OBJECTIVES: To externally and prospectively validate the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Simple Rules (SRs), Logistic Regression model 2 (LR2) and Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model in a Portuguese population, comparing these approaches with subjective assessment and the risk-of-malignancy index (RMI), as well as with each other. This study also aimed to retrospectively validate the IOTA two-step strategy, using modified benign simple descriptors (MBDs) followed by the ADNEX model in cases in which MBDs were not applicable. METHODS: This was a prospective multicenter diagnostic accuracy study conducted between January 2016 and December 2021 of consecutive patients with an ultrasound diagnosis of at least one adnexal tumor, who underwent surgery at one of three tertiary referral centers in Lisbon, Portugal. All ultrasound assessments were performed by Level-II or -III sonologists with IOTA certification. Patient clinical data and serum CA 125 levels were collected from hospital databases. Each adnexal mass was classified as benign or malignant using subjective assessment, RMI, IOTA SRs, LR2 and the ADNEX model (with and without CA 125). The reference standard was histopathological diagnosis. In the second phase, all adnexal tumors were classified retrospectively using the two-step strategy (MBDs + ADNEX). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, positive and negative likelihood ratios and overall accuracy were determined for all methods. Receiver-operating-characteristics curves were constructed and corresponding areas under the curve (AUC) were determined for RMI, LR2, the ADNEX model and the two-step strategy. The ADNEX model calibration plots were constructed using locally estimated scatterplot smoothing (LOESS). RESULTS: Of the 571 patients included in the study, 428 had benign disease and 143 had malignant disease (prevalence of malignancy, 25.0%), of which 42 had borderline ovarian tumor, 93 had primary invasive adnexal cancer and eight had metastatic tumors in the adnexa. Subjective assessment had an overall sensitivity of 97.9% and a specificity of 83.6% for distinguishing between benign and malignant lesions. RMI showed high specificity (95.6%) but very low sensitivity (58.7%), with an AUC of 0.913. The IOTA SRs were applicable in 80.0% of patients, with a sensitivity of 94.8% and specificity of 98.6%. The IOTA LR2 had a sensitivity of 84.6%, specificity of 86.9% and an AUC of 0.939, at a malignancy risk cut-off of 10%. At the same cut-off, the sensitivity, specificity and AUC for the ADNEX model with vs without CA 125 were 95.8% vs 98.6%, 82.5% vs 79.7% and 0.962 vs 0.960, respectively. The ADNEX model gave heterogeneous results for distinguishing between benign masses and different subtypes of malignancy, with the highest AUC (0.991) for discriminating benign masses from primary invasive adnexal cancer Stages II-IV, and the lowest AUC (0.696) for discriminating primary invasive adnexal cancer Stage I from metastatic lesion in the adnexa. The calibration plot suggested underestimation of the risk by the ADNEX model compared with the observed proportion of malignancy. The MBDs were applicable in 26.3% (150/571) of cases, of which none was malignant. The two-step strategy using the ADNEX model in the second step only, with and without CA 125, had AUCs of 0.964 and 0.961, respectively, which was similar to applying the ADNEX model in all patients. CONCLUSIONS: The IOTA methods showed good-to-excellent performance in the Portuguese population, outperforming RMI. The ADNEX model was superior to other methods in terms of accuracy, but interpretation of its ability to distinguish between malignant subtypes was limited by sample size and large differences in the prevalence of tumor subtypes. The IOTA MBDs are reliable in identifying benign disease. The two-step strategy comprising application of MBDs followed by the ADNEX model if MBDs are not applicable, is suitable for daily clinical practice, circumventing the need to calculate the risk of malignancy in all patients. © 2024 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
- MeSH
- antigen CA-125 krev MeSH
- diferenciální diagnóza MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- logistické modely MeSH
- nádory vaječníků * diagnostické zobrazování patologie klasifikace krev MeSH
- nemoci děložních adnex * diagnostické zobrazování MeSH
- prediktivní hodnota testů MeSH
- prospektivní studie MeSH
- reprodukovatelnost výsledků MeSH
- retrospektivní studie MeSH
- ROC křivka MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- senzitivita a specificita MeSH
- ultrasonografie * metody MeSH
- Check Tag
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- multicentrická studie MeSH
- validační studie MeSH
- Geografické názvy
- Portugalsko MeSH
OBJECTIVES: To compare the performance of transvaginal and transabdominal ultrasound with that of the first-line staging method (contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT)) and a novel technique, whole-body magnetic resonance imaging with diffusion-weighted sequence (WB-DWI/MRI), in the assessment of peritoneal involvement (carcinomatosis), lymph-node staging and prediction of non-resectability in patients with suspected ovarian cancer. METHODS: Between March 2016 and October 2017, all consecutive patients with suspicion of ovarian cancer and surgery planned at a gynecological oncology center underwent preoperative staging and prediction of non-resectability with ultrasound, CT and WB-DWI/MRI. The evaluation followed a single, predefined protocol, assessing peritoneal spread at 19 sites and lymph-node metastasis at eight sites. The prediction of non-resectability was based on abdominal markers. Findings were compared to the reference standard (surgical findings and outcome and histopathological evaluation). RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients with confirmed ovarian cancer were analyzed. Among them, 51 (76%) had advanced-stage and 16 (24%) had early-stage ovarian cancer. Diagnostic laparoscopy only was performed in 16% (11/67) of the cases and laparotomy in 84% (56/67), with no residual disease at the end of surgery in 68% (38/56), residual disease ≤ 1 cm in 16% (9/56) and residual disease > 1 cm in 16% (9/56). Ultrasound and WB-DWI/MRI performed better than did CT in the assessment of overall peritoneal carcinomatosis (area under the receiver-operating-characteristics curve (AUC), 0.87, 0.86 and 0.77, respectively). Ultrasound was not inferior to CT (P = 0.002). For assessment of retroperitoneal lymph-node staging (AUC, 0.72-0.76) and prediction of non-resectability in the abdomen (AUC, 0.74-0.80), all three methods performed similarly. In general, ultrasound had higher or identical specificity to WB-DWI/MRI and CT at each of the 19 peritoneal sites evaluated, but lower or equal sensitivity in the abdomen. Compared with WB-DWI/MRI and CT, transvaginal ultrasound had higher accuracy (94% vs 91% and 85%, respectively) and sensitivity (94% vs 91% and 89%, respectively) in the detection of carcinomatosis in the pelvis. Better accuracy and sensitivity of ultrasound (93% and 100%) than WB-DWI/MRI (83% and 75%) and CT (84% and 88%) in the evaluation of deep rectosigmoid wall infiltration, in particular, supports the potential role of ultrasound in planning rectosigmoid resection. In contrast, for the bowel serosal and mesenterial assessment, abdominal ultrasound had the lowest accuracy (70%, 78% and 79%, respectively) and sensitivity (42%, 65% and 65%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first prospective study to document that, in experienced hands, ultrasound may be an alternative to WB-DWI/MRI and CT in ovarian cancer staging, including peritoneal and lymph-node evaluation and prediction of non-resectability based on abdominal markers of non-resectability. © 2021 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
- MeSH
- celotělové zobrazování statistika a číselné údaje MeSH
- difuzní magnetická rezonance statistika a číselné údaje MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- epiteliální ovariální karcinom diagnostické zobrazování patologie MeSH
- invazivní růst nádoru MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- lymfatické uzliny patologie MeSH
- magnetická rezonanční tomografie statistika a číselné údaje MeSH
- nádory vaječníků diagnostické zobrazování patologie MeSH
- peritoneální nádory diagnostické zobrazování patologie MeSH
- prospektivní studie MeSH
- Check Tag
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH