-
Something wrong with this record ?
Comparison of the ADNEX and ROMA risk prediction models for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer: a multicentre external validation in patients who underwent surgery
C. Landolfo, J. Ceusters, L. Valentin, W. Froyman, T. Van Gorp, R. Heremans, T. Baert, R. Wouters, A. Vankerckhoven, AS. Van Rompuy, J. Billen, F. Moro, F. Mascilini, A. Neumann, C. Van Holsbeke, V. Chiappa, T. Bourne, D. Fischerova, A. Testa, A....
Language English Country England, Great Britain
Document type Multicenter Study, Journal Article
Grant support
18B2921N
Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (Research Foundation Flanders)
K2014-99X-22475-01-3
Vetenskapsrådet (Swedish Research Council)
NLK
Free Medical Journals
from 1947 to 1 year ago
Freely Accessible Journals
from 1947 to 1 year ago
PubMed Central
from 1947 to 1 year ago
Europe PubMed Central
from 1947 to 1 year ago
ProQuest Central
from 2000-01-01 to 1 year ago
Open Access Digital Library
from 1947-01-01
Open Access Digital Library
from 1999-01-01
Nursing & Allied Health Database (ProQuest)
from 2000-01-01 to 1 year ago
Health & Medicine (ProQuest)
from 2000-01-01 to 1 year ago
Public Health Database (ProQuest)
from 2000-01-01 to 1 year ago
- MeSH
- Algorithms MeSH
- CA-125 Antigen MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Ovarian Neoplasms * diagnosis surgery pathology MeSH
- Adnexal Diseases * diagnosis surgery pathology MeSH
- Retrospective Studies MeSH
- Sensitivity and Specificity MeSH
- Ultrasonography MeSH
- Check Tag
- Humans MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Multicenter Study MeSH
BACKGROUND: Several diagnostic prediction models to help clinicians discriminate between benign and malignant adnexal masses are available. This study is a head-to-head comparison of the performance of the Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model with that of the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA). METHODS: This is a retrospective study based on prospectively included consecutive women with an adnexal tumour scheduled for surgery at five oncology centres and one non-oncology centre in four countries between 2015 and 2019. The reference standard was histology. Model performance for ADNEX and ROMA was evaluated regarding discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility. RESULTS: The primary analysis included 894 patients, of whom 434 (49%) had a malignant tumour. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.92 (95% CI 0.88-0.95) for ADNEX with CA125, 0.90 (0.84-0.94) for ADNEX without CA125, and 0.85 (0.80-0.89) for ROMA. ROMA, and to a lesser extent ADNEX, underestimated the risk of malignancy. Clinical utility was highest for ADNEX. ROMA had no clinical utility at decision thresholds <27%. CONCLUSIONS: ADNEX had better ability to discriminate between benign and malignant adnexal tumours and higher clinical utility than ROMA. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT01698632 and NCT02847832.
Department of Biomedical Data Sciences Leiden University Medical Centre Leiden The Netherlands
Department of Clinical Sciences Malmö Lund University Lund Sweden
Department of Development and Regeneration KU Leuven Leuven Belgium
Department of Gynecologic Oncology National Cancer Institute of Milan Milan Italy
Department of Laboratory Medicine UZ Leuven Leuven Belgium
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology University Hospitals Leuven Leuven Belgium
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Skåne University Hospital Malmö Sweden
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Ziekenhuis Oost Limburg Genk Belgium
Department of Oncology Gynaecological Oncology KU Leuven Leuven Cancer Institute Leuven Belgium
Department of Pathology UZ Leuven Leuven Belgium
General University Hospital Prague Czech Republic
Leuven Unit for Health Technology Assessment Research KU Leuven Leuven Belgium
Queen Charlotte's and Chelsea Hospital Imperial College London UK
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc24006580
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20240423155353.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 240412s2024 enk f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1038/s41416-024-02578-x $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)38243011
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a enk
- 100 1_
- $a Landolfo, Chiara $u Department of Oncology, Laboratory of Tumour Immunology and Immunotherapy, Leuven Cancer Institute, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium $u Department of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium $u Queen Charlotte's and Chelsea Hospital, Imperial College, London, UK $u Dipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli, IRCCS, Rome, Italy
- 245 10
- $a Comparison of the ADNEX and ROMA risk prediction models for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer: a multicentre external validation in patients who underwent surgery / $c C. Landolfo, J. Ceusters, L. Valentin, W. Froyman, T. Van Gorp, R. Heremans, T. Baert, R. Wouters, A. Vankerckhoven, AS. Van Rompuy, J. Billen, F. Moro, F. Mascilini, A. Neumann, C. Van Holsbeke, V. Chiappa, T. Bourne, D. Fischerova, A. Testa, A. Coosemans, D. Timmerman, B. Van Calster
- 520 9_
- $a BACKGROUND: Several diagnostic prediction models to help clinicians discriminate between benign and malignant adnexal masses are available. This study is a head-to-head comparison of the performance of the Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model with that of the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA). METHODS: This is a retrospective study based on prospectively included consecutive women with an adnexal tumour scheduled for surgery at five oncology centres and one non-oncology centre in four countries between 2015 and 2019. The reference standard was histology. Model performance for ADNEX and ROMA was evaluated regarding discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility. RESULTS: The primary analysis included 894 patients, of whom 434 (49%) had a malignant tumour. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.92 (95% CI 0.88-0.95) for ADNEX with CA125, 0.90 (0.84-0.94) for ADNEX without CA125, and 0.85 (0.80-0.89) for ROMA. ROMA, and to a lesser extent ADNEX, underestimated the risk of malignancy. Clinical utility was highest for ADNEX. ROMA had no clinical utility at decision thresholds <27%. CONCLUSIONS: ADNEX had better ability to discriminate between benign and malignant adnexal tumours and higher clinical utility than ROMA. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT01698632 and NCT02847832.
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a retrospektivní studie $7 D012189
- 650 _2
- $a ultrasonografie $7 D014463
- 650 12
- $a nádory vaječníků $x diagnóza $x chirurgie $x patologie $7 D010051
- 650 12
- $a nemoci děložních adnex $x diagnóza $x chirurgie $x patologie $7 D000291
- 650 _2
- $a algoritmy $7 D000465
- 650 _2
- $a senzitivita a specificita $7 D012680
- 650 _2
- $a antigen CA-125 $7 D018394
- 655 _2
- $a multicentrická studie $7 D016448
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Ceusters, Jolien $u Department of Oncology, Laboratory of Tumour Immunology and Immunotherapy, Leuven Cancer Institute, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium $u Department of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium $1 https://orcid.org/0000000154225668
- 700 1_
- $a Valentin, Lil $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden $u Department of Clinical Sciences Malmö, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
- 700 1_
- $a Froyman, Wouter $u Department of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- 700 1_
- $a Van Gorp, Toon $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium $u Department of Oncology, Gynaecological Oncology, KU Leuven, Leuven Cancer Institute, Leuven, Belgium $1 https://orcid.org/000000022564721X
- 700 1_
- $a Heremans, Ruben $u Department of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- 700 1_
- $a Baert, Thaïs $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium $u Department of Oncology, Gynaecological Oncology, KU Leuven, Leuven Cancer Institute, Leuven, Belgium
- 700 1_
- $a Wouters, Roxanne $u Department of Oncology, Laboratory of Tumour Immunology and Immunotherapy, Leuven Cancer Institute, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium $u Oncoinvent AS, Oslo, Norway
- 700 1_
- $a Vankerckhoven, Ann $u Department of Oncology, Laboratory of Tumour Immunology and Immunotherapy, Leuven Cancer Institute, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- 700 1_
- $a Van Rompuy, Anne-Sophie $u Department of Pathology, UZ Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- 700 1_
- $a Billen, Jaak $u Department of Laboratory Medicine, UZ Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- 700 1_
- $a Moro, Francesca $u Dipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli, IRCCS, Rome, Italy
- 700 1_
- $a Mascilini, Floriana $u Dipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli, IRCCS, Rome, Italy
- 700 1_
- $a Neumann, Adam $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic $u General University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Van Holsbeke, Caroline $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ziekenhuis Oost-Limburg, Genk, Belgium
- 700 1_
- $a Chiappa, Valentina $u Department of Gynecologic Oncology, National Cancer Institute of Milan, Milan, Italy
- 700 1_
- $a Bourne, Tom $u Department of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium $u Queen Charlotte's and Chelsea Hospital, Imperial College, London, UK
- 700 1_
- $a Fischerova, Daniela $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic $u General University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Testa, Antonia $u Dipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli, IRCCS, Rome, Italy
- 700 1_
- $a Coosemans, An $u Department of Oncology, Laboratory of Tumour Immunology and Immunotherapy, Leuven Cancer Institute, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- 700 1_
- $a Timmerman, Dirk $u Department of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- 700 1_
- $a Van Calster, Ben $u Department of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. ben.vancalster@kuleuven.be $u Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands. ben.vancalster@kuleuven.be $u Leuven Unit for Health Technology Assessment Research (LUHTAR), KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. ben.vancalster@kuleuven.be $1 https://orcid.org/0000000316137450
- 773 0_
- $w MED00009369 $t British journal of cancer $x 1532-1827 $g Roč. 130, č. 6 (2024), s. 934-940
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38243011 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20240412 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20240423155350 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 2080902 $s 1216347
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC-MEDLINE
- BMC __
- $a 2024 $b 130 $c 6 $d 934-940 $e 20240119 $i 1532-1827 $m British journal of cancer $n Br J Cancer $x MED00009369
- GRA __
- $a 18B2921N $p Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (Research Foundation Flanders)
- GRA __
- $a K2014-99X-22475-01-3 $p Vetenskapsrådet (Swedish Research Council)
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20240412
