ReviewSubjective assessment versus ultrasound models to diagnose ovarian cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Introduction
In order to ensure that ovarian cancer patients receive appropriate treatment, an accurate characterisation of any adnexal mass that needs surgery is pivotal to improve the outcome of this disease. Subjective assessment by experienced examiners, also called ‘pattern recognition’, is generally accepted to be the best way to classify adnexal masses prior to surgery. Several individual reports have demonstrated that subjective assessment is superior to the use of scoring systems and mathematical models, such as International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) simple ultrasound-based rules (simple rules), IOTA logistic regression model 2 (LR2) or the risk of malignancy index (RMI) [1], [2], [3], [4]. However, both LR2 and simple rules closely approximate the performance of subjective assessment by expert examiners [5], [6]. An advantage of these models over subjective assessment is their objectivity and simplicity which facilitates their use by ultrasonographers with different backgrounds and various levels of experience [7], [8], [9], [10]. Despite accumulating and compelling evidence in favour of both subjective assessment and the ultrasound-based models such as simple rules and LR2, many national guidelines concerning the management of ovarian masses still advocate the use of RMI in the classification of adnexal masses. Consequently, the RMI is still the most commonly used model in clinical practice.
Several reviews have critically appraised the evidence relating to this subject [5], [6], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16]. However, none of these has provided a meta-analysis on the test performance of subjective assessment of adnexal tumours, while in general this method is considered the most accurate way to distinguish benign from malignant adnexal tumours. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of subjective assessment, simple rules, LR2 and RMI for the pre-operative differentiation of benign and malignant adnexal masses.
Section snippets
Protocol and registration
All methods described in this manuscript were determined in advance and recorded in a study protocol (Prospero CRD42013004334, http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO). The conduct of this systematic review and meta-analysis was done in accordance with prevailing guidelines (http://www.prisma-statement.org and http://srdta.cochrane.org/handbook-dta-reviews).-
Eligibility criteria
Eligible studies had to evaluate diagnostic accuracy of subjective assessment, simple rules, LR2 and/or RMI for the characterisation of adnexal
Study selection and characteristics
In total 60 studies were included in the qualitative data synthesis (Fig. 1) [1], [6], [7], [8], [18], [19], [20], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37], [38], [39], [40], [41], [42], [43], [44], [45], [46], [47], [48], [49], [50], [51], [52], [53], [54], [55], [56], [57], [58], [59], [60], [61], [62], [63], [64], [65], [66], [67], [68], [69], [70], [71], [72], [73], [74], [75]. Of these, 47 were valid for quantitative data synthesis (meta-analysis),
Main results
This review and meta-analysis summarises the evidence currently available on the diagnostic accuracy of different pre-operative ultrasound methods for differentiating benign from malignant adnexal masses. According to this systematic review and meta-analysis, we believe an evidence-based approach should incorporate either simple rules with referral for subjective assessment of ultrasound findings by expert examiners if the rules are not applicable, or alternatively the LR2 model if such
Implications for research
Side-by-side comparison studies in which all methods are validated in the same population should be performed in order to prove which method demonstrates the best diagnostic performance. Furthermore, studies should employ strict blinding of the ultrasonographer to the outcome (histology) and vice versa.
More research should be performed on new methods, such as the ADNEX-model, or combinations of current methods.
Implications for practice
Evidence of this meta-analysis shows that, although RMI is used most commonly, both
Conflicts of interest statement
None declared.
Role of the funding source
EM, RK and TVG received grants from CZ Fund and the Academic Fund of Maastricht University Medical Centre+. This study is supported by the Flemish Government: FWO project G049312N, Flanders’. DT is Senior Clinical Investigator of the Research Foundation - Flanders (Belgium) (FWO).
The sponsors had no role in design of the review and meta-analysis; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the work for publication. The
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the authors of included articles who provided us with additional data, whenever possible; Dr. S. Granberg [25], Dr. B. Hagen [50], Dr. F Strigini [34], Dr. L. Roman [32], Dr. O. Lucidarme [27], Dr. A. Rossi and Dr. L. Forzano [51], Dr. S. Derchain [9], Dr. N. Nunes and Dr. D. Jurkovic [6], [7], [77], Dr. E Vaes and Dr. R. Manchanda [56], Dr. J.L. Alcazar [10], [70], [73], Dr. R. Moszynski [30], Dr. V. Arun-Muthuvel [46], Dr. T. Tongsong [58] and the members of the IOTA
References (85)
- et al.
Subjective assessment by ultrasound is superior to the risk of malignancy index (RMI) or the risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm (ROMA) in discriminating benign from malignant adnexal masses
Eur J Cancer
(2012) The use of mathematical models to evaluate pelvic masses; can they beat an expert operator
Best Prac Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol
(2004)- et al.
Three-dimensional ultrasound for assessing women with gynecological cancer: a systematic review
Gynecol Oncol
(2011) - et al.
Preoperative identification of a suspicious adnexal mass: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Gynecol Oncol
(2012) - et al.
Ultrasonography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosis of ovarian carcinoma
Eur J Radiol
(2007) - et al.
Tumors in the lower pelvis as imaged by vaginal sonography
Gynecol Oncol
(1990) - et al.
Pelvic examination, tumor marker level, and gray-scale and Doppler sonography in the prediction of pelvic cancer
Obstet Gynecol
(1997) - et al.
Differential diagnosis of adnexal masses with transvaginal sonography, color flow imaging, and serum CA 125 assay in pre- and postmenopausal women
Gynecol Oncol
(1996) - et al.
The role of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound in patients with adnexal masses
Clin Radiol
(2005) - et al.
Risk of malignancy index in the preoperative evaluation of patients with adnexal masses
Gynecol Oncol
(2003)
A proposal for a new scoring system to evaluate pelvic masses: pelvic masses score (PMS)
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol
Risk of malignancy index validity assessment in premenopausal and postmenopausal women with adnexal tumors
Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol
External validation of simple ultrasound rules of Timmerman on 122 ovarian tumors
Gynecologie Obstetrique Fertilite
Distinguishing benign and malignant pelvic masses: the value of different diagnostic methods in everyday clinical practice
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol
A comparison between an ultrasound based prediction model (LR2) and the risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm (ROMA) to assess the risk of malignancy in women with an adnexal mass
Gynecol Oncol
External validation of the adapted risk of malignancy index incorporating tumor size in the preoperative evaluation of adnexal masses
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol
Diagnostic performance of IOTA simple rules for adnexal masses classification: a comparison between two centers with different ovarian cancer prevalence
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol
Borderline tumours of the ovary: a cohort study of the Arbeitsgmeinschaft Gynakologische Onkologie (AGO) Study Group
Eur J Cancer
Adding a single CA 125 measurement to ultrasound imaging performed by an experienced examiner does not improve preoperative discrimination between benign and malignant adnexal masses
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
Simple ultrasound rules to distinguish between benign and malignant adnexal masses before surgery: prospective validation by IOTA group
BMJ
Presurgical diagnosis of adnexal tumours using mathematical models and scoring systems: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Hum Reprod Update
Use of the IOTA simple rules for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
A prospective validation of the IOTA logistic regression models (LR1 and LR2) in comparison to subjective pattern recognition for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer
Int J Gynecol Cancer
Multicentre external validation of IOTA prediction models and RMI by operators with varied training
Br J Cancer
Ultrasound criteria and CA 125 as predictive variables of ovarian cancer in women with adnexal tumors
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
IOTA simple rules for discriminating between benign and malignant adnexal masses: a prospective external validation
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
The accuracy of risk scores in predicting ovarian malignancy: a systematic review
Obstet Gynecol
Indeterminate ovarian mass at US: incremental value of second imaging test for characterization–meta-analysis and Bayesian analysis
Radiology
Usefulness of diagnostic indices comprising clinical, sonographic, and biomarker data for discriminating benign from malignant ovarian masses
J Ultrasound Med
Simple ultrasound-based rules for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
A risk of malignancy index incorporating CA 125, ultrasound and menopausal status for the accurate preoperative diagnosis of ovarian cancer
Br J Obstet Gynaecol
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
The risk-of-malignancy index to evaluate potential ovarian cancers in local hospitals
Obstet Gynecol
Minimum training recommendations for the practice of medical ultrasound
Ultraschall Med
QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies
Ann Intern Med
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
Improving the preoperative classification of adnexal masses as benign or malignant by second-stage tests
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
Transvaginal color Doppler imaging in the detection of ovarian cancer in a large study population
Int J Gynecol Cancer
A new computer-aided diagnostic tool for non-invasive characterisation of malignant ovarian masses: results of a multicentre validation study
Eur Radiol
The role of transvaginal ultrasonography and serum CA 125 assay combined with age and hormonal state in the differential diagnosis of pelvic masses
Eur J Gynaecol Oncol
Risk of malignancy index is not sensitive in detecting non-epithelial ovarian cancer and borderline ovarian tumor
J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc
Analysis of false negative results of subjective ultrasonography assessment of adnexal masses
Ginekol Pol
Cited by (185)
Current uptake and barriers to wider use of the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) models in Dutch gynaecological practice
2023, European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive BiologyO-RADS scoring system for adnexal lesions: Diagnostic performance on TVUS performed by an expert sonographer and MRI
2023, European Journal of RadiologyRadiomics and Radiogenomics of Ovarian Cancer: Implications for Treatment Monitoring and Clinical Management
2023, Radiologic Clinics of North AmericaDevelopment and validation of an ultrasound-based deep learning radiomics nomogram for predicting the malignant risk of ovarian tumours
2024, BioMedical Engineering OnlineMachine learning and radiomics for segmentation and classification of adnexal masses on ultrasound
2024, npj Precision Oncology
- 1
Present address: Montessoriweg 1, 3083 AN, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.