Evaluation of the risk of malignancy index in daily clinical management of adnexal masses

Gynecologic Oncology

Volumn 116, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 384-388

  van den Akker, Petronella A J ^a   Aalders, Anette L ^b   Snijders, Marc P L M ^c   Kluivers, Kirsten B ^a   Samlal, Rahul A K ^d   Vollebergh, Jos H A ^e   Massuger, Leon F A G ^a  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b RIJNSTATE HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^c CANISIUS WILHELMINA HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^d GELDERSE VALLEI HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^e BERNHOVEN HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Adnexal masses; Preoperative evaluation; Risk of malignancy index; Ultrasound

Indexed keywords

CA 125 ANTIGEN;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BLOOD EXAMINATION; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER RISK; CARCINOSARCOMA; CLEAR CELL CARCINOMA; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL TRIAL; CYST; CYSTADENOCARCINOMA; CYSTADENOMA; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; ENDOMETRIOID CARCINOMA; FEMALE; FIBROMA; GRANULOSA CELL TUMOR; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MENOPAUSE; MULTICENTER STUDY; OVARY CANCER; PREDICTIVE VALIDITY; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; TERATOMA; TRANSVAGINAL ECHOGRAPHY; UNDIFFERENTIATED CARCINOMA;

ADNEXAL DISEASES; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CA-125 ANTIGEN; CYSTADENOCARCINOMA, SEROUS; FEMALE; GENITAL NEOPLASMS, FEMALE; HUMANS; MENOPAUSE; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVATION; RISK ASSESSMENT; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 75749083610     PISSN: 00908258     EISSN: 10956859     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2009.11.014     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Junor E.J., Hole D.J., McNulty L., Mason M., and Young J. Specialist gynaecologists and survival outcome in ovarian cancer: a Scottish national study of 1866 patients. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 106 (1999) 1130-1136
2. Olaitan A., Weeks J., Mocroft A., Smith J., Howe K., and Murdoch J. The surgical management of women with ovarian cancer in the south west of England. Br. J. Cancer 85 (2001) 1824-1830
3. Elit L., Bondy S.J., Paszat L., Przybysz R., and Levine M. Outcomes in surgery for ovarian cancer. Gynecol. Oncol. 87 (2002) 260-267
4. Carney M.E., Lancaster J.M., Ford C., Tsodikov A., and Wiggins C.L. A population-based study of patterns of care for ovarian cancer: who is seen by a gynecologic oncologist and who is not?. Gynecol. Oncol. 84 (2002) 36-42
5. Grossi M., Quinn M.A., Thursfield V.J., Francis P.A., Rome R.M., Planner R.S., et al. Ovarian cancer: patterns of care in Victoria during 1993-1995. Med. J. Aust. 177 (2002) 11-16
6. Engelen M.J., Kos H.E., Willemse P.H., Aalders J.G., de Vries E.G., Schaapveld M., et al. Surgery by consultant gynecologic oncologists improves survival in patients with ovarian carcinoma. Cancer 106 (2006) 589-598
7. Earle C.C., Schrag D., Neville B.A., Yabroff K.R., Topor M., Fahey A., et al. Effect of surgeon specialty on processes of care and outcomes for ovarian cancer patients. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 98 (2006) 172-180
8. Kumpulainen S., Kuoppala T., Leminen A., Penttinen J., Puistola U., Pukkala E., et al. Surgical treatment of ovarian cancer in different hospital categories-a prospective nation-wide study in Finland. Eur. J. Cancer 42 (2006) 388-395
9. Goff B.A., Matthews B.J., Wynn M., Muntz H.G., Lishner D.M., and Baldwin L.M. Ovarian cancer: patterns of surgical care across the United States. Gynecol. Oncol. 103 (2006) 383-390
10. Vernooij F., Heintz A.P., Coebergh J.W., Massuger L.F., Witteveen P.O., and van der Graaf Y. Specialized and high-volume care leads to better outcomes of ovarian cancer treatment in the Netherlands. Gynecol. Oncol. 112 (2009) 455-461
11. Jacobs I., Oram D., Fairbanks J., Turner J., Frost C., and 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. 97 (1990) 922-929
12. Tingulstad S., Hagen B., Skjeldestad F.E., Onsrud M., Kiserud T., Halvorsen T., 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. 103 (1996) 826-831
13. Tingulstad S., Hagen B., Skjeldestad F.E., Halvorsen T., Nustad K., and Onsrud M. The risk-of-malignancy index to evaluate potential ovarian cancers in local hospitals. Obstet. Gynecol. 93 (1999) 448-452
14. Davies A.P., Jacobs I., Woolas R., Fish A., and Oram D. The adnexal mass: benign or malignant? Evaluation of a risk of malignancy index. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 100 (1993) 927-931
15. Morgante G., la Marca A., Ditto A., and De Leo V. Comparison of two malignancy risk indices based on serum CA125, ultrasound score and menopausal status in the diagnosis of ovarian masses. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 106 (1999) 524-527
16. Aslam N., Tailor A., Lawton F., Carr J., Savvas M., and Jurkovic D. Prospective evaluation of three different models for the pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian cancer. BJOG 107 (2000) 1347-1353
17. Manjunath A.P., Pratapkumar, Sujatha K., and Vani R. Comparison of three risk of malignancy indices in evaluation of pelvic masses. Gynecol. Oncol. 81 (2001) 225-229
18. Mol B.W., Boll D., De Kanter M., Heintz A.P., Sijmons E.A., Oei S.G., et al. Distinguishing the benign and malignant adnexal mass: an external validation of prognostic models. Gynecol. Oncol. 80 (2001) 162-167
19. Torres J.C., Derchain S.F., Faundes A., Gontijo R.C., Martinez E.Z., and Andrade L.A. Risk-of-malignancy index in preoperative evaluation of clinically restricted ovarian cancer. Sao Paulo Med. J. 120 (2002) 72-76
20. Andersen E.S., Knudsen A., Rix P., and Johansen B. Risk of malignancy index in the preoperative evaluation of patients with adnexal masses. Gynecol. Oncol. 90 (2003) 109-112
21. Obeidat B.R., Amarin Z.O., Latimer J.A., and Crawford R.A. Risk of malignancy index in the preoperative evaluation of pelvic masses. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 85 (2004) 255-258
22. Bailey J., Tailor A., Naik R., Lopes A., Godfrey K., Hatem H.M., et al. Risk of malignancy index for referral of ovarian cancer cases to a tertiary center: does it identify the correct cases?. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 16 Suppl 1 (2006) 30-34
23. van Trappen P.O., Rufford B.D., Mills T.D., Sohaib S.A., Webb J.A., Sahdev A., et al. Differential diagnosis of adnexal masses: risk of malignancy index, ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging, and radioimmunoscintigraphy. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 17 (2007) 61-67
24. Ulusoy S., Akbayir O., Numanoglu C., Ulusoy N., Odabas E., and Gulkilik A. The risk of malignancy index in discrimination of adnexal masses. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 96 (2007) 186-191
25. Timmerman D., Testa A.C., Bourne T., Ferrazzi E., Ameye L., Konstantinovic M.L., et al. 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. 23 (2005) 8794-8801
26. Van Calster B., Timmerman D., Bourne T., Testa A.C., Van Holsbeke C., Domali E., et al. Discrimination between benign and malignant adnexal masses by specialist ultrasound examination versus serum CA-125. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 99 (2007) 1706-1714
27. Yazbek J., Raju S.K., Ben-Nagi J., Holland T.K., Hillaby K., and Jurkovic D. Effect of quality of gynaecological ultrasonography on management of patients with suspected ovarian cancer: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 9 (2008) 124-131
28. Yamamoto Y., Yamada R., Oguri H., Maeda N., and Fukaya T. Comparison of four malignancy risk indices in the preoperative evaluation of patients with pelvic masses. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 144 (2009) 163-167
29. Yazbek J., Aslam N., Tailor A., Hillaby K., Raju K.S., and Jurkovic D. A comparative study of the risk of malignancy index and the ovarian crescent sign for the diagnosis of invasive ovarian cancer. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 28 (2006) 320-324
30. Strigini F.A., Gadducci A., Del Bravo B., Ferdeghini M., and Genazzani A.R. Differential diagnosis of adnexal masses with transvaginal sonography, color flow imaging, and serum CA 125 assay in pre- and postmenopausal women. Gynecol. Oncol. 61 (1996) 68-72
31. Timmerman D., Van Calster B., Jurkovic D., Valentin L., Testa A.C., Bernard J.P., et al. Inclusion of CA-125 does not improve mathematical models developed to distinguish between benign and malignant adnexal tumors. J. Clin. Oncol. 25 (2007) 4194-4200