Comparative assessment of algorithms for differential diagnosis of ovarian masses (ROMA, RMI)
https://doi.org/10.24835/1607-0771-2020-2-48-59
Abstract
The aim of the study was to compare the effectiveness of the ROMA and RMI algorithms in the ovarian masses malignancy prediction. A total of 188 women with uni- or bilateral ovarian masses were examined. Postoperative histological evaluation was performed in all patients. In 126 (67.0%) of them benign ovarian masses were revealed (first group), in 62 (33.0%) ovarian masses were malignant (second group). The menopause subgroup of the first group consisted of 78 out of 126 (61.9%) patients, of the second group - 48 out of 62 (77.4%) (P < 0.05). When comparing groups and subgroups of patients, significant differences of ROMA and RMI values were obtained (P < 0.05). The RMI has higher diagnostic accuracy compared to the ROMA (AUC, sensitivity, and specificity of 0.93, 85.5%, and 96.8% versus 0.89, 87.1%, and 83.3%, respectively). The RMI assessing can be recommended as the first step of the ovarian masses characterization.
About the Authors
A. V. Ulyanova
Loginov Moscow Clinical Scientific Center
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Yu. N. Ponomareva
Loginov Moscow Clinical Scientific Center
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
I. B. Manukhin
Yevdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
V. V. Kapustin
Yevdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry; Moscow City Oncology Hospital No. 62
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Kuivasaari-Pirinen P., Anttila M. Ovarian cysts // Duodecim. 2011. V. 127. No. 17. P. 1857-1863.
2. Аксель Е.М., Виноградова Н.Н. Статистика злокачественных новообразований женских репродуктивных органов // Онкогинекология. 2018. № 3 (27). С. 64-78.
3. Гинекология. Национальное руководство / Под ред. Г.М. Савельевой, Г.Т. Сухих, В.Н. Серова, В.Е. Радзинского, И.Б. Манухина. М.: ГЭОТАР-Медиа, 2017. 1048 с.
4. Полев Д., Баранова А. Диагностические биомаркеры в онкогинекологии: критический взгляд // Онкогинекология. 2012. № 4. С. 4-12.
5. Dodge J.E., Covens A.L., Lacchetti C., Elit L.M., Le T., Devries-Aboud M., Fung-Kee-Fung M., Gynecology Cancer Disease Site Group. Preoperative identification of a suspicious adnexal mass: a systematic review and meta-analysis // Gynecol. Oncol. 2012. V. 126. No. 1. P. 157-166. Doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.03.048.
6. Moore R.G., McMeekin S., Brown A.K., DiSilvestro P., Miller M.C., Allard W.J. Gajewski W., Kurman R., Bast R.C. Jr., Skatesh S.J. A novel multiple marker bioassay utilizing HE4 and CA125 for the prediction of ovarian cancer in patients with a pelvic mass // Gynecol. Oncol. 2009. V. 112. No. 1. P. 40-46. Doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.08.0317.
7. Jacobs I., Oram D., Fairbanks J., Turner J., Frost C., Grudzinskas J.G. A risk of malignancy index incorporating CA 125, ultrasound and menopausal status for the accurate preoperative diagnosis of ovarian cancer // Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 1990. V. 97. No. 10. P. 922-929. Doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1990.tb02448.x.
8. Tingulstad S., Hagen B., Skjeldestad F.E., Onsrud M., Kiserud T., Halvorsen T., Nustad K. Evaluation of a risk of malignancy index based on serum CA125, ultrasound findings and menopausal status in the pre-operative diagnosis of pelvic masses // Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 1996. V. 103. No. 8. P. 826-831. Doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1996.tb09882.x.
9. Abdulrahman G.O. Jr., McKnight L., Lutchman Singh K. The risk of malignancy index (RMI) in women with adnexal masses in Wales // Taiwan J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2014. V. 53. No. 3. P. 376-381. Doi: 10.1016/j.tjog.2014.05.002.
10. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Ovarian cancer: recognition and initial management. Clinical guideline. 2011. Режим доступа: // https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg122/resources/ovarian-cancer-recognition-andinitial-management-35109446543557, свободный. Загл. с экрана. 15.07.2019.
11. Karlsen M.A., Sandhu N., Hogdall C., Chris tensen I.J., Nedergaard L., Lundvall L., Engelholm S.A., Pedersen A.T., Hartwell D., Lydolph M., Laursen I.A., Hogdall E.V.S. Evaluation of HE4, CA125, risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm (ROMA) and risk of malignancy index (RMI) as diagnostic tools of epithelial ovarian cancer in patients with a pelvic mass // Gynecol. Oncol. 2012. V. 127. No. 2. P. 379-383. Doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.07.106.
12. Medeiros L.R., Rosa D.D., da Rosa M.I., Bozzetti M.C. Accuracy of ultrasonography with color Doppler in ovarian tumor: a systematic quantitative review // Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer. 2009. V. 19. No. 2. P. 230-236. Doi: 10.1111/IGC.0b013e31819c1369.
13. Борисова Е.А., Буланов М.Н., Пашов А.И., Макаренко Т.А., Наркевич А.Н. Возможности комплексного использования эхографии и онкомаркеров (СА125, НЕ4, ROMA) для дифференциальной диагностики опухолей яичников // Ультразвуковая и функциональная диагностика. 2015. № 6. С. 36-52.
14. Гланц С. Медико-биологическая статистика. Пер. с англ. М.: Практика, 1998. 459 с.
15. Van Gorp T., Veldman J., Van Calster B., Cadron I., Leunen K., Amant F., Timmerman D., Vergote I. Subjective assessment by ultrasound is superior to the risk of malignancy index (RMI) or the risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm (ROMA) in discriminating benign from malignant adnexal masses// Eur. J. Cancer. 2012. V. 48. No. 11. P. 1649-1656. Doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2011.12.003.
16. Auekitrungrueng R., Tinnangwattana D., Tanti palakorn C., Charoenratana C., Lerthiranwong T., Wanapirak C., Tongsong T. Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of International Ovarian Tumor Analysis simple rules and the risk of malignancy index to discriminate between benign and malignant adnexal masses // Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 2019. V. 146. No. 3. P. 364-369. Doi: 10.1002/ijgo.12891.
17. Meys E.M.J., Jeelof L.S., Achten N.M.J., Slangen B.F.M., Lambrechts S., Kruitwagen R.F.P.M., Van Gorp T. Estimating risk of malignancy in adnexal masses: external validation of the ADNEX model and comparison with other frequently used ultrasound methods // Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2017. V. 49. No. 6. P. 784-792. Doi: 10.1002/uog.17225.
Review
For citations:
Ulyanova A.V., Ponomareva Yu.N., Manukhin I.B., Kapustin V.V. Comparative assessment of algorithms for differential diagnosis of ovarian masses (ROMA, RMI). Ultrasound & Functional Diagnostics. 2020;(2):48-59. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24835/1607-0771-2020-2-48-59
Views:
105
Email this article 