The diagnostic performance of International Ovarian Tumor Analysis: Simple Rules for diagnosing ovarian tumors-a systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Adnexal masses are a common health issue in gynecology; the challenge lies in the differential diagnosis of these masses. The International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Simple Rules (IOTA-SR) offers the first scoring system to aid in diagnosis. It is based on a set of five ultrasound imaging features indicative of a malignant ovarian tumor and five features indicative of a benign tumor. This review aims to assess the diagnostic performance of IOTA-SR for classifying ovarian tumors as benign or malignant.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted on MEDLINE, Embase, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science. The terminologies "IOTA-SR", "adnexal, mass", and "ovarian tumors scoring" were employed. Twenty-seven research articles conducted from 2008 to 2022 were included in the meta-analysis; the publication outcome indicates that performance quality tests were extracted directly or indirectly, including true positive (TP), false positive (FP), true negative (TN), and false negative (FN). The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) was used to evaluate the study quality and estimate the risk of bias. After estimating the pooled effect of the sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was estimated using the bivariate random effects model. Utilizing Cochran's Q statistics and Higgins's inconsistency test through the I2 index for pooled analysis, the heterogeneity of studies was quantitatively evaluated. The funnel plot and Egger's test were utilized to visually and quantitatively evaluate potential publication bias.

Results

Among 27 studies, including 7,841 adnexal masses, the results of this meta-analysis showed excellent diagnostic performance with a pooled sensitivity of 92% [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.89-0.94] and a pooled specificity of 92% (95% CI, 0.89-0.94). The IOTA-SR was applicable in 85.7% of adnexal masses.

Conclusion

The IOTA-SR is highly effective in the presurgical differentiation of malignant versus benign adnexal masses when applied by an expert ultrasonography operator.

Accuracy of O-RADS System in Differentiating Between Benign and Malignant Adnexal Masses Assessed via External Validation by Inexperienced Gynecologists

Objective: To evaluate the accuracy of the O-RADS system in differentiating between benign and malignant adnexal masses, as assessed by inexperienced gynecologists. Methods: Ten gynecologic residents attended a 20 h training course on the O-RADS system conducted by experienced examiners. Following the training, the residents performed ultrasound examinations on patients admitted with adnexal masses under supervision, recording the data in a database that included videos and still images. The senior author later accessed this ultrasound database and presented the cases offline to ten residents for O-RADS rating, with the raters being blinded to the final diagnosis. The efficacy of the O-RADS system by the residents and inter-observer variability were assessed. Results: A total of 201 adnexal masses meeting the inclusion criteria were evaluated, consisting of 136 (67.7%) benign masses and 65 (32.3%) malignant masses. The diagnostic performance of the O-RADS system showed a sensitivity of 90.8% (95% CI: 82.2-96.2%) and a specificity of 86.8% (95% CI: 80.4-91.8%). Inter-observer variability in scoring was analyzed using multi-rater Fleiss Kappa analysis, yielding Kappa indices of 0.642 (95% CI: 0.641-0.643). The false positive rate was primarily due to the misclassification of solid components in classic benign masses as O-RADS-4 or O-RADS-5. Conclusions: The O-RADS system demonstrates high diagnostic performance in distinguishing benign from malignant adnexal masses, even when used by inexperienced examiners. However, the false positive rate remains relatively high, mainly due to the over-interpretation of solid-appearing components in classic benign lesions. Despite this, inter-observer variability among non-expert raters was substantial. Incorporating O-RADS system training into residency programs is beneficial for inexperienced practitioners. This study could be an educational model for gynecologic residency training for other systems of sonographic features.

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.

Clinicopathological analysis of giant ovarian tumors

Objective

This study aims to analyze giant ovarian tumors' clinical and pathological characteristics.

Material and Methods

This was an analytical observational study. Medical records of all patients with giant ovarian tumors who underwent surgery between January 2020 and June 2022 at Dr. Soetomo Academic Hospital, Surabaya, Indonesia, were analyzed.

Results

We analyzed 63 patients with ovarian tumors measuring > 20 cm who underwent surgery at Dr. Soetomo Academic Hospital, Surabaya, Indonesia. The mean tumor size was 25.9 cm (largest size was 41 cm). There was no significant difference in tumor size between benign and malignant giant ovarian tumors (p = 0.261). Based on histopathological results, 66.67 % of giant ovarian tumors were malignant, 26.98 % were benign, and 6.35 % were borderline. Among the malignant tumors, the epithelial type accounted for 69 % of cases. Most giant ovarian tumors originated in the left adnexa (68.25 %). There was no significant difference in patient age (p = 0.511), tumor size (p = 0.168), malignancy (p = 0.303), and histopathological type (p = 0.232) regardless of adnexal side. CA125 levels did not differ significantly between malignant and benign giant ovarian tumors (p = 0.604). There was no correlation between malignant ovarian tumor size and CA125 levels, while there was a significant difference between CA125 levels and the adnexal side (p = 0.010).

Conclusions

Most giant ovarian tumors were malignant, diagnosed at an early stage, and predominantly epithelial type. CA125 levels did not correlate with the size of malignant ovarian tumors. Most giant ovarian tumors originate in the left adnexa.

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

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

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.

Comparisons of Effectiveness in Differentiating Benign from Malignant Ovarian Masses between Conventional and Modified Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI)

OBJECTIVE

To compare the predictive performance in differentiating benign from malignant ovarian masses between the modified risk malignancy index (RMI) and the conventional RMI (RMI-1 and RMI-2).

METHODS

Women scheduled for elective surgery because of adnexal masses were recruited to undergo pelvic sonography within 24 h before surgery to assess the sonographic characteristics of the masses, focusing on loculi, solid part, ascites, bilateralness, papillary projection, and color flow mapping (CFM). Preoperative CA-125 levels were also measured. Modified RMI, RMI-1, and RMI-2 systems were used to predict malignant masses. The gold standard was pathological or intraoperative diagnosis.

RESULTS

A total of 342 ovarian masses, benign: 243 (71.1%); malignant: 99 (28.9%), meeting the inclusion criteria were analyzed. The sensitivity and the specificity of the modified RMI (87.9% and 81.9%) were significantly higher than those of RMI-1 (74.7% and 84.4%), and RMI-2 (79.8% and 81.1%, respectively). Based on ROC curves, the area under the curves were 0.930, 0.881 and 0.882 for modified RMI, RMI-1 and RMI-2, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Modified RMI had better predictive performance than the conventional RMI in differentiating between benign and malignant ovarian masses. Modified RMI may be useful to help general gynecologists or practitioners to triage patients with an adnexal mass, especially in settings of low resources.

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.

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.

External validation of Risk of Malignancy Index compared to IOTA Simple Rules

BACKGROUND

Mathematical predictive models for ovarian tumors have an advantage over subjective assessment due to their relative simplicity, and therefore usefulness for less experienced sonographers. It is currently unclear which predictive model is best at predicting the nature of an ovarian tumor.

PURPOSE

To compare the diagnostic predictive accuracy of the International Ovarian Tumour Analysis Simple Rules (IOTA SR) with Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI), to differentiate between benign and malignant ovarian tumors.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 202 women diagnosed with ovarian tumor(s) were included. Preoperatively, patients were examined through transvaginal ultrasonography and CA-125 (U/mL) levels were measured. RMI and IOTA SR were determined, and where possible compared to definitive histopathological diagnosis.

RESULTS

Of the 202 women with ovarian tumors, 168 women were included in this cohort study. Of these tumors, 118 (70.2%) were benign, 17 (10.1%) were borderline, and 33 (19.7%) were malignant. The sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve for the RMI were 72.0%, 90.7%, and 0.896, respectively. For the IOTA SR, these were 90.0%, 68.6%, and 0.793, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This cohort study shows that the RMI is a relatively useful diagnostic model in characterizing ovarian tumors, compared to the IOTA SR. However, due to the relatively low sensitivity of the RMI and high rate of inconclusive results of the IOTA SR, both diagnostic tests do not seem discriminative enough. Therefore, alternative diagnostic models are necessary.

Prediction Models of Adnexal Masses: State-of-the-Art Review

Importance

Several predictive models and scoring systems have been developed to differentiate between benign and malignant ovarian masses, in order to guide effective management. These models use combinations of patient characteristics, ultrasound markers, and biochemical markers.

Objective

The aim of this study was to describe, compare, and prioritize, according to their strengths and qualities, all the adnexal prediction models.

Evidence Acquisition

This was a state-of-the-art review, synthesizing the findings of the current published literature on the available prediction models of adnexal masses.

Results

The existing models include subjective assessment by expert sonographers, the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis models (logistic regression models 1 and 2, Simple Rules, 3-step strategy, and ADNEX [Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa] model), the Risk of Malignancy Index, the Risk of Malignancy Ovarian Algorithm, the Gynecologic Imaging Reporting and Data System, and the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System. Overall, subjective assessment appears to be superior to all prediction models. However, the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis models are probably the best available methods for nonexpert examiners. The Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System is an international approach that incorporates both the common European and North American approaches, but still needs to be validated.

Conclusions

Many prediction models exist for the assessment of adnexal masses. The adoption of a particular model is based on local guidelines, as well as sonographer's experience. The safety of expectant management of adnexal masses with benign ultrasound morphology is still under investigation.

Preoperative Evaluation of the ADNEX Model for the Prediction of the Ovarian Cancer Risk of Adnexal Masses at Siriraj Hospital

INTRODUCTION

Distinguishing benign adnexal masses from malignant tumors plays an important role in preoperative planning and improving patients' survival rates. The International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) group developed a model termed the Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX).

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to evaluate the performance of the ADNEX model in distinguishing between benign and malignant tumors at a cutoff value of 10%.

METHODS

This was a prospective diagnostic study. 357 patients with an adnexal mass who were scheduled for surgery at Siriraj Hospital were included from May 1, 2018, to May 30, 2019. All patients were undergoing ultrasonography, and serum CA125 was measured. Data were calculated by the ADNEX model via an IOTA ADNEX calculator.

RESULTS

Of the 357 patients, 296 had benign tumors and 61 had malignant tumors. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for using the ADNEX model was 0.975 (95% confidence interval, 0.953-0.988). At a 10% cutoff, the sensitivity was 98.4% and specificity was 87.2%. The best cutoff value was at 16.6% in our population.

CONCLUSIONS

The performance of the ADNEX model in differentiating benign and malignant tumors was excellent.

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.

Obstetrics and Gynecology Residents Can Accurately Classify Benign Ovarian Tumors Using the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Rules

OBJECTIVES

Recognition of benign versus malignant tumors is essential in gynecologic ultrasound (US). The International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) rules have been proposed as part of resident US training. The objective of this study was to examine whether they could be accurately used by obstetrics and gynecology residents in Rwanda.

METHODS

Patients undergoing explorative laparotomy for adnexal masses at the University Teaching Hospital of Kigali were included. Before the study, a didactic lecture on the IOTA rules for classifying adnexal masses was performed. Preoperative transabdominal US examinations were performed by residents at different levels of training, who were blinded to the results of prior US examinations. The IOTA classification was compared to the final pathologic diagnosis.

RESULTS

There were 72 patients who underwent 116 US examinations. Only 15.5% of US examinations were considered inconclusive. First-year residents (12) correctly diagnosed 18 of 20 masses (90%) as benign and 4 of 4 as malignant. Second-year residents (9) classified 29 of 29 masses correctly. Third-year residents (10) accurately identified 21 of 22 (95.5%) as benign and 5 of 5 as malignant. Fourth-year residents (13) accurately identified 11 of 12 (91.7%) as benign and 6 of 6 as malignant. Therefore, 74 of 78 tumors (94.9%) considered benign by IOTA rules were confirmed by histologic results. Similarly, all 20 tumors classified as malignant were confirmed. Overall, the sensitivities to diagnose benign and malignant tumors by the IOTA rules were 83.3% and 100%, respectively. The positive and negative predictive values were 100% and 94.9%. There were no significant differences noted between residency years.

CONCLUSIONS

All levels of Rwandan obstetrics and gynecology residents were able to use the IOTA rules to accurately distinguish benign from malignant tumors.

Evaluation of adnexal tumours in the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis system in reference to histopathological results

Aim of the study

To retrospectively evaluate how the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) simple rules used in ultrasound examinations estimate the probability of malignant and benign tumour occurrence in the studied population.

Material and methods

The study was performed on a group of 425 patients with ovarian tumours operated in the Clinic of Surgical and Oncological Gynecology at the Medical University of Lodz in the years 2014-2015. Adnexal tumours were rated according to IOTA simple rules, classifying them as probably malignant, probably benign, or unclassified. The results of the study were compared with final histopathological results. The statistical analysis was performed using STATISTICA 13 PL with Medical Pack.

Results

We analysed data on n = 43 (11%) patients with malignant, n = 346 (86%) patients with benign, and n = 12 (3%) patients with borderline tumours, respectively. Malignant tumour patients were significantly older (mean age 61.0 ±11.6 vs. 43.6 ±16.2 years, p< 0.001), had higher BMI (mean 27.3 ±7.0 vs. 25.2 ±5.2, p< 0.05), more pregnancies (median 2 vs. 1, p = 0.001), and higher cancer antigen 125 (CA 125) concentrations (median 251.5 vs. 18.5, p< 0.001) than patients with a benign tumour. Also, they more often suffered from diabetes mellitus (19% vs. 8%, p = 0.02) and arterial hypertension (60% vs. 42%, p< 0.01) than benign tumour patients.

Conclusions

In our study, IOTA performance in predicting or ruling out a malignant tumour was highly satisfactory and similar to that of CA 125. Both the methods may be complementary and used to assess the risk of malignant vs. benign ovarian neoplasm, although the context of other clinical variables may also be important.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

Objective

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

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.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

AIM

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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.

Improved Diagnostic Accuracy in Characterization of Adnexal Masses by Detection of Choline Peak Using 1H MR Spectroscopy in Comparison to Internal Reference at 3 Tesla

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the role of the presence of a choline peak in 3 Tesla 1H magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) for differentiating benign from malignant adnexal masses.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 46 adnexal masses (23 malignant and 23 benign) underwent 1H MRS study prior to surgery to assess the presence of choline peak.

RESULTS

A choline peak was detected in 16 malignant masses (69.5%) and was absent in the other 7 (30.5%). A choline peak was only detected in 6 (26%) of the benign adnexal masses. The presence of an MRS choline peak had a sensitivity of 69.5%, a specificity of 74%, a positive predictive value (PPV) of 72.7%, and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 71% for diagnosing malignant adnexal masses. A significant difference between the frequency of mean choline peaks in benign and malignant adnexal masses was observed (P value<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

A 1H MRS choline peak is seen in malignant adnexal masses more frequently than the benign masses, and may be helpful for diagnosing malignant adnexal masses.