open access
The use of sonographic subjective tumor assessment, IOTA logistic regression model 1, IOTA Simple Rules and GI-RADS system in the preoperative prediction of malignancy in women with adnexal masses
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, County Hospital, Minsk Mazowiecki, Poland
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Gynecology of the Medical University of Lublin, Poland
- Department of Epidemiology and Clinical Research Methodology, Medical University of Lublin, Poland
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Collegium Medicum, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, ul.Jagiellońska 13-15, 85-067 Bydgoszcz
open access
Abstract
Abstract
Keywords
ovarian cancer prediction, sonography, IOTA group, Simple Rules, LR1 model, GI-RADS model, RMI model
Title
The use of sonographic subjective tumor assessment, IOTA logistic regression model 1, IOTA Simple Rules and GI-RADS system in the preoperative prediction of malignancy in women with adnexal masses
Journal
Issue
Article type
Research paper
Pages
647-653
Published online
2017-12-29
Page views
2518
Article views/downloads
4026
DOI
Pubmed
Bibliographic record
Ginekol Pol 2017;88(12):647-653.
Keywords
ovarian cancer prediction
sonography
IOTA group
Simple Rules
LR1 model
GI-RADS model
RMI model
Authors
Jarosław Koneczny
Artur Czekierdowski
Marek Florczak
Paweł Poziemski
Norbert Stachowicz
Dariusz Borowski
- American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Committee on Practice Bulletins—Gynecology. Practice Bulletin No. 174: Evaluation and Management of Adnexal Masses. Obstet Gynecol. 2016; 128(5): e210–e226.
- Hall JA. Adnexal masses: when to observe, when to intervene, and when to refer. Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 116(2 Pt 1): 440; author reply 440.
- Liu JH, Zanotti KM. Management of the adnexal mass. Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 117(6): 1413–1428.
- Carney ME, Lancaster JM, Ford C, et al. A population-based study of patterns of care for ovarian cancer: who is seen by a gynecologic oncologist and who is not? Gynecol Oncol. 2002; 84(1): 36–42.
- Giede KC, Kieser K, Dodge J, et al. Who should operate on patients with ovarian cancer? An evidence-based review. Gynecol Oncol. 2005; 99(2): 447–461.
- Mercado C, Zingmond D, Karlan B, et al. Quality of care in advanced ovarian cancer: The importance of provider specialty. Gynecologic Oncology. 2010; 117(1): 18–22.
- Valentin L, Hagen B, Tingulstad S, et al. Comparison of 'pattern recognition' and logistic regression models for discrimination between benign and malignant pelvic masses: a prospective cross validation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2001; 18(4): 357–365.
- Moszynski R, Szpurek D, Szubert S, et al. Analysis of false negative results of subjective ultrasonography assessment of adnexal masses. Ginekol Pol. 2013; 84(2): 102–107.
- Stukan M, Dudziak M, Ratajczak K, et al. Usefulness of diagnostic indices comprising clinical, sonographic, and biomarker data for discriminating benign from malignant ovarian masses. J Ultrasound Med. 2015; 34(2): 207–217.
- Kaijser J, Gorp TV, Smet ME, et al. Are serum HE4 or ROMA scores useful to experienced examiners for improving characterization of adnexal masses after transvaginal ultrasonography? Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2013; 43(1): 89–97.
- Timmerman D, Valentin L, Bourne TH, et al. International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Group. Terms, definitions and measurements to describe the sonographic features of adnexal tumors: a consensus opinion from the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Group. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2000; 16(5): 500–505.
- Timmerman D, Testa AC, Bourne T, et al. International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Group. Logistic regression model to distinguish between the benign and malignant adnexal mass before surgery: a multicenter study by the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Group. J Clin Oncol. 2005; 23(34): 8794–8801.
- Timmerman D, Testa AC, Bourne T, et al. Simple ultrasound-based rules for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2008; 31(6): 681–690.
- Polish Gynecological Society recommendations. Ginekol.Pol.Supl. 2015.
- Jacobs I, Oram D, Fairbanks J, et al. 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; 97(10): 922–929.
- Tingulstad S, Hagen B, Skjeldestad FE, et al. 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; 103(8): 826–831.
- Tingulstad S, Hagen B, Skjeldestad FE, et al. The risk-of-malignancy index to evaluate potential ovarian cancers in local hospitals. Obstet Gynecol. 1999; 93(3): 448–452.
- Amor F, Alcázar JL, Vaccaro H, et al. GI-RADS reporting system for ultrasound evaluation of adnexal masses in clinical practice: a prospective multicenter study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 38(4): 450–455.
- Amor F, Alcázar JL, Vaccaro H, et al. GI-RADS reporting system for ultrasound evaluation of adnexal masses in clinical practice: a prospective multicenter study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 38(4): 450–455.
- Education and Practical Standards Committee, European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology. Minimum training recommendations for the practice of medical ultrasound. Ultraschall Med. 2006; 27(1): 79–105.
- Miller RW, Ueland FR. Risk of malignancy in sonographically confirmed ovarian tumors. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2012; 55(1): 52–64.
- Sayasneh A, Wynants L, Preisler J, et al. Multicentre external validation of IOTA prediction models and RMI by operators with varied training. Br J Cancer. 2013; 108(12): 2448–2454.
- Knafel A, Banas T, Nocun A, et al. The Prospective External Validation of International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Simple Rules in the Hands of Level I and II Examiners. Ultraschall Med. 2016; 37(5): 516–523.
- Abdalla N, Winiarek J, Bachanek M, et al. Clinical, ultrasound parameters and tumor marker-based mathematical models and scoring systems in pre-surgical diagnosis of adnexal tumors. Ginekol Pol. 2016; 87(12): 824–829.
- Valentin L, Ameye L, Savelli L, et al. Adnexal masses difficult to classify as benign or malignant using subjective assessment of gray-scale and Doppler ultrasound findings: logistic regression models do not help. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2011; 38(4): 456–465.
- Kaijser J, Sayasneh A, Van Hoorde K, et al. Presurgical diagnosis of adnexal tumours using mathematical models and scoring systems: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2014; 20(3): 449–462.
- Meys EMJ, Kaijser J, Kruitwagen RF, et al. Subjective assessment versus ultrasound models to diagnose ovarian cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Cancer. 2016; 58: 17–29.
- Nunes N, Ambler G, Foo X, et al. A prospective evaluation of the IOTA Logistic Regression Models (LR1 and LR2) in comparison to Subjective Pattern Recognition for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer in the outpatient setting. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017 [Epub ahead of print].
- Calster BV, Hoorde KV, Valentin L, et al. Evaluating the risk of ovarian cancer before surgery using the ADNEX model to differentiate between benign, borderline, early and advanced stage invasive, and secondary metastatic tumours: prospective multicentre diagnostic study. BMJ. 2014; 349(oct07 3): g5920–g5920.
- Abramowicz JS, Timmerman D. Ovarian mass-differentiating benign from malignant: the value of the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis ultrasound rules. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 217(6): 652–660.