Article Data

  • Views 589
  • Dowloads 129

Original Research

Open Access

Risk of malignancy index in discrimination between benign and malignant adnexal masses

  • A. Ristić1,*,
  • D. Filimonović1
  • O. Džatić-Smijković1
  • D. Dimitrijević1
  • R. Aničić1
  • S. Mihajlović1
  • D. Ardalić1
  • L. Srbinović1
  • M. Đukić1

1University Clinic for Gynecology and Obstetrics “Narodni front”, Belgrade (Serbia)

DOI: 10.12892/ejgo3777.2018 Vol.39,Issue 5,October 2018 pp.733-736

Published: 10 October 2018

*Corresponding Author(s): A. Ristić E-mail: galamedica@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Ovarian cancer is a big health concern, which continually attracts clinical debate in regard to validation and improvement of methods for malignancy prediction in women with adnexal masses. Purpose of investigation: The aim of this study was to evaluate the validity of the risk of malignancy index (RMI) as a diagnostic tool for discrimination between benign and malignant adnexal masses. Materials and Methods: The study group of 153 women with adnexal tumours were investigated and the RMI was calculated for each patient. Results: According to the histological examination of the specimens, 116 (75.8%) women had benign conditions, while 37 (24.2%) women had malignant masses. The RMI was reliable in 85% of all women with adnexal masses, and optimal cut-off value of 200 provides the highest performance for preoperative triage of adnexal masses. Conclusions: Although this study confirmed that the RMI is useful method for preoperative identification of benign and malignant adnexal masses, it is only a diagnostic tool and cannot predict malignancy in all cases.

Keywords

Ovarian cancer; Risk of malignancy index; Preoperative evaluation; Adnexal masses.

Cite and Share

A. Ristić,D. Filimonović,O. Džatić-Smijković,D. Dimitrijević,R. Aničić,S. Mihajlović,D. Ardalić,L. Srbinović,M. Đukić. Risk of malignancy index in discrimination between benign and malignant adnexal masses. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology. 2018. 39(5);733-736.

References

[1] Liu J.H., Zanotti K.M.: “Management of the adnexal mass”. Obstet. Gynecol., 2011, 117, 1413.

[2] Ferlay J., Shin H.R., Bray F., Forman D., Mathers C., Parkin D.M.: “Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008”. Int. J. Cancer, 2010, 127, 2893.

[3] Guzel A.I., Kuyumcuoglu U., Erdemoglu M.: “Adnexal masses in postmenopausal and reproductive age women”. J. Exp. Ther. Oncol., 2011, 9, 167.

[4] Yazbek J., Raju S.K., Ben-Nagi J., Holland T.K., Hillaby K., Jurkovic D.: “Effect of quality of gynaecological ultrasonography on management of patients with suspected ovarian cancer: a randomised controlled trial”. Lancet Oncol., 2008, 9, 124.

[5] Dodge J.E., Covens A.L., Lacchetti C., Elit L.M., Le T., DevriesAboud M., et al.: “Preoperative identification of a suspicious adnexal mass: a systematic review and meta-analysis”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2012, 126, 157.

[6] Santotoribio J.D., Garcia-de la Torre A., Canavate-Solano C., ArceMatute F., Sanchez-del Pino M.J., Perez-Ramos S.: “Cancer antigens 19.9 and 125 as tumor markers in patients with mucinous ovarian tumors”. Eur. J. Gynaecol. Oncol., 2016, 37, 26.

[7] Jacobs I., Bast R.C. Jr.: “The CA 125 tumour-associated antigen: a review of the literature”. Hum. Reprod., 1989, 4, 1.

[8] Skates S.J., Mai P., Horick N.K., Piedmonte M., Drescher C.W., Isaacs C., et al.: “Large prospective study of ovarian cancer screening in high-risk women: CA125 cut-point defined by menopausal status”. Cancer. Prev. Res., 2011, 4, 1401.

[9] Jacobs I., Oram D., Fairbanks J., Turner J., Frost C., Grudzinskas J.G.: “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, 922.

[10] Tingulstad S., Hagen B., Skjeldestad F.E., Onsrud M., Kiserud T., Halvorsen T., et al.: “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, 826.

[11] Tingulstad S., Hagen B., Skjeldestad F.E., Halvorsen T., Nustad K., Onsrud M.: “The risk-of-malignancy index to evaluate potential ovarian cancers in local hospitals”. Obstet. Gynecol., 1999, 93, 448.

[12] Aslam N., Tailor A., Lawton F., Carr J., Savvas M., Jurkovic D.: “Prospective evaluation of three different models for the pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian cancer”. BJOG, 2000, 107, 1347.

[13] Manjunath A.P., Pratapkumar, Sujatha K., Vani R.: “Comparison of three risk of malignancy indices in evaluation of pelvic masses”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2001, 81, 225.

[14] Bouzari Z., Yazdani S., Ahmadi M.H., Barat S., Kelagar Z.S., Kutenaie M.J., et al.: “Comparison of three malignancy risk indices and CA-125 in the preoperative evaluation of patients with pelvic masses”. BMC Res. Notes, 2011, 4, 1756.

[15] Abdulrahman G.O., Jr., McKnight L., Lutchman Singh K.: “The risk of malignancy index (RMI) in women with adnexal masses in Wales”. Taiwan. J. Obstet. Gynecol., 2014, 53, 376.

[16] Yenen M.C., Alanbay I., Akturk E., Ercan C.M., Coksuer H., Karasahin E., et al.: “Comparison of risk of malignancy indices; RMI 1-4 in borderline ovarian tumor”. Eur. J. Gynaecol. Oncol., 2012, 33, 168.

[17] Weiner Z., Thaler I., Beck D., Rottem S., Deutsch M., Brandes J.M.: “Differentiating malignant from benign ovarian tumors with transvaginal color flow imaging”. Obstet. Gynecol., 1992, 79, 159.

[18] Kurjak A., Zalud I., Alfirevic Z.: “Evaluation of adnexal masses with transvaginal color ultrasound”. J. Ultrasound. Med., 1991, 10, 295.

[19] Clarke-Pearson D.L.: “Clinical practice. Screening for ovarian cancer”. N. Engl. J. Med., 2009, 361, 170.

[20] Goff B.A., Mandel L., Muntz H.G., Melancon C.H.: “Ovarian carcinoma diagnosis”. Cancer, 2000, 89, 2068.

[21] Luketina H., Fotopoulou C., Luketina R.R., Pilger A., Sehouli J.: “Treatment decision-making processes in the systemic treatment of ovarian cancer: review of the scientific evidence”. Anticancer Res., 2012, 32, 4085.

[22] Strigini F.A., Gadducci A., Del Bravo B., Ferdeghini M., Genazzani A.R.: “Differential diagnosis of adnexal masses with transvaginal sonography, color flow imaging, and serum CA 125 assay in preand postmenopausal women”. Gynecol. Oncol., 1996, 61, 68.

[23] Park Y., Lee J.H., Hong D.J., Lee E.Y., Kim H.S.: “Diagnostic performances of HE4 and CA125 for the detection of ovarian cancer from patients with various gynecologic and non-gynecologic diseases”. Clin. Biochem., 2011, 44, 884.

[24] Dimitrijevic D., Vasiljevic M., Anicic R., Brankovic S., Ristic A., Devic A.: “Recurrence rate of ovarian endometriosis in patients treated with laparoscopic surgery and postoperative suppressive therapy”. Clin. Exp. Obstet. Gynecol., 2015, 42, 339.

[25] van Trappen P.O., Rufford B.D., Mills T.D., Sohaib S.A., Webb J.A., Sahdev A., et al.: “Differential diagnosis of adnexal masses: risk of malignancy index, ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging, and radioimmunoscintigraphy”. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer, 2007, 17, 61.

[26] Terzic M.M., Dotlic J., Likic I., Ladjevic N., Brndusic N., Arsenovic N., et al.: “Current diagnostic approach to patients with adnexal masses: which tools are relevant in routine praxis?”. Chin. J. Cancer Res., 2013, 25, 55.

[27] Terzic M., Dotlic J., Likic I., Brndusic N., Pilic I., Ladjevic N., et al.: “Risk of malignancy index validity assessment in premenopausal and postmenopausal women with adnexal tumors”. Taiwan. J. Obstet. Gynecol., 2013, 52, 253.

[28] Enakpene C.A., Omigbodun A.O., Goecke T.W., Odukogbe A.T., Beckmann M.W.: “Preoperative evaluation and triage of women with suspicious adnexal masses using risk of malignancy index”. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Res., 2009, 35, 131.

[29] van den Akker P.A., Aalders A.L., Snijders M.P., Kluivers K.B., Samlal R.A., Vollebergh J.H., et al.: “Evaluation of the Risk of Malignancy Index in daily clinical management of adnexal masses”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2010, 116, 384.

[30] Andersen E.S., Knudsen A., Rix P., Johansen B.: “Risk of malignancy index in the preoperative evaluation of patients with adnexal masses”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2003, 90, 109.

[31] Obeidat B.R., Amarin Z.O., Latimer J.A., Crawford R.A.: “Risk of malignancy index in the preoperative evaluation of pelvic masses”. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet., 2004, 85, 255.

[32] Lennox G.K., Eiriksson L.R., Reade C.J., Leung F., Mojtahedi G., Atenafu E.G., et al.: “Effectiveness of the risk of malignancy index and the risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm in a cohort of women with ovarian cancer: does histotype and stage matter?”. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer, 2015, 25, 809.

[33] Richards A., Herbst U., Manalang J., Pather S., Saidi S., TejadaBerges T., et al.: “HE4, CA125, the Risk of Malignancy Algorithm and the Risk of Malignancy Index and complex pelvic masses - a prospective comparison in the pre-operative evaluation of pelvic masses in an Australian population”. Aust. N. Z. J. Obstet. Gynaecol., 2015, 55, 493.

[34] Akdeniz N., Kuyumcuoglu U., Kale A., Erdemoglu M., Caca F.: “Risk of malignancy index for adnexal masses”. Eur. J. Gynaecol. Oncol., 2009, 30, 178.

[35] Bailey J., Tailor A., Naik R., Lopes A., Godfrey K., Hatem H.M., et al.: “Risk of malignancy index for referral of ovarian cancer cases to a tertiary center: does it identify the correct cases?”. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer, 2006, 1, 30.

Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,500 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.

Biological Abstracts Easily discover critical journal coverage of the life sciences with Biological Abstracts, produced by the Web of Science Group, with topics ranging from botany to microbiology to pharmacology. Including BIOSIS indexing and MeSH terms, specialized indexing in Biological Abstracts helps you to discover more accurate, context-sensitive results.

Google Scholar Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines.

JournalSeek Genamics JournalSeek is the largest completely categorized database of freely available journal information available on the internet. The database presently contains 39226 titles. Journal information includes the description (aims and scope), journal abbreviation, journal homepage link, subject category and ISSN.

Current Contents - Clinical Medicine Current Contents - Clinical Medicine provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in clinical medicine.

BIOSIS Previews BIOSIS Previews is an English-language, bibliographic database service, with abstracts and citation indexing. It is part of Clarivate Analytics Web of Science suite. BIOSIS Previews indexes data from 1926 to the present.

Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.

Submission Turnaround Time

Conferences

Top