The 4 RMI variants performed acceptably in a medium-resource setting where ultrasound examiners were physicians with varied experience. This finding indicates a good tradeoff between performance and feasibility, since ultrasound RMI protocols are of low complexity.
BackgroundThis manuscript evaluates whether specific symptoms, a symptom index (SI), CA125 and HE4 can help identify women with malignant tumors in the group of women with adnexal masses previously diagnosed with ultrasound.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional study with data collection between January 2010 and January 2012. We invited 176 women with adnexal masses of suspected ovarian origin, attending the hospital of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of the Unicamp School of Medicine. A control group of 150 healthy women was also enrolled. Symptoms were assessed with a questionnaire tested previously. Women with adnexal masses were interviewed before surgery to avoid recall bias. The Ward Agglomerative Method was used to define symptom clusters. Serum measurements of CA125 and HE4 were made. The Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) was calculated using standard formulae.ResultsSixty women had ovarian cancer and 116 benign ovarian tumors. Six symptom clusters were formed and three specific symptoms (back pain, leg swelling and able to feel abdominal mass) did not agglomerate. A symptom index (SI) using clusters abdomen, pain and eating was formed. The sensitivity of the SI in discriminating women with malignant from those with benign ovarian tumors was 78.3%, with a specificity of 60.3%. Positive SI was more frequent in women with malignant than in women with benign tumors (OR 5.5; 95% CI 2.7 to 11.3). Elevated CA125 (OR 11.8; 95% CI 5.6 to 24.6) or HE4 (OR 7.6; 95% CI 3.7 to 15.6) or positive ROMA (OR 9.5; 95% CI 4.4 to 20.3) were found in women with malignant tumors compared with women with benign tumors. The AUC-ROC for CA125 was not different from that for HE4 or ROMA. The best specificity and negative predictive values were obtained using CA125 in women with negative SI.ConclusionWomen diagnosed with an adnexal mass could benefit from a short enquiry about presence, frequency and onset of six symptoms, and CA125 measurements. Primary care physicians can be thereby assisted in deciding as to whether or not reference the woman to often busy, congested specialized oncology centers.
Objective: To evaluate the performance of mesothelin, CA125, HE4 and ROMA index in the detection of malignant ovarian tumors. Study Design: This is a cross-sectional study including 199 women with adnexal masses (67 with malignant tumors and 132 with benign tumors) and 150 healthy women (controls). We used a recursive multivariate partitioning algorithm to assess the contribution of each of the serum markers and the ROMA index to the discrimination of women with malignant tumors. Also, the areas under the ROC curves (AUC) for each of the serum markers and for the ROMA index were compared using the Venkatraman's projection-permutation test. Results: In the recursive model, CA125 had the best performance in discriminating women with malignant tumors. In women with normal-range CA125 levels, none of the other markers contributed to the discrimination of women with malignant tumors. In women with elevated CA125 levels, elevated HE4 levels were associated with an increased risk of harboring a malignant tumor. The AUC for mesothelin was smaller than that for all the other curves, and both the ROMA index and CA125 had better AUC than HE4. Conclusion: In women with normal CA125 levels, neither mesothelin nor HE4 contributed to discriminate women with malignant ovarian tumors; however, for women with elevated CA125 levels HE4 may help discriminating those who have a malignant ovarian tumor.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.