Cargando…
Comparison of the predictive performance of risk of malignancy indexes 1–4, HE4 and risk of malignancy algorithm in the triage of adnexal masses
OBJECTIVES: For patients presenting with adnexal mass, it is important to correctly distinguish whether the mass is benign or malignant for the purpose of precise and timely referral and implication of correct line of management. The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of Risk of...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7183707/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32334618 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13048-020-00643-6 |
_version_ | 1783526476508823552 |
---|---|
author | Hada, Abha Han, Li-ping Chen, Yanyan Hu, Qing-hong Yuan, Yidan Liu, Liya |
author_facet | Hada, Abha Han, Li-ping Chen, Yanyan Hu, Qing-hong Yuan, Yidan Liu, Liya |
author_sort | Hada, Abha |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: For patients presenting with adnexal mass, it is important to correctly distinguish whether the mass is benign or malignant for the purpose of precise and timely referral and implication of correct line of management. The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of Risk of malignancy Indexes (RMI) 1–4, Human Epididymis Protein 4 (HE4) and Risk of Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) in differentiating the adnexal mass into benign and malignant. METHODS: A retrospective study using 155 patients diagnosed with adnexal mass between January 2014 to December 2014 in The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University was conducted. The patient records were assessed for age, menopausal status, serum CA125 and HE4 levels, ultrasound characteristics of the pelvic mass and the final pathological diagnosis of the mass. RMI1, RMI2, RMI3, RMI4, ROMA were calculated for each patient and the sensitivity, specificity and the Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curves were determined for each test to evaluate their performance. RESULTS: Among 155 patients with adnexal masses meeting inclusion criteria, 120 (77.4%) were benign, 8 (5.2%) borderline and 27 (17.4%) were malignant. RMI2 and RMI4 had the highest sensitivity (66.7%) while HE4 had the highest specificity (96.9%).Although ROMA had the highest area under the curve (AUC) of 0.886 it was not found to be statistically superior to the other tests. For epithelial ovarian cancers, ROMA (80%), HE4 (96.9%) and RMI 4 (0.868) had the highest sensitivity, specificity and AUC respectively however, the AUC characteristics were not statistically significant between any groups. Compared to the postmenopausal group (sensitivity 72.2–77.8%) all the tests showed lower sensitivity (42.9%) for the premenopausal group of patients. CONCLUSIONS: RMI 1–4, ROMA and HE4 were all found to be useful for differentiating benign/borderline adnexal masses from malignant ones for deciding optimal therapy, however no test was found to be significantly better than the other. None were able to differentiate between benign and borderline tumors. All of the tests demonstrated increased sensitivity when borderline tumors were considered low-risk, and when only epithelial ovarian cancers were considered. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7183707 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-71837072020-04-29 Comparison of the predictive performance of risk of malignancy indexes 1–4, HE4 and risk of malignancy algorithm in the triage of adnexal masses Hada, Abha Han, Li-ping Chen, Yanyan Hu, Qing-hong Yuan, Yidan Liu, Liya J Ovarian Res Research OBJECTIVES: For patients presenting with adnexal mass, it is important to correctly distinguish whether the mass is benign or malignant for the purpose of precise and timely referral and implication of correct line of management. The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of Risk of malignancy Indexes (RMI) 1–4, Human Epididymis Protein 4 (HE4) and Risk of Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) in differentiating the adnexal mass into benign and malignant. METHODS: A retrospective study using 155 patients diagnosed with adnexal mass between January 2014 to December 2014 in The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University was conducted. The patient records were assessed for age, menopausal status, serum CA125 and HE4 levels, ultrasound characteristics of the pelvic mass and the final pathological diagnosis of the mass. RMI1, RMI2, RMI3, RMI4, ROMA were calculated for each patient and the sensitivity, specificity and the Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curves were determined for each test to evaluate their performance. RESULTS: Among 155 patients with adnexal masses meeting inclusion criteria, 120 (77.4%) were benign, 8 (5.2%) borderline and 27 (17.4%) were malignant. RMI2 and RMI4 had the highest sensitivity (66.7%) while HE4 had the highest specificity (96.9%).Although ROMA had the highest area under the curve (AUC) of 0.886 it was not found to be statistically superior to the other tests. For epithelial ovarian cancers, ROMA (80%), HE4 (96.9%) and RMI 4 (0.868) had the highest sensitivity, specificity and AUC respectively however, the AUC characteristics were not statistically significant between any groups. Compared to the postmenopausal group (sensitivity 72.2–77.8%) all the tests showed lower sensitivity (42.9%) for the premenopausal group of patients. CONCLUSIONS: RMI 1–4, ROMA and HE4 were all found to be useful for differentiating benign/borderline adnexal masses from malignant ones for deciding optimal therapy, however no test was found to be significantly better than the other. None were able to differentiate between benign and borderline tumors. All of the tests demonstrated increased sensitivity when borderline tumors were considered low-risk, and when only epithelial ovarian cancers were considered. BioMed Central 2020-04-25 /pmc/articles/PMC7183707/ /pubmed/32334618 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13048-020-00643-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Hada, Abha Han, Li-ping Chen, Yanyan Hu, Qing-hong Yuan, Yidan Liu, Liya Comparison of the predictive performance of risk of malignancy indexes 1–4, HE4 and risk of malignancy algorithm in the triage of adnexal masses |
title | Comparison of the predictive performance of risk of malignancy indexes 1–4, HE4 and risk of malignancy algorithm in the triage of adnexal masses |
title_full | Comparison of the predictive performance of risk of malignancy indexes 1–4, HE4 and risk of malignancy algorithm in the triage of adnexal masses |
title_fullStr | Comparison of the predictive performance of risk of malignancy indexes 1–4, HE4 and risk of malignancy algorithm in the triage of adnexal masses |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of the predictive performance of risk of malignancy indexes 1–4, HE4 and risk of malignancy algorithm in the triage of adnexal masses |
title_short | Comparison of the predictive performance of risk of malignancy indexes 1–4, HE4 and risk of malignancy algorithm in the triage of adnexal masses |
title_sort | comparison of the predictive performance of risk of malignancy indexes 1–4, he4 and risk of malignancy algorithm in the triage of adnexal masses |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7183707/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32334618 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13048-020-00643-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hadaabha comparisonofthepredictiveperformanceofriskofmalignancyindexes14he4andriskofmalignancyalgorithminthetriageofadnexalmasses AT hanliping comparisonofthepredictiveperformanceofriskofmalignancyindexes14he4andriskofmalignancyalgorithminthetriageofadnexalmasses AT chenyanyan comparisonofthepredictiveperformanceofriskofmalignancyindexes14he4andriskofmalignancyalgorithminthetriageofadnexalmasses AT huqinghong comparisonofthepredictiveperformanceofriskofmalignancyindexes14he4andriskofmalignancyalgorithminthetriageofadnexalmasses AT yuanyidan comparisonofthepredictiveperformanceofriskofmalignancyindexes14he4andriskofmalignancyalgorithminthetriageofadnexalmasses AT liuliya comparisonofthepredictiveperformanceofriskofmalignancyindexes14he4andriskofmalignancyalgorithminthetriageofadnexalmasses |