Comparison of risk of malignancy index (RMI), CA125, CA 19-9, ultrasound score, and menopausal status in borderline ovarian tumor

[Borderline Ovarian Tumours: CNGOF Guidelines for Clinical Practice - Imaging]

OBJECTIVE

To determine the place of imaging and the performance of different imaging techniques (transvaginal ultrasound with or without Doppler, scoring, CT, MRI) to differentiate benign tumour, borderline ovarian tumour (BOT) and malignant ovarian tumor. Differentiate the histological subtypes of BOT (serous, sero-mucinous, mucinous) and prediction in imaging of the possibility of conservative treatment.

METHODS

The research was carried out over the last 16 years using the terms "MeSH" based on the query of the Medline® database and supplemented by the review of references contained in the meta-analyzes, systematic reviews and original articles included.

RESULTS

Endo-vaginal and suprapubic ultrasonography is recommended for analysis of an ovarian mass (grade A). In the case of ultrasound by a referent, subjective analysis is the recommended technique (grade A). In case of echography by a non-referent, the use of "Simple Rules" is recommended (grade A) and should be best combined with subjective analysis to rejoin the performance of a sonographer refer (grade A). In cases of undetermined ovarian lesions in endovaginal ultrasound and suprapubic ultrasound, it is recommended to perform a pelvic MRI (grade A). The MRI protocol should include T2, T1, T1 sequences with fat saturation, diffusion, injected dynamics, and after gadolinium injection (grade B). To characterize an MRI-adnexal image, it is recommended to include a risk score for malignancy (ADNEX-MR/O-RADS) (grade C) in the report and to formulate an anatomopathological hypothesis (Grade C). The predictive signs of benignity in front of a cyst with endocystic vegetations are the low number, the small size, the presence of calcifications and the absence of Doppler flow in case of size greater than 10mm in echography (LP 4) and a curve of type 1 MRI (LP4). MRI is recommended for suspicious lesions of BOT in ultrasound (grade B) or indeterminate lesions in ultrasound (grade A). There is no data to support the usefulness of CT or PET-CT for BOT. Morphological criteria in ultrasound and MRI exist to differentiate BOT from invasive tumors regardless of grade (NP 2). Pelvic MRI is recommended to characterize a tumor suggestive of ultrasound BOT (grade C). No recommendations can be made about the use of combined ultrasound, biological, and menopausal status scores for the diagnosis of BOT. The diagnostic performance of imaging to detect peritoneal implants of BOT is not known. The assessment of the invasiveness of peritoneal implants of imaging BOT has not been evaluated. The association of macroscopic signs in MRI makes it possible to differentiate the different subtypes - serous, sero-mucinous and mucinous (intestinal type) - of BOT, despite the overlap of certain presentations (LP3). The analysis of macroscopic MRI signs must be performed to differentiate the different subtypes of TFO (grade C). No recommendation can be made on imaging prediction of the possibility of conservative BOT treatment.

Diagnostic extended usefulness of RMI: comparison of four risk of malignancy index in preoperative differentiation of borderline ovarian tumors and benign ovarian tumors

Background

This study aimed to examine the performance of the four risk of malignancy index (RMI) in discriminating borderline ovarian tumors (BOTs) and benign ovarian masses in daily clinical practice.

Methods

A total of 162 women with BOTs and 379 women with benign ovarian tumors diagnosed at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University from January 2012 to December 2016 were enrolled in this retrospective study. Also, we classified these patients into serous borderline ovarian tumor (SBOT) and mucinous borderline ovarian tumor (MBOT) subgroup. Preoperative ultrasound findings, cancer antigen 125 (CA125) and menopausal status were reviewed. The area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operator characteristic curves (ROC) and performance indices of RMI I, RMI II, RMI III and RMI IV were calculated and compared for discrimination between benign ovarian tumors and BOTs.

Results

RMI I had the highest AUC (0.825, 95% CI: 0.790–0.856) among the four RMIs in BOTs group. Similar results were found in SBOT (0.839, 95% CI: 0.804–0.871) and MBOT (0.791, 95% CI: 0.749–0.829) subgroups. RMI I had the highest specificity among the BOTs group (87.6, 95% CI: 83.9–90.7%), SBOT (87.6, 95% CI: 83.9–90.7%) and MBOT group (87.6, 95% CI: 83.9–90.7%). RMI II scored the highest overall in terms of sensitivity among the BOTs group (69.75, 95% CI: 62.1–76.7%), SBOT (74.34, 95% CI: 65.3–82.1%) and MBOT (59.18, 95% CI: 44.2–73.0%) group.

Conclusion

Compared to other RMIs, RMI I was the best-performed method for differentiation of BOTs from benign ovarian tumors. At the same time, RMI I also performed best in the discrimination SBOT from benign ovarian tumors.

Diagnostic value of ultrasound score, color Doppler ultrasound RI and spiral CT for ovarian tumors

Diagnostic value of ultrasound score, color Doppler ultrasound resistance index (RI) and spiral computed tomography (CT) for ovarian tumors was investigated. In total 224 patients pathologically diagnosed with ovarian tumor after operation in Cangzhou Central Hospital were selected, including 120 patients with benign ovarian tumor and 104 patients with malignant ovarian tumor. Patients with benign and malignant tumors were scored according to the ultrasound scoring criteria. The color Doppler ultrasound examination was performed and the corresponding RI was recorded. At the same time, 64-slice spiral CT was performed, and results were compared with the postoperative pathological diagnosis. Also, the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the combined application of the three methods were detected. The RI value of benign ovarian tumor was higher than that of malignant ovarian tumor, displaying statistically significant difference (P<0.05). The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the combined application of the three methods were 96.49, 90.91 and 93.75%, respectively. Ultrasound scoring, color Doppler ultrasound RI and 64-slice spiral CT have good diagnostic value for ovarian tumor, and the diagnostic accuracy rate of the combined application is higher. Therefore, different examination methods can be selected in clinic according to the different situations.

Cancer Antigen 125 (CA125, MUC16) Protein Expression in the Diagnosis and Progression of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive carcinoma, with most patients diagnosed at an advanced stage, with a 5-year survival rate of around 5%. An urgent need exists for identifying better diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic markers for this lethal disease. Recently, CA125 has been identified in PDAC, and the aim of this research is to study the changes in CA125 expression during the progression of benign pancreatic tissue (BPT) to PDAC and to assess its value as a biomarker of tumor growth. To address these questions, the cellular levels of CA125 in BPT and PDAC were measured using immunohistochemistry and compared on the basis of tumor staging, and the tissue microarray technology were constructed using resected pancreatic tissues. The staining reactions for each case were evaluated semiquantitatively using the histologic score system. Our investigation demonstrates a consistent and significant upregulation of CA125 during the transition from BPT to PDAC. We also found a direct correlation between CA125 immunohistochemistry score and tumor stage (P=0.02). In conclusion, our data indicate that CA125 plays a direct role in pancreatic carcinogenesis and suggests that it may eventually be used as a diagnostic and/or prognostic biomarker of pancreatic cancer. Prospective studies are recommended to evaluate further the diagnostic and prognostic capabilities of CA125 in PDAC, and further studies are warranted to assess the use of CA125 as a therapeutic marker.

Diagnostic Value of the Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI) for Detection of Pelvic Malignancies Compared with Pathology

Introduction

Pelvic masses are among most the common causes of patient admission into gynecology clinics and one of the most common reasons for referral to gynecologic oncology departments due to the risk of uterine or ovarian malignancies. The aim of this study is to compare the four indices of the risk of malignancy index (RMI 1–4), as a combination of menstrual status, radiological findings, and serum CA125 concentration, for discrimination of benign from malignant pelvic masses.

Methods

This retrospective descriptive and analytic study was conducted on 200 patients with pelvic mass, post-surgery, and who were referred to the oncology department in Shahid Sadoughi hospital of Yazd (Iran) between June 2007 and September 2011. Data regarding demographics, pathology reports, paraclinical and clinical tests were analyzed. The four RMI indices were separately used for determination of benign vs. malignant masses using the optimized cutoff points, ROC curve, sensitivity, specificity, predictive value of positive and negative, and accuracy. Finally, p value for each index was calculated, and a final discrimination power was measured by using SPSS version 17 software.

Results

The calculated p values in the four RMI indices in ultrasound findings indicated statistical significance, and the RMI 2 showed the highest level of accuracy or diagnostic performance. RMI 2 had a cutoff point of 90, an under-chart area 86.7, 79.36% sensitivity, 78.95% specificity, 58.44%, positive predictive value, 90.08% negative predictive value, and 78.93% accuracy, and a p value of 0.004. However, this relationship was found not to be meaningful using CT scan images.

Conclusions

Using RMI 2 for differentiation of malignant from benign pelvic masses is a reliable method with ultrasound findings.

CA 19-9 in evaluation of adnexal mass: retrospective cohort analysis and review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to estimate the diagnostic accuracy of serum marker CA 19-9 levels in the triage of adnexal masses.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was carried out in patients referred to the Gynecology Department at Carmel Medical Center due to adnexal masses. All patients underwent preoperative measurements of serum CA 125 and CA 19-9 and surgery with histopathologically confirmed diagnosis.

RESULTS

Between January 2005 and December 2012, 503 patients with adnexal masses were evaluated with serum tumor markers. Combination of CA 19-9 with CA 125, compared with CA 125 levels alone, suggested a nonsignificant effect on sensitivity (86.9% vs. 88.9%, respectively, p = 0.54) or specificity (79.5% vs. 73.5%, p = 0.1) in differentiating malignant from benign adnexal masses. CA 19-9 was not helpful in detecting mucinous histological types or borderline tumors. Mean CA 19-9 levels were higher in metastatic cases compared with primary ovarian malignancy (488.7 ± 1,457 vs. 46.3 ± 149.8 U/mL, respectively, p = 0.001). In mature cystic teratomas, mean CA 19-9 levels were higher and CA 125 levels were lower than in ovarian carcinoma (p = 0.049 and p = 0.0012, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of the tumor markers CA 19-9 and CA 125 did not contribute significantly to the detection of malignant adnexal masses compared with CA 125 alone. As our results suggest that higher CA 19-9 levels could be helpful in differentiating metastatic tumors from primary ovarian malignancy; this issue should be investigated in large well-designed prospective cohort trials.