K G Araujo1,2, R M Jales1,2, P N Pereira1, A Yoshida1, L de Angelo Andrade3, L O Sarian1, S Derchain1. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Unicamp, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil. 2. Section of Ultrasonography, Prof. José Aristodemo Pinotti Women's Hospital, CAISM, University of Campinas, Unicamp, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil. 3. Department of Pathologic Anatomy, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Unicamp, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) ADNEX model in the preoperative discrimination between benign ovarian (including tubal and para-ovarian) tumors, borderline ovarian tumors (BOT), Stage I ovarian cancer (OC), Stage II-IV OC and ovarian metastasis in a gynecological oncology center in Brazil. METHODS: This was a diagnostic accuracy study including 131 women with an adnexal mass invited to participate between February 2014 and November 2015. Before surgery, pelvic ultrasound examination was performed and serum levels of tumor marker CA 125 were measured in all women. Adnexal masses were classified according to the IOTA ADNEX model. Histopathological diagnosis was the gold standard. Receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis was used to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the model to classify tumors into different histological types. RESULTS: Of 131 women, 63 (48.1%) had a benign ovarian tumor, 16 (12.2%) had a BOT, 17 (13.0%) had Stage I OC, 24 (18.3%) had Stage II-IV OC and 11 (8.4%) had ovarian metastasis. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.88-0.97) for the basic discrimination between benign vs malignant tumors using the IOTA ADNEX model. Performance was high for the discrimination between benign vs Stage II-IV OC, BOT vs Stage II-IV OC and Stage I OC vs Stage II-IV OC, with AUCs of 0.99, 0.97 and 0.94, respectively. Performance was poor for the differentiation between BOT vs Stage I OC and between Stage I OC vs ovarian metastasis with AUCs of 0.64. CONCLUSION: The majority of adnexal masses in our study were classified correctly using the IOTA ADNEX model. On the basis of our findings, we would expect the model to aid in the management of women with an adnexal mass presenting to a gynecological oncology center.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) ADNEX model in the preoperative discrimination between benign ovarian (including tubal and para-ovarian) tumors, borderline ovarian tumors (BOT), Stage I ovarian cancer (OC), Stage II-IV OC and ovarian metastasis in a gynecological oncology center in Brazil. METHODS: This was a diagnostic accuracy study including 131 women with an adnexal mass invited to participate between February 2014 and November 2015. Before surgery, pelvic ultrasound examination was performed and serum levels of tumor marker CA 125 were measured in all women. Adnexal masses were classified according to the IOTA ADNEX model. Histopathological diagnosis was the gold standard. Receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis was used to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the model to classify tumors into different histological types. RESULTS: Of 131 women, 63 (48.1%) had a benign ovarian tumor, 16 (12.2%) had a BOT, 17 (13.0%) had Stage I OC, 24 (18.3%) had Stage II-IV OC and 11 (8.4%) had ovarian metastasis. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.88-0.97) for the basic discrimination between benign vs malignant tumors using the IOTA ADNEX model. Performance was high for the discrimination between benign vs Stage II-IV OC, BOT vs Stage II-IV OC and Stage I OC vs Stage II-IV OC, with AUCs of 0.99, 0.97 and 0.94, respectively. Performance was poor for the differentiation between BOT vs Stage I OC and between Stage I OC vs ovarian metastasis with AUCs of 0.64. CONCLUSION: The majority of adnexal masses in our study were classified correctly using the IOTA ADNEX model. On the basis of our findings, we would expect the model to aid in the management of women with an adnexal mass presenting to a gynecological oncology center.
Authors: Michal Migda; Migda Bartosz; Marian S Migda; Marcin Kierszk; Gieryn Katarzyna; Marek Maleńczyk Journal: J Ovarian Res Date: 2018-11-03 Impact factor: 4.234
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
Authors: Ben Van Calster; Lil Valentin; Wouter Froyman; Chiara Landolfo; Jolien Ceusters; Antonia C Testa; Laure Wynants; Povilas Sladkevicius; Caroline Van Holsbeke; Ekaterini Domali; Robert Fruscio; Elisabeth Epstein; Dorella Franchi; Marek J Kudla; Valentina Chiappa; Juan L Alcazar; Francesco P G Leone; Francesca Buonomo; Maria Elisabetta Coccia; Stefano Guerriero; Nandita Deo; Ligita Jokubkiene; Luca Savelli; Daniela Fischerová; Artur Czekierdowski; Jeroen Kaijser; An Coosemans; Giovanni Scambia; Ignace Vergote; Tom Bourne; Dirk Timmerman Journal: BMJ Date: 2020-07-30