Literature DB >> 20455203

Ovarian cancer prediction in adnexal masses using ultrasound-based logistic regression models: a temporal and external validation study by the IOTA group.

D Timmerman1, B Van Calster, A C Testa, S Guerriero, D Fischerova, A A Lissoni, C Van Holsbeke, R Fruscio, A Czekierdowski, D Jurkovic, L Savelli, I Vergote, T Bourne, S Van Huffel, L Valentin.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aims of the study were to temporally and externally validate the diagnostic performance of two logistic regression models containing clinical and ultrasound variables in order to estimate the risk of malignancy in adnexal masses, and to compare the results with the subjective interpretation of ultrasound findings carried out by an experienced ultrasound examiner ('subjective assessment').
METHODS: Patients with adnexal masses, who were put forward by the 19 centers participating in the study, underwent a standardized transvaginal ultrasound examination by a gynecologist or a radiologist specialized in ultrasonography. The examiner prospectively collected information on clinical and ultrasound variables, and classified each mass as benign or malignant on the basis of subjective evaluation of ultrasound findings. The gold standard was the histology of the mass with local clinicians deciding whether to operate on the basis of ultrasound results and the clinical picture. The models' ability to discriminate between malignant and benign masses was assessed, together with the accuracy of the risk estimates.
RESULTS: Of the 1938 patients included in the study, 1396 had benign, 373 had primary invasive, 111 had borderline malignant and 58 had metastatic tumors. On external validation (997 patients from 12 centers), the area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve (AUC) for a model containing 12 predictors (LR1) was 0.956, for a reduced model with six predictors (LR2) was 0.949 and for subjective assessment was 0.949. Subjective assessment gave a positive likelihood ratio of 11.0 and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.14. The corresponding likelihood ratios for a previously derived probability threshold (0.1) were 6.84 and 0.09 for LR1, and 6.36 and 0.10 for LR2. On temporal validation (941 patients from seven centers), the AUCs were 0.945 (LR1), 0.918 (LR2) and 0.959 (subjective assessment).
CONCLUSIONS: Both models provide excellent discrimination between benign and malignant masses. Because the models provide an objective and reasonably accurate risk estimation, they may improve the management of women with suspected ovarian pathology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20455203     DOI: 10.1002/uog.7636

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0960-7692            Impact factor:   7.299


  34 in total

1.  Assessing the discriminative ability of risk models for more than two outcome categories.

Authors:  Ben Van Calster; Yvonne Vergouwe; Caspar W N Looman; Vanya Van Belle; Dirk Timmerman; Ewout W Steyerberg
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2012-10-07       Impact factor: 8.082

2.  Risk of Malignant Ovarian Cancer Based on Ultrasonography Findings in a Large Unselected Population.

Authors:  Rebecca Smith-Bindman; Liina Poder; Eric Johnson; Diana L Miglioretti
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2019-01-01       Impact factor: 21.873

Review 3.  Ultrasound in gynecological cancer: is it time for re-evaluation of its uses?

Authors:  Daniela Fischerova; David Cibula
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 5.075

4.  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

Review 5.  Evaluation of markers and risk prediction models: overview of relationships between NRI and decision-analytic measures.

Authors:  Ben Van Calster; Andrew J Vickers; Michael J Pencina; Stuart G Baker; Dirk Timmerman; Ewout W Steyerberg
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2013-01-11       Impact factor: 2.583

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

Authors:  Jyothi Shetty; Aruna Saradha; Deeksha Pandey; Rajeshwari Bhat; Sunanda Bharatnur
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India       Date:  2019-05-03

7.  Simple ultrasound rules to distinguish between benign and malignant adnexal masses before surgery: prospective validation by IOTA group.

Authors:  Dirk Timmerman; Lieveke Ameye; Daniela Fischerova; Elisabeth Epstein; Gian Benedetto Melis; Stefano Guerriero; Caroline Van Holsbeke; Luca Savelli; Robert Fruscio; Andrea Alberto Lissoni; Antonia Carla Testa; Joan Veldman; Ignace Vergote; Sabine Van Huffel; Tom Bourne; Lil Valentin
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-12-14

8.  A mathematical model for interpretable clinical decision support with applications in gynecology.

Authors:  Vanya M C A Van Belle; Ben Van Calster; Dirk Timmerman; Tom Bourne; Cecilia Bottomley; Lil Valentin; Patrick Neven; Sabine Van Huffel; Johan A K Suykens; Stephen Boyd
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-03-29       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Multicentre external validation of IOTA prediction models and RMI by operators with varied training.

Authors:  A Sayasneh; L Wynants; J Preisler; J Kaijser; S Johnson; C Stalder; R Husicka; Y Abdallah; F Raslan; A Drought; A A Smith; S Ghaem-Maghami; E Epstein; B Van Calster; D Timmerman; T Bourne
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2013-05-14       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Comparison of the Diagnostic Performances of Ultrasound-Based Models for Predicting Malignancy in Patients With Adnexal Masses.

Authors:  Le Qian; Qinwen Du; Meijiao Jiang; Fei Yuan; Hui Chen; Weiwei Feng
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 6.244

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.