Suppr超能文献

与CA125和HE4联合ROMA算法相比,IOTA简单规则风险评估、ADNEX模型及主观评估在鉴别良性、交界性和I期恶性附件病变中的性能。

Performance of IOTA Simple Rules Risks, ADNEX Model, Subjective Assessment Compared to CA125 and HE4 with ROMA Algorithm in Discriminating between Benign, Borderline and Stage I Malignant Adnexal Lesions.

作者信息

Czekierdowski Artur, Stachowicz Norbert, Smolen Agata, Łoziński Tomasz, Guzik Paweł, Kluz Tomasz

机构信息

Department of Gynecological Oncology and Gynecology, Medical University of Lublin, 20-081 Lublin, Poland.

Chair and Department of Epidemiology and Clinical Research Methodology, Medical University of Lublin, 20-080 Lublin, Poland.

出版信息

Diagnostics (Basel). 2023 Feb 25;13(5):885. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics13050885.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Borderline ovarian tumors (BOTs) and early clinical stage malignant adnexal masses can make sonographic diagnosis challenging, while the clinical utility of tumor markers, e.g., CA125 and HE4, or the ROMA algorithm, remains controversial in such cases.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the IOTA group Simple Rules Risk (SRR), the ADNEX model and the subjective assessment (SA) with serum CA125, HE4 and the ROMA algorithm in the preoperative discrimination between benign tumors, BOTs and stage I malignant ovarian lesions (MOLs).

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective study was conducted with lesions classified prospectively using subjective assessment and tumor markers with the ROMA. The SRR assessment and ADNEX risk estimation were applied retrospectively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR-) were calculated for all tests.

RESULTS

In total, 108 patients (the median age: 48 yrs, 44 postmenopausal) with 62 (79.6%) benign masses, 26 (24.1%) BOTs and 20 (18.5%) stage I MOLs were included. When comparing benign masses with combined BOTs and stage I MOLs, SA correctly identified 76% of benign masses, 69% of BOTs and 80% of stage I MOLs. Significant differences were found for the presence and size of the largest solid component ( = 0.0006), the number of papillary projections ( = 0.01), papillation contour ( = 0.008) and IOTA color score ( = 0.0009). The SRR and ADNEX models were characterized by the highest sensitivity (80% and 70%, respectively), whereas the highest specificity was found for SA (94%). The corresponding likelihood ratios were as follows: LR+ = 3.59 and LR- = 0.43 for the ADNEX; LR+ = 6.40 and LR- = 0.63 for SA and LR+ = 1.85 with LR- = 0.35 for the SRR. The sensitivity and specificity of the ROMA test were 50% and 85%, respectively, with LR+ = 3.44 and LR- = 0.58. Of all the tests, the ADNEX model had the highest diagnostic accuracy of 76%.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the limited value of diagnostics based on CA125 and HE4 serum tumor markers and the ROMA algorithm as independent modalities for the detection of BOTs and early stage adnexal malignant tumors in women. SA and IOTA methods based on ultrasound examination may present superior value over tumor marker assessment.

摘要

背景

卵巢交界性肿瘤(BOTs)和临床早期恶性附件肿块的超声诊断具有挑战性,而肿瘤标志物(如CA125和HE4)或ROMA算法在此类病例中的临床应用仍存在争议。

目的

比较IOTA组简单规则风险(SRR)、ADNEX模型和主观评估(SA)与血清CA125、HE4及ROMA算法在术前鉴别良性肿瘤、BOTs和I期恶性卵巢病变(MOLs)中的价值。

方法

进行一项多中心回顾性研究,对病变采用主观评估和带有ROMA的肿瘤标志物进行前瞻性分类。回顾性应用SRR评估和ADNEX风险估计。计算所有检测的敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性似然比(LR+和LR-)。

结果

共纳入108例患者(中位年龄:48岁,44例绝经后),其中62例(79.6%)为良性肿块,26例(24.1%)为BOTs,20例(18.5%)为I期MOLs。在比较良性肿块与BOTs和I期MOLs的组合时,SA正确识别出76%的良性肿块、69%的BOTs和80%的I期MOLs。在最大实性成分的存在和大小(P = 0.0006)、乳头样突起数量(P = 0.01)、乳头样轮廓(P = 0.008)和IOTA彩色评分(P = 0.0009)方面发现了显著差异。SRR和ADNEX模型的敏感性最高(分别为80%和70%),而SA的特异性最高(94%)。相应的似然比如下:ADNEX的LR+ = 3.59,LR- = 0.43;SA的LR+ = 6.40,LR- = 0.63;SRR的LR+ = 1.85,LR- = 0.35。ROMA检测的敏感性和特异性分别为50%和85%,LR+ = 3.44,LR- = 0.58。在所有检测中,ADNEX模型的诊断准确性最高,为76%。

结论

本研究表明,基于CA125和HE血清肿瘤标志物及ROMA算法作为独立手段检测女性BOTs和早期附件恶性肿瘤的诊断价值有限。基于超声检查的SA和IOTA方法可能比肿瘤标志物评估具有更高的价值。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/84fe/10000903/12f1830952df/diagnostics-13-00885-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验