Subjective assessment and IOTA ADNEX model in evaluation of adnexal masses in patients with history of breast cancer.


Journal

Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology
ISSN: 1469-0705
Titre abrégé: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9108340

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Oct 2023
Historique:
revised: 14 03 2023
received: 11 08 2022
accepted: 18 04 2023
medline: 4 10 2023
pubmed: 19 5 2023
entrez: 19 5 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

To evaluate the performance of subjective assessment and the Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model in discriminating between benign and malignant adnexal tumors and between metastatic and primary adnexal tumors in patients with a personal history of breast cancer. This was a retrospective single-center study including patients with a history of breast cancer who underwent surgery for an adnexal mass between 2013 and 2020. All patients had been examined with transvaginal or transrectal ultrasound using a standardized examination technique and all ultrasound reports had been stored and were retrieved for the purposes of this study. The specific diagnosis suggested by the original ultrasound examiner in the retrieved report was analyzed. For each mass, the ADNEX model risks were calculated prospectively and the highest relative risk was used to categorize each into one of five categories (benign, borderline, primary Stage I, primary Stages II-IV or metastatic ovarian cancer) for analysis of the ADNEX model in predicting the specific tumor type. The performance of subjective assessment and the ADNEX model in discriminating between benign and malignant adnexal tumors and between primary and metastatic adnexal tumors was evaluated, using final histology as the reference standard. Included in the study were 202 women with a history of breast cancer who underwent surgery for an adnexal mass. At histology, 93/202 (46.0%) masses were benign, 76/202 (37.6%) were primary malignancies (four borderline and 72 invasive tumors) and 33/202 (16.3%) were metastases. The original ultrasound examiner classified correctly 79/93 (84.9%) benign adnexal masses, 72/76 (94.7%) primary adnexal malignancies and 30/33 (90.9%) metastatic tumors. Subjective ultrasound evaluation had a sensitivity of 93.6%, specificity of 84.9% and accuracy of 89.6%, while the ADNEX model had higher sensitivity (98.2%) but lower specificity (78.5%), with similar accuracy (89.1%), in discriminating between benign and malignant ovarian masses. Subjective evaluation had a sensitivity of 51.5%, specificity of 88.8% and accuracy of 82.7% in distinguishing metastatic and primary tumors (including benign, borderline and invasive tumors), and the ADNEX model had a sensitivity of 63.6%, specificity of 84.6% and similar accuracy (81.2%). The performance of subjective assessment and the ADNEX model in discriminating between benign and malignant adnexal masses in this series of patients with history of breast cancer was relatively similar. Both subjective assessment and the ADNEX model demonstrated good accuracy and specificity in discriminating between metastatic and primary tumors, but the sensitivity was low. © 2023 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37204769
doi: 10.1002/uog.26253
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

594-602

Informations de copyright

© 2023 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Références

Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin 2022; 72: 7-33.
Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, Bray F. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2021; 71: 209-249.
Levi F, Te VC, Randimbison L, La Vecchia C. Cancer risk in women with previous breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2003; 14: 71-73.
Bergfeldt K, Rydh B, Granath F, Grönberg H, Thalib L, Adami HO, Hall P. Risk of ovarian cancer in breast-cancer patients with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer: a population-based cohort study. Lancet 2002; 360: 891-894.
Metcalfe KA, Lynch HT, Ghadirian P, Tung N, Olivotto IA, Foulkes WD, Warner E, Olopade O, Eisen A, Weber B, McLennan J, Sun P, Narod SA. The risk of ovarian cancer after breast cancer in BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 carriers. Gynecol Oncol 2005; 96: 222-226.
Tuncer ZS, Boyraz G, Selcuk I, Sahin N, Kaynaroğlu V, Ozışık Y. Adnexal masses in women with breast cancer. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2012; 52: 266-269.
Simpkins F, Zahurak M, Armstrong D, Grumbine F, Bristow R. Ovarian malignancy in breast cancer patients with an adnexal mass. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 105: 507-513.
Tserkezoglou A, Kontou S, Hadjieleftheriou G, Apostolikas N, Vassilomanolakis M, Sikiotis K, Salamalekis E, Tseke P, Magiakos G. Primary and metastatic ovarian cancer in patients with prior breast carcinoma. Pre-operative markers and treatment results. Anticancer Res 2006; 26: 2339-2344.
Reinert T, Nogueira-Rodrigues A, Kestelman FP, Ashton-Prolla P, Graudenz MS, Bines J. The challenge of evaluating adnexal masses in patients with breast cancer. Clin Breast Cancer 2018; 18: e587-e594.
Van Calster B, Van Hoorde K, Valentin L, Testa AC, Fischerova D, Van Holsbeke C, Savelli L, Franchi D, Epstein E, Kaijser J, Van Belle V, Czekierdowski A, Guerriero S, Fruscio R, Lanzani C, Scala F, Bourne T, Timmerman D; International Ovarian Tumour Analysis Group. 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: g5920.
Sayasneh A, Ferrara L, De Cock B, Saso S, Al-Memar M, Johnson S, Kaijser J, Carvalho J, Husicka R, Smith A, Stalder C, Blanco MC, Ettore G, Van Calster B, Timmerman D, Bourne T. Evaluating the risk of ovarian cancer before surgery using the ADNEX model: a multicentre external validation study. Br J Cancer 2016; 115: 542-548.
Araujo KG, Jales RM, Pereira PN, Yoshida A, de Angelo Andrade L, Sarian LO, Derchain S. Performance of the IOTA ADNEX model in preoperative discrimination of adnexal masses in a gynecological oncology center. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017; 49: 778-783.
Meys EMJ, Jeelof LS, Achten NMJ, Slangen BFM, Lambrechts S, Kruitwagen RFPM, Van Gorp T. Estimating risk of malignancy in adnexal masses: external validation of the ADNEX model and comparison with other frequently used ultrasound methods. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017; 49: 784-792.
Szubert S, Wojtowicz A, Moszynski R, Zywica P, Dyczkowski K, Stachowiak A, Sajdak S, Szpurek D, Alcazar JL. External validation of the IOTA ADNEX model performed by two independent gynecologic centers. Gynecol Oncol 2016; 142: 490-495.
Van Calster B, Steyerberg EW, Bourne T, Timmerman D, Collins GS; TG6 of the STRATOS initiative. Flawed external validation study of the ADNEX model to diagnose ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol Rep 2016; 18: 49-50.
Van Calster B. External validation of ADNEX model for diagnosing ovarian cancer: evaluating performance of differentiation between tumor subgroups. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017; 50: 406-407.
Wynants L, Timmerman D, Verbakel JY, Testa A, Savelli L, Fischerova D, Franchi D, Van Holsbeke C, Epstein E, Froyman W, Guerriero S, Rossi A, Fruscio R, Leone FP, Bourne T, Valentin L, Van Calster B. Clinical utility of risk models to refer patients with adnexal masses to specialized oncology care: multicenter external validation using decision curve analysis. Clin Cancer Res 2017; 23: 5082-5090.
Chen H, Qian L, Jiang M, Du Q, Yuan F, Feng W. Performance of IOTA ADNEX model in evaluating adnexal masses in a gynecological oncology center in China. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2019; 54: 815-822.
Viora E, Piovano E, Baima Poma C, Cotrino I, Castiglione A, Cavallero C, Sciarrone A, Bastonero S, Iskra L, Zola P. The ADNEX model to triage adnexal masses: An external validation study and comparison with the IOTA two-step strategy and subjective assessment by an experienced ultrasound operator. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2020; 247: 207-211.
Timmerman D, Valentin L, Bourne TH, Collins WP, Verrelst H, Vergote I; 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: 500-505.
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: 79-105.
Valentin L. Prospective cross-validation of Doppler ultrasound examination and gray-scale ultrasound imaging for discrimination of benign and malignant pelvic masses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1999; 14: 273-283.
Valentin L. Pattern recognition of pelvic masses by gray-scale ultrasound imaging: the contribution of Doppler ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1999; 14: 338-347.
American Joint Committee on Cancer. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, 7th edn, Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A (eds). Springer: New York, 2009.
Prat J; FIGO Committee on Gynecologic Oncology. Staging classification for cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, and peritoneum. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2014; 124: 1-5.
Prospective Validation and Comparison of Different Ultrasound Methods for Discrimination Between Benign and Malignant Ovarian/Tubal Masses Prior to Surgery (IOTA7). https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02847832.
International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) Phase 5 (IOTA-5). https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01698632.
Hann LE, Lui DM, Shi W, Bach AM, Selland DL, Castiel M. Adnexal masses in women with breast cancer: US findings with clinical and histopathologic correlation. Radiology 2000; 216: 242-247.
Testa AC, Ferrandina G, Timmerman D, Savelli L, Ludovisi M, Van Holsbeke C, Malaggese M, Scambia G, Valentin L. Imaging in gynecological disease (1): ultrasound features of metastases in the ovaries differ depending on the origin of the primary tumor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2007; 29: 505-511.
Moro F, Baima Poma C, Zannoni GF, Vidal Urbinati A, Pasciuto T, Ludovisi M, Moruzzi MC, Carinelli S, Franchi D, Scambia G, Testa AC. Imaging in gynecological disease (12): clinical and ultrasound features of invasive and non-invasive malignant serous ovarian tumors. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017; 50: 788-799.
Timmerman D, Schwärzler P, Collins WP, Claerhout F, Coenen M, Amant F, Vergote I, Bourne TH. Subjective assessment of adnexal masses with the use of ultrasonography: an analysis of interobserver variability and experience. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1999; 13: 11-16.
Epstein E, Van Calster B, Timmerman D, Nikman S. Subjective ultrasound assessment, the ADNEX model and ultrasound-guided tru-cut biopsy to differentiate disseminated primary ovarian cancer from metastatic non-ovarian cancer. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016; 47: 110-106.
Colombo N, Sessa C, du Bois A, Ledermann J, McCluggage WG, McNeish I, Morice P, Pignata S, Ray-Coquard I, Vergote I, Baert T, Belaroussi I, Dashora A, Olbrecht S, Planchamp F, Querleu D; ESMO-ESGO Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conference Working Group. ESMO-ESGO consensus conference recommendations on ovarian cancer: pathology and molecular biology, early and advanced stages, borderline tumours and recurrent disease†. Ann Oncol 2019; 30: 672-705.
National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Ovarian cancer including Fallopian Tube Cancer and Primary Peritoneal Cancer. NCCN Clin Pract Guidel Oncol Version 2.2022, July 13, 2022. https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/ovarian.pdf [Accessed 25 July 2022].
Abu-Rustum NR, Aghajanian CA, Venkatraman ES, Feroz F, Barakat RR. Metastatic breast carcinoma to the abdomen and pelvis. Gynecol Oncol 1997; 66: 41-44.
Ayhan A, Guvenal T, Salman MC, Ozyuncu O, Sakinci M, Basaran M. The role of cytoreductive surgery in nongenital cancers metastatic to the ovaries. Gynecol Oncol 2005; 98: 235-241.
Kubeček O, Laco J, Špaček J, Petera J, Kopecký J, Kubečková A, Filip S. The pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management of metastatic tumors to the ovary: a comprehensive review. Clin Exp Metastasis 2017; 34: 295-307.
Espinosa I, Gallardo A, D'Angelo E, Mozos A, Lerma E, Prat J. Simultaneous carcinomas of the breast and ovary: utility of Pax-8, WT-1, and GATA3 for distinguishing independent primary tumors from metastases. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2015; 34: 257-265.
Skírnisdóttir I, Garmo H, Holmberg L. Non-genital tract metastases to the ovaries presented as ovarian tumors in Sweden 1990-2003: occurrence, origin and survival compared to ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2007; 105: 166-171.

Auteurs

F Pozzati (F)

Dipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Rome, Italy.

C M Sassu (CM)

Dipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Rome, Italy.

G Marini (G)

Dipartimento Scienze della Vita e Sanità Pubblica, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.

F Mascilini (F)

Dipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Rome, Italy.

A Biscione (A)

Dipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Rome, Italy.

D Giannarelli (D)

Facility of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, G-STEP Generator, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Rome, Italy.

G Garganese (G)

Dipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Dipartimento Scienze della Vita e Sanità Pubblica, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.

S M Fragomeni (SM)

Dipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Rome, Italy.

G Scambia (G)

Dipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Dipartimento Scienze della Vita e Sanità Pubblica, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.

A C Testa (AC)

Dipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Dipartimento Scienze della Vita e Sanità Pubblica, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.

F Moro (F)

Dipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Rome, Italy.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH