopausal women and 35 U/mL for post-menopausal women. We compare the performance of OVA1 to CA125 in classifying the risk of malignancy in this cohort, including sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values. Results: The overall sensitivity of OVA1 in patients with a low-risk serum CA125 was 59% with a false-positive rate of 30%. OVA1 detected over 50% of ovarian malignancies in premenopausal women despite a low-risk serum CA125. OVA1 also correctly identified 63% of early-stage cancers missed by CA125. The most common epithelial ovarian cancer subtypes in the study population were mucinous (25%) and serous (23%) carcinomas. Despite a low-risk CA125, OVA1 successfully detected 83% of serous, 58% of mucinous, and 50% of clear cell ovarian cancers. Conclusions: As a standalone test, CA125 misses a significant number of ovarian malignancies that can be detected by OVA1. This is particularly important for premenopausal women and early-stage cancers, which have a much better long-term survival than late-stage malignancies. Using OVA1 in the setting of a normal serum CA125 can help identify at-risk ovarian tumors for referral to a gynecologic oncologist, potentially improving overall survival.

Sensitivity of Medicare Data to Identify Oncologists

BACKGROUND

Health services researchers have studied how care from oncologists impacts treatment and outcomes for cancer patients. These studies frequently identify physician specialty using files from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) or the American Medical Association (AMA). The completeness of the CMS data resources, individually or combined, to identify oncologists is unknown. This study assessed the sensitivity of CMS data to capture oncologists included in the AMA Physician Masterfile.

METHODS

Oncologists were identified from three CMS data resources: physician claims, the National Plan and Provider Enumeration System Registry, and the Medicare Data on Provider Practice and Specialty file. CMS files and AMA data were linked using a unique physician identifier. Sensitivity to identify any oncologists, radiation oncologists (ROs), surgical oncologists (SOs), and medical oncologists (MOs) was calculated for individual and combined CMS files. For oncologists in the AMA data not identified as oncologists in the CMS data, their CMS specialty was assessed.

RESULTS

Individual CMS files each captured approximately 83% of the 17 934 oncologists in the AMA Masterfile; combined CMS files captured 90.4%. By specialty, combined CMS data captured 98.2% of ROs, 89.3% of MOs, and 70.1% of SOs. For ROs and SOs in the AMA data not identified as oncologists in the CMS data, their CMS specialty was usually similar to the AMA subspecialty; ROs were radiologists and SOs were surgeons.

CONCLUSION

Using combined files from CMS identified most ROs and MOs found in the AMA, but not most SOs. Determining whether to use the AMA data or CMS files for a particular research project will depend on the specific research question and the type of oncologist included in the study.

Pelvic Inflammatory Disease: Possible Catches and Correct Management in Young Women

The incidence of adnexal masses increases exponentially with age and the most frequent causes in young women are physiologic cysts and pelvic abscesses with pelvic inflammatory disease (PID). Clinical examination can direct physicians to an appropriate management of adnexal mass, but the role of transvaginal ultrasound is crucial for diagnosis and treatment decision, even if it sometimes can be misleading, especially in young women. Ca 125, blood count, and CRP are useful to clarify suspected etiology of a pelvic mass, but specificity and positive predictive value are low because elevation of laboratory tests may occur in several benign conditions. In our work we present four cases of suspected pelvic masses. Despite guidelines for management of PID, the right timing to switch to surgical therapy is not clear. Therefore, the treatment decision should be based on a careful evaluation of various parameters such as signs symptoms and above all age. Moreover, we believe that, for a correct diagnosis and for the best fertility sparing treatment, it is also extremely important to refer to a gynecological oncology unit with an expert surgeon.