Morphological Parameters of Ovarian Masses and Accuracy of the Risk of Malignancy Index in Diagnosing Ovarian Malignancy

Overview

Journal Prz Menopauzalny

Publisher Termedia

Date 2022 Oct 6

PMID 36199743

Authors

Akmaral S Adilgereyeva

Ibrahim A Abdelazim

Gulmira A Zhurabekova

Tamer E El-Ghazaly

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction: To detect the morphological parameters of ovarian masses and the accuracy of the risk of mali-gnancy index (RMI) in diagnosing ovarian malignancy.

Material And Methods: 264 women in 3 groups (reproductive, premenopausal, and postmenopausal) presented with ovarian masses and scheduled for surgery were included in this study. The participants' preoperative RMI was compared to the postoperative histology (gold standard) to detect the accuracy of RMI in diagnosing ovarian malignancy.

Results: The incidence of malignant and benign ovarian tumours in the reproductive group was 9.1% and 90.9%, respectively, while it was 35.2% and 64.8%, respectively, in the premenopausal group, and 35.2%, and 64.8%, respectively, in the postmenopausal group. The incidence of malignant ovarian tumours was significantly higher in the premenopausal (35.2%) and postmenopausal (35.2%) groups compared to the reproductive group (9.1%), ( = 0.0008, and = 0.0008, respectively).The receiver operating characteristic curve showed that RMI at cut-off value > 247.5 had 82.9% sensitivity, 100% specificity, 100% positive predictive value (PPV), and 98.1% negative predictive value (NPV) in diagnosing ovarian malignancy in the 3 studied groups (AUC 0.955, < 0.001). There was significant positive correlation between the participants' age, and RMI ( = 0.001), and between participants' cancer antigen-125 (CA-125) and RMI ( < 0.0001) in the ovarian malignancy group.

Conclusions: The multimodal RMI is an effective tool for primary evaluation of suspected ovarian masses. Risk malignancy index at cut-off value > 247.5 had the best performance (82.9% sensitivity, 100% specificity, 100% PPV, and 98.1% NPV) in diagnosing ovarian malignancy in the 3 studied groups. There was significant positive correlation between participants' age, and RMI, and between participants' CA-125 and RMI, in the studied malignant ovarian tumours.

Citing Articles

Relation between vitamin D and adolescents' serum prolactin.

Amanzholkyzy A, Donayeva A, Kulzhanova D, Abdelazim I, Abilov T, Baubekov Z Prz Menopauzalny. 2024; 22(4):202-206.

PMID: 38239397 PMC: 10793607. DOI: 10.5114/pm.2023.133883.

Vitamin D and vitamin D receptor polymorphism in Asian adolescents with primary dysmenorrhea.

Donayeva A, Amanzholkyzy A, Nurgaliyeva R, Gubasheva G, Saparbayev S, Ayaganov D BMC Womens Health. 2023; 23(1):414.

PMID: 37543584 PMC: 10403873. DOI: 10.1186/s12905-023-02569-9.

Accuracy of the risk of malignancy index-I in diagnosing ovarian malignancy in menopausal women.

Radwan A, Taema M Prz Menopauzalny. 2023; 22(1):1-5.

PMID: 37206673 PMC: 10189665. DOI: 10.5114/pm.2023.126435.

References

Boujoual M, Hakimi I, Kouach J, Oukabli M, Moussaoui D, Dehayni M . Large twisted ovarian fibroma in menopausal women: a case report. Pan Afr Med J. 2015; 20:322. PMC: 4491469. DOI: 10.11604/pamj.2015.20.322.5998. View

Tingulstad S, Hagen B, Skjeldestad F, Onsrud M, Kiserud T, Halvorsen T . 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):826-31. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1996.tb09882.x. View

Jacobs I, Menon U, Ryan A, Gentry-Maharaj A, Burnell M, Kalsi J . Ovarian cancer screening and mortality in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015; 387(10022):945-956. PMC: 4779792. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01224-6. View

Tingulstad S, Hagen B, Skjeldestad F, Halvorsen T, Nustad K, Onsrud M . The risk-of-malignancy index to evaluate potential ovarian cancers in local hospitals. Obstet Gynecol. 1999; 93(3):448-52. View

Nagle C, Dixon S, Jensen A, Kjaer S, Modugno F, deFazio A . Obesity and survival among women with ovarian cancer: results from the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium. Br J Cancer. 2015; 113(5):817-26. PMC: 4559823. DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2015.245. View

Simsek H, Tokmak A, Ozgu E, Doganay M, Danisman N, Erkaya S . Role of a risk of malignancy index in clinical approaches to adnexal masses. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2014; 15(18):7793-7. DOI: 10.7314/apjcp.2014.15.18.7793. View

Jung E, Eom H, Byun J, Kim Y, Lee K, Sung M . Different features of the histopathological subtypes of ovarian tumors in pre- and postmenopausal women. Menopause. 2017; 24(9):1028-1032. DOI: 10.1097/GME.0000000000000976. View

Van Calster B, Timmerman D, Valentin L, McIndoe A, Ghaem-Maghami S, Testa A . Triaging women with ovarian masses for surgery: observational diagnostic study to compare RCOG guidelines with an International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) group protocol. BJOG. 2012; 119(6):662-71. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2012.03297.x. View

Menon U, McGuire A, Raikou M, Ryan A, Davies S, Burnell M . The cost-effectiveness of screening for ovarian cancer: results from the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS). Br J Cancer. 2017; 117(5):619-627. PMC: 5572177. DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2017.222. View

10.

Abdelazim I, AbuFaza M, Hamed M, Bekmukhambetov Y, Zhurabekova G, Shikanova S . Severe adenomyosis with unexpectedly high CA-125: report of a rare case. Prz Menopauzalny. 2020; 19(3):144-146. PMC: 7573337. DOI: 10.5114/pm.2020.99610. View

11.

Jacobs I, Oram D, Fairbanks J, Turner J, Frost C, Grudzinskas J . 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):922-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1990.tb02448.x. View

12.

Enakpene C, Omigbodun A, Goecke T, Odukogbe A, Beckmann M . Preoperative evaluation and triage of women with suspicious adnexal masses using risk of malignancy index. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2009; 35(1):131-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1447-0756.2008.00869.x. View

13.

Cannioto R, Moysich K . Epithelial ovarian cancer and recreational physical activity: A review of the epidemiological literature and implications for exercise prescription. Gynecol Oncol. 2015; 137(3):559-73. PMC: 4447575. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.03.016. View

14.

Doubeni C, Doubeni A, Myers A . Diagnosis and Management of Ovarian Cancer. Am Fam Physician. 2016; 93(11):937-44. View

15.

Javdekar R, Maitra N . Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI) in Evaluation of Adnexal Mass. J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2015; 65(2):117-21. PMC: 4395584. DOI: 10.1007/s13224-014-0609-1. View

16.

Dora S, Dandapat A, Pande B, Hota J . A prospective study to evaluate the risk malignancy index and its diagnostic implication in patients with suspected ovarian mass. J Ovarian Res. 2017; 10(1):55. PMC: 5556625. DOI: 10.1186/s13048-017-0351-2. View

17.

Kearns B, Chilcott J, Whyte S, Preston L, Sadler S . Cost-effectiveness of screening for ovarian cancer amongst postmenopausal women: a model-based economic evaluation. BMC Med. 2016; 14(1):200. PMC: 5139096. DOI: 10.1186/s12916-016-0743-y. View

18.

Gaitskell K, Green J, Pirie K, Reeves G, Beral V . Tubal ligation and ovarian cancer risk in a large cohort: Substantial variation by histological type. Int J Cancer. 2015; 138(5):1076-84. PMC: 4832307. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.29856. View

19.

Harry V, Narayansingh G, Parkin D . The risk of malignancy index for ovarian tumours in Northeast Scotland--a population based study. Scott Med J. 2009; 54(2):21-3. DOI: 10.1258/rsmsmj.54.2.21. View

20.

Akturk E, Karaca R, Alanbay I, Dede M, Karasahin E, Yenen M . Comparison of four malignancy risk indices in the detection of malignant ovarian masses. J Gynecol Oncol. 2011; 22(3):177-82. PMC: 3188716. DOI: 10.3802/jgo.2011.22.3.177. View