Diagnostic Accuracy of the Copenhagen Index in Ovarian Malignancy: A Meta-analysis

Overview

Journal PLoS One

Specialties General Medicine
Science

Date 2023 Jun 14

PMID 37315054

Authors

Huiling Liu

Shouye Ma

Xiaohong Chen

Huifang Wu

Rongrong Wang

Mengmeng Du

Xiazi Nie

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: To assess the diagnostic value of the Copenhagen index for ovarian malignancy.

Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Embase, CBM, CNKI, and WanFang databases were searched throughout June 2021. Statistical analyses were performed using Stata 12, Meta-DiSc, and RevMan 5.3. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio were calculated, the summary receiver operating characteristic curve was drawn, and the area under the curve was calculated.

Results: Ten articles, including 11 studies with a total of 5266 patients, were included. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio were 0.82 [95% CI (0.80-0.83)], 0.88 [95% CI (0.87-0.89)], and 57.31 [95% CI (32.84-100.02)], respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristics curve and the Q index were 0.9545 and 0.8966, respectively.

Conclusion: Our systematic review shows that the sensitivity and specificity of the Copenhagen index are high enough for it to be used in a clinical setting to provide accurate ovarian cancer diagnosis without considering menopausal status.

Citing Articles

Current and Emerging Strategies for Tubo-Ovarian Cancer Diagnostics.

Brincat M, Mira A, Lawrence A Diagnostics (Basel). 2023; 13(21).

PMID: 37958227 PMC: 10647517. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13213331.

References

Deeks J, Macaskill P, Irwig L . The performance of tests of publication bias and other sample size effects in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy was assessed. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005; 58(9):882-93. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.01.016. View

Higgins J, Thompson S . Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2002; 21(11):1539-58. DOI: 10.1002/sim.1186. View

Gong S, Chen Y, Zhang Y, Yao W, Chen L, Liu S . [Diagnostic value of CA125, HE4 and Copenhagen Index in differentiating benign from malignant epithelial ovarian tumors]. Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao. 2017; 37(5):628-632. PMC: 6780478. View

. Practice Bulletin No. 174: Evaluation and Management of Adnexal Masses. Obstet Gynecol. 2016; 128(5):e210-e226. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001768. View

. Committee Opinion No. 477: the role of the obstetrician-gynecologist in the early detection of epithelial ovarian cancer. Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 117(3):742-746. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31821477db. View

Whiting P, Rutjes A, Westwood M, Mallett S, Deeks J, Reitsma J . QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med. 2011; 155(8):529-36. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-155-8-201110180-00009. View

Moore R, Brown A, Miller M, Skates S, Allard W, Verch T . The use of multiple novel tumor biomarkers for the detection of ovarian carcinoma in patients with a pelvic mass. Gynecol Oncol. 2007; 108(2):402-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2007.10.017. View

Arnold M, Rutherford M, Bardot A, Ferlay J, Andersson T, Myklebust T . Progress in cancer survival, mortality, and incidence in seven high-income countries 1995-2014 (ICBP SURVMARK-2): a population-based study. Lancet Oncol. 2019; 20(11):1493-1505. PMC: 6838671. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30456-5. View

Singh A, Gupta S, Badarukhiya J, Sachan M . Detection of aberrant methylation of HOXA9 and HIC1 through multiplex MethyLight assay in serum DNA for the early detection of epithelial ovarian cancer. Int J Cancer. 2020; 147(6):1740-1752. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.32984. View

10.

Kirchhoff C, Habben I, Ivell R, Krull N . A major human epididymis-specific cDNA encodes a protein with sequence homology to extracellular proteinase inhibitors. Biol Reprod. 1991; 45(2):350-7. DOI: 10.1095/biolreprod45.2.350. 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.

Minar L, Felsinger M, cermakova Z, Zlamal F, Bienertova-Vasku J . Comparison of the Copenhagen Index versus ROMA for the preoperative assessment of women with ovarian tumors. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2017; 140(2):241-246. DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.12371. View

13.

Drescher C, Anderson G . The Yet Unrealized Promise of Ovarian Cancer Screening. JAMA Oncol. 2018; 4(4):456-457. DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.0028. View

14.

Moore R, Miller M, Steinhoff M, Skates S, Lu K, Lambert-Messerlian G . Serum HE4 levels are less frequently elevated than CA125 in women with benign gynecologic disorders. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012; 206(4):351.e1-8. PMC: 3985608. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2011.12.029. View

15.

Schorge J, Modesitt S, Coleman R, Cohn D, Kauff N, Duska L . SGO White Paper on ovarian cancer: etiology, screening and surveillance. Gynecol Oncol. 2010; 119(1):7-17. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2010.06.003. View

16.

Shipeng G, Yongning C, Yadi Z, Chanyuan L, Qifan J . [Comparison of serum cancer antigen 125, human epididymis protein 4, ROMA, and CPH-I for diagnosis of ovarian cancer in Chinese patients with ovarian mass]. Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao. 2020; 39(12):1393-1401. PMC: 6942985. DOI: 10.12122/j.issn.1673-4254.2019.12.02. View

17.

Jayson G, Kohn E, Kitchener H, Ledermann J . Ovarian cancer. Lancet. 2014; 384(9951):1376-88. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62146-7. View

18.

Yoshida A, Francoise Derchain S, Pitta D, Andrade L, Sarian L . Comparing the Copenhagen Index (CPH-I) and Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA): Two equivalent ways to differentiate malignant from benign ovarian tumors before surgery?. Gynecol Oncol. 2016; 140(3):481-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.01.023. View

19.

Ferlay J, Colombet M, Soerjomataram I, Mathers C, Parkin D, Pineros M . Estimating the global cancer incidence and mortality in 2018: GLOBOCAN sources and methods. Int J Cancer. 2018; 144(8):1941-1953. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.31937. View

20.

Anton C, Carvalho F, Oliveira E, Maciel G, Baracat E, Carvalho J . A comparison of CA125, HE4, risk ovarian malignancy algorithm (ROMA), and risk malignancy index (RMI) for the classification of ovarian masses. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2012; 67(5):437-41. PMC: 3351260. DOI: 10.6061/clinics/2012(05)06. View