Comparison of HE4, CA125, ROMA and CPH-I for Preoperative Assessment of Adnexal Tumors

dc.contributor.author
Carreras-Dieguez, Nuria
dc.contributor.author
Glickman, Ariel
dc.contributor.author
Munmany, Meritxell
dc.contributor.author
Casanovas, Georgina
dc.contributor.author
Agustí, Núria
dc.contributor.author
Díaz Feijoo, Berta
dc.contributor.author
Saco, Adela
dc.contributor.author
Sánchez Hoyo, Beatriz
dc.contributor.author
Gaba, Lydia
dc.contributor.author
Rovirosa Casino, Angeles
dc.contributor.author
Pahisa Fábregas, Jaume
dc.contributor.author
Fernández Galán, Esther
dc.contributor.author
Torné Bladé, Aureli
dc.contributor.author
Fusté, Pere
dc.date.issued
2022-07-06T12:49:50Z
dc.date.issued
2022-07-06T12:49:50Z
dc.date.issued
2022-01-17
dc.date.issued
2022-07-06T12:49:50Z
dc.identifier
2075-4418
dc.identifier
https://hdl.handle.net/2445/187391
dc.identifier
718358
dc.description.abstract
(1) OBJECTIVE: To assess the performance of CA125, HE4, ROMA index and CPH-I index to preoperatively identify epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) or metastatic cancer in the ovary (MCO). (2) METHODS: single center retrospective study, including women with a diagnosis of adnexal mass. We obtained the AUC, sensitivity, specificity and predictive values were of HE4, CA125, ROMA and CPH-I for the diagnosis of EOC and MCO. Subgroup analysis for women harboring adnexal masses with inconclusive diagnosis of malignancy by ultrasound features and Stage I EOC was performed. (3) RESULTS: 1071 patients were included, 852 (79.6%) presented benign/borderline tumors and 219 (20.4%) presented EOC/MCO. AUC for HE4 was higher than for CA125 (0.91 vs. 0.87). No differences were seen between AUC of ROMA and CPH-I, but they were both higher than HE4 AUC. None of the tumor markers alone achieved a sensitivity of 90%; HE4 was highly specific (93.5%). ROMA showed a sensitivity and specificity of 91.1% and 84.6% respectively, while CPH-I showed a sensitivity of 91.1% with 79.2% specificity. For patients with inconclusive diagnosis of malignancy by ultrasound features and with Stage I EOC, ROMA showed the best diagnostic performance (4) CONCLUSIONS: ROMA and CPH-I perform better than tumor markers alone to identify patients harboring EOC or MCO. They can be helpful to assess the risk of malignancy of adnexal masses, especially in cases where ultrasonographic diagnosis is challenging (stage I EOC, inconclusive diagnosis of malignancy by ultrasound features).
dc.format
11 p.
dc.format
application/pdf
dc.format
application/pdf
dc.language
eng
dc.publisher
MDPI
dc.relation
Reproducció del document publicat a: https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12010226
dc.relation
Diagnostics, 2022, vol. 12, num. 1, p. 226
dc.relation
https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12010226
dc.rights
cc-by (c) Carreras, Núria et al., 2022
dc.rights
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.rights
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.source
Articles publicats en revistes (Cirurgia i Especialitats Medicoquirúrgiques)
dc.subject
Marcadors tumorals
dc.subject
Càncer d'ovari
dc.subject
Metàstasi
dc.subject
Tumor markers
dc.subject
Ovarian cancer
dc.subject
Metastasis
dc.title
Comparison of HE4, CA125, ROMA and CPH-I for Preoperative Assessment of Adnexal Tumors
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion


Fitxers en aquest element

FitxersGrandàriaFormatVisualització

No hi ha fitxers associats a aquest element.