Literature DB >> 17698805

Inclusion of CA-125 does not improve mathematical models developed to distinguish between benign and malignant adnexal tumors.

Dirk Timmerman1, Ben Van Calster, Davor Jurkovic, Lil Valentin, Antonia C Testa, Jean-Pierre Bernard, Caroline Van Holsbeke, Sabine Van Huffel, Ignace Vergote, Tom Bourne.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To test the value of serum CA-125 measurements alone or as part of a multimodal strategy to distinguish between malignant and benign ovarian tumors before surgery based on a large prospective multicenter study (International Ovarian Tumor Analysis). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with at least one persistent ovarian mass preoperatively underwent transvaginal ultrasonography using gray scale imaging to assess tumor morphology and color Doppler imaging to obtain indices of blood flow.
RESULTS: Data from 809 patients recruited from nine centers were included in the analysis; 567 patients (70%) had benign tumors and 242 (30%) had malignant tumors-of these 152 were primary invasive (62.8%), 52 were borderline malignant (21.5%), and 38 were metastatic (15.7%). A logistic regression model including CA-125 (M2) resulted in an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.934 and did not outperform a published (M1) without serum CA-125 information (AUC, 0.936). Specifically designed new models including CA-125 for premenopausal women (M3) and for postmenopausal women (M4) did not perform significantly better than the model without CA-125 (M1; AUC, 0.891 v AUC, 0.911 and AUC, 0.975 v AUC, 0.949, respectively). In postmenopausal patients, serum CA-125 alone (AUC, 0.920) and the risk of malignancy index (AUC, 0.924) performed very well. Results were very similar when the models were prospectively tested on a group of 345 new patients with adnexal masses of whom 126 had malignant tumors (37%).
CONCLUSION: Adding information on CA-125 to clinical information and ultrasound information does not improve discrimination of mathematical models between benign and malignant adnexal masses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17698805     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2006.09.5943

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  11 in total

Review 1.  Current and Emerging Methods for Ovarian Cancer Screening and Diagnostics: A Comprehensive Review.

Authors:  Juliane M Liberto; Sheng-Yin Chen; Ie-Ming Shih; Tza-Huei Wang; Tian-Li Wang; Thomas R Pisanic
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-11       Impact factor: 6.575

2.  Polytomous diagnosis of ovarian tumors as benign, borderline, primary invasive or metastatic: development and validation of standard and kernel-based risk prediction models.

Authors:  Ben Van Calster; Lil Valentin; Caroline Van Holsbeke; Antonia C Testa; Tom Bourne; Sabine Van Huffel; Dirk Timmerman
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2010-10-20       Impact factor: 4.615

3.  Bilateral Ovarian Tumors on MRI: How Should We Differentiate the Lesions?

Authors:  Naoko Mukuda; Shinya Fujii; Chie Inoue; Takeru Fukunaga; Tetsuro Oishi; Tasuku Harada; Toshihide Ogawa
Journal:  Yonago Acta Med       Date:  2018-06-18       Impact factor: 1.641

4.  Towards an evidence-based approach for diagnosis and management of adnexal masses: findings of the International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) studies.

Authors:  J Kaijser
Journal:  Facts Views Vis Obgyn       Date:  2015

5.  Evaluating the risk of ovarian cancer before surgery using the ADNEX model to differentiate between benign, borderline, early and advanced stage invasive, and secondary metastatic tumours: prospective multicentre diagnostic study.

Authors:  Ben Van Calster; Kirsten Van Hoorde; Lil Valentin; Antonia C Testa; Daniela Fischerova; Caroline Van Holsbeke; Luca Savelli; Dorella Franchi; Elisabeth Epstein; Jeroen Kaijser; Vanya Van Belle; Artur Czekierdowski; Stefano Guerriero; Robert Fruscio; Chiara Lanzani; Felice Scala; Tom Bourne; Dirk Timmerman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2014-10-15

Review 6.  Key findings from the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) study: an approach to the optimal ultrasound based characterisation of adnexal pathology.

Authors:  Jeroen Kaijser; Tom Bourne; Sylvie De Rijdt; Caroline Van Holsbeke; Ahmad Sayasneh; Lil Valentin; Ben Van Calster; Dirk Timmerman
Journal:  Australas J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2015-12-31

7.  Development and validation of a model that includes two ultrasound parameters and the plasma D-dimer level for predicting malignancy in adnexal masses: an observational study.

Authors:  Maciej Stukan; Michał Badocha; Karol Ratajczak
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2019-06-11       Impact factor: 4.430

8.  Prospective revalidation of IOTA "two-step", "alternative two-step" and "three-step" strategies for characterization of adnexal masses - An Indian study focussing the radiology context.

Authors:  Shabnam Bhandari Grover; Sayantan Patra; Hemal Grover; Pratima Mittal; Geetika Khanna
Journal:  Indian J Radiol Imaging       Date:  2020-10-15

Review 9.  ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE Consensus Statement on pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian tumors.

Authors:  Dirk Timmerman; François Planchamp; Tom Bourne; Chiara Landolfo; Andreas du Bois; Luis Chiva; David Cibula; Nicole Concin; Daniela Fischerova; Wouter Froyman; Guillermo Gallardo Madueño; Birthe Lemley; Annika Loft; Liliana Mereu; Philippe Morice; Denis Querleu; Antonia Carla Testa; Ignace Vergote; Vincent Vandecaveye; Giovanni Scambia; Christina Fotopoulou
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2021-06-10       Impact factor: 3.437

10.  Strategies to diagnose ovarian cancer: new evidence from phase 3 of the multicentre international IOTA study.

Authors:  A Testa; J Kaijser; L Wynants; D Fischerova; C Van Holsbeke; D Franchi; L Savelli; E Epstein; A Czekierdowski; S Guerriero; R Fruscio; F P G Leone; I Vergote; T Bourne; L Valentin; B Van Calster; D Timmerman
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2014-06-17       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.