Literature DB >> 16515564

Risk of malignancy index for referral of ovarian cancer cases to a tertiary center: does it identify the correct cases?

J Bailey1, A Tailor, R Naik, A Lopes, K Godfrey, H M Hatem, J Monaghan.   

Abstract

Characterization of adnexal masses to identify patients with malignant ovarian tumors preoperatively for referral to a cancer center for treatment has been extensively studied. A simple algorithm called "risk of malignancy index" (RMI) reported by Jacobs incorporated the serum CA125 level, menopausal status, and ultrasound morphologic features. This algorithm has subsequently been tested on retrospective and prospective data with encouraging results. However, these studies did not include cases that had had both their serum CA125 measurements and ultrasound examinations from a diverse range of laboratories and sonographers. The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of the RMI algorithm for identifying cases of ovarian malignancy presenting at cancer units for subsequent referral to a cancer center. All cases of suspected ovarian malignancy referred to the Northern Gynaecological Oncology Centre (NGOC) during an 18-month period were identified from the NGOC database. A case note review was performed, and the following data were extracted: patient demographics, the referring physician and the operating surgeon, ultrasound morphology, serum CA125 levels, and menopausal status. All patients had their ultrasound performed by sonographers at the peripheral unit according to local protocols. A total of 182 patients with a pelvic mass were referred to the center for surgery. A total of 24% patients had benign tumors, 6% had tumors of borderline malignancy, and 70% had invasive tumors. A total of 145 cases had an RMI >200; 125 of these had ovarian or peritoneal cancers. An RMI >200 had a sensitivity of 88.5% for diagnosing invasive lesions. The overall sensitivity of this algorithm for diagnosing all borderline, invasive ovarian, or primary peritoneal lesions was 87.4%, and the positive predictive value was 86.8%. Our data confirm the effectiveness of the RMI algorithm in clinical practice for the identification and subsequent referral to cancer centers of cases of potential ovarian malignancy. We therefore recommend its continued use.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16515564     DOI: 10.1111/j.1525-1438.2006.00468.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer        ISSN: 1048-891X            Impact factor:   3.437


  15 in total

1.  Comparison of a novel multiple marker assay vs the Risk of Malignancy Index for the prediction of epithelial ovarian cancer in patients with a pelvic mass.

Authors:  Richard G Moore; Moune Jabre-Raughley; Amy K Brown; Katina M Robison; M Craig Miller; W Jeffery Allard; Robert J Kurman; Robert C Bast; Steven J Skates
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2010-05-14       Impact factor: 8.661

2.  Multianalyte assay systems in the differential diagnosis of ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Brian M Nolen; Anna E Lokshin
Journal:  Expert Opin Med Diagn       Date:  2012-03

3.  Differential diagnosis of a pelvic mass: improved algorithms and novel biomarkers.

Authors:  Robert C Bast; Steven Skates; Anna Lokshin; Richard G Moore
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 3.437

4.  Risk of malignancy index as an evaluation of preoperative pelvic mass.

Authors:  Zinatossadat Bouzari; Shahla Yazdani; Ziba Shirkhani Kelagar; Narges Abbaszadeh
Journal:  Caspian J Intern Med       Date:  2011

5.  A novel multiple marker bioassay utilizing HE4 and CA125 for the prediction of ovarian cancer in patients with a pelvic mass.

Authors:  Richard G Moore; D Scott McMeekin; Amy K Brown; Paul DiSilvestro; M Craig Miller; W Jeffrey Allard; Walter Gajewski; Robert Kurman; Robert C Bast; Steven J Skates
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2008-10-12       Impact factor: 5.482

Review 6.  The role of human epididymis protein 4 in the diagnosis of epithelial ovarian cancer.

Authors:  L-T Jia; Y-C Zhang; J Li; Y Tian; J-F Li
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2015-07-29       Impact factor: 3.405

Review 7.  Current state of biomarker development for clinical application in epithelial ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Richard G Moore; Shannon MacLaughlan; Robert C Bast
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2009-10-31       Impact factor: 5.482

8.  Major clinical research advances in gynecologic cancer 2008.

Authors:  Kidong Kim; Seok-Cheol Choi; Sang-Young Ryu; Jae Weon Kim; Soon-Beom Kang
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2008-12-29       Impact factor: 4.401

9.  Risk of malignancy index is not sensitive in detecting non-epithelial ovarian cancer and borderline ovarian tumor.

Authors:  Onur Meray; Ilgın Türkçüoğlu; Mehmet Mutlu Meydanlı; Ayşe Kafkaslı
Journal:  J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc       Date:  2010-03-01

Review 10.  Intraoperative frozen section analysis for the diagnosis of early stage ovarian cancer in suspicious pelvic masses.

Authors:  Nithya D G Ratnavelu; Andrew P Brown; Susan Mallett; Rob J P M Scholten; Amit Patel; Christina Founta; Khadra Galaal; Paul Cross; Raj Naik
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-03-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.