HE4 and CA125 as a diagnostic test in ovarian cancer: prospective validation of the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Recently, a Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) utilising human epididymis secretory protein 4 (HE4) and CA125 successfully classified patients as presenting a high or low risk for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). We validated this algorithm in an independent prospective study.Methods
Women with a pelvic mass, who were scheduled to have surgery, were enrolled in a prospective study. Preoperative serum levels of HE4 and CA125 were measured in 389 patients. The performance of each of the markers, as well as that of ROMA, was analysed.Results
When all malignant tumours were included, ROMA (receiver operator characteristic (ROC)-area under curve (AUC)=0.898) and HE4 (ROC-AUC)=0.857) did not perform significantly better than CA125 alone (ROC-AUC=0.877). Using a cutoff for ROMA of 12.5% for pre-menopausal patients, the test had a sensitivity of 67.5% and a specificity of 87.9%. With a cutoff of 14.4% for post-menopausal patients, the test had a sensitivity of 90.8% and a specificity of 66.3%. For EOC vs benign disease, the ROC-AUC of ROMA increased to 0.913 and for invasive EOC vs benign disease to 0.957.Conclusion
This independent validation study demonstrated similar performance indices to those recently published. However, in this study, HE4 and ROMA did not increase the detection of malignant disease compared with CA125 alone. Although the initial reports were promising, measurement of HE4 serum levels does not contribute to the diagnosis of ovarian cancer.
SUBMITTER: Van Gorp T
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3048204 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:Presumed benign ovarian tumours (PBOT) are defined by the International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) group, without suspected sonographic criteria of cancer, without ascites or metastasis. The aim is to evaluate the efficacy of human epididymis protein 4 (HE4), cancer antigen 125 (CA125), the risk of malignancy index (RMI) and the risk of ovarian malignancy index (ROMA) to predict ovarian cancer in women with PBOT. METHODS:It is a prospective, observational, multicentre, laboratory-based study including women with PBOT in four hospitals from 11 May 2015 through 12 May 2016. Preoperative CA125 and HE4 plasma levels were measured for all women. The primary endpoint was the specificity of CA125 and HE4 for diagnosing ovarian cancer. The main secondary endpoints were specificity and likelihood ratio of RMI, ROMA and tumours markers. RESULTS:Two hundred and fifty patients were initially enrolled and 221 patients were finally analysed, including 209 benign ovarian tumours (94.6%) and 12 malignant ovarian tumours (5.4%). The malignant group had significantly higher mean values of HE4, CA125, RMI and ROMA compared to the benign group (p < 0.001). Specificity was significantly higher using a combination of HE4 and CA125 (99.5%) compared to either HE4 or CA125 alone (90.4% and 91.4%, respectively, p < 0.001). Moreover, the positive likelihood ratio for combination HE4 and CA125 was significantly higher (104.5; 95% CI 13.6-800.0) compared to HE4 alone (5.81; 95% CI 2.83-11.90) or CA125 alone (6.97; 95% CI 3.91-12.41). CONCLUSIONS:The combination of HE4 and CA125 represents the best tool to predict the risk of ovarian cancer in patients with a PBOT.
| S-EPMC6912210 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) combing human epididymis secretary protein 4 (HE4) and CA125 showed better diagnostic accuracy for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) when compared with HE4 or CA125 alone; however, other studies showed no or worse diagnostic accuracy. We aim to conduct a prospective and multicenter clinical trial to compare the diagnostic accuracy of HE4, CA125, and ROMA for EOC.A prospective and multicenter (n = 9) trial including 2481 individuals was performed in Chinese women. HE4, CA125, and ROMA diagnostic accuracy were evaluated according to different menopausal status and stages of EOC. Their diagnostic values were evaluated by the area under curve (AUC) and compared by the Z scores. Diagnostic specificity of other kinds of participants (n = 1098) was also evaluated.For discriminating between healthy control (HC) and EOC, only CA125 showed significant difference for discriminating HC and EOC in all the individuals when compared with HE4 and ROMA (P < 0.001 and P = 0.02, respectively), at the cutoff value of 31.5, the sensitivity (SN) and specificity (SP) were 88.6% and 97.1%. For discriminating between benign pelvic mass (BPM) and EOC, ROMA showed significant difference for discriminating BPM and EOC in the all individuals (P = 0.01 and P = 0.02, respectively) and the postmenopausal individuals (P = 0.03 and P = 0.04, respectively), at the cutoff value of 27.3 and 34.5, the SNs were 97.0% and 89.4%, SPs were 81.4% and 82.5%, separately. Within all kinds of diseases, there was no significant difference in specificity between CA125 and HE4.In conclusions, when HE4, CA125, and ROMA were compared with each other according to different menopausal status, and stages. Only CA125 showed significant difference for discriminating HC and EOC in all the individuals, and ROMA for discriminating BPM and EOC in the all individuals and postmenopausal individuals when compared with HE4 or CA125. HE4 has showed no significant difference in specificity with all kinds of diseases when compared with CA125.
| S-EPMC5291636 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveSurvival in epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) remains poor. Most patients are diagnosed in late stages. Early diagnosis increases the chance of survival. We used the proximity extension assay from Olink Proteomics to search for new protein biomarkers with the potential to improve the diagnostic performance of CA125 and HE4 in patients with ovarian tumors.Material and methodsPlasma samples were obtained from 180 women with ovarian tumors; 30 cases of benign tumor, 28 cases with borderline tumors, 25 early EOC cases (FIGO stage I) and 97 advanced EOC cases (FIGO stages II-IV). Proteins were measured using the Olink® Oncology II and Inflammation panels. For statistical analyses, patients were categorized into benign tumors versus cancer and benign tumors versus borderline + cancer, respectively.ResultsWe analyzed 177 biomarkers. Thirty-four proteins had ROC AUC > 0.7 for discrimination between benign tumors and cancer. Fifteen proteins had ROC AUC > 0.7 for discrimination between benign tumors and borderline tumors + cancer. HE4 ranked highest for both comparisons. A reference model with HE4, CA125 and age (AUC 0.838 for benign tumors vs. cancer and AUC 0.770 for benign tumors vs. borderline tumors + cancer) was compared to the reference model with the addition of each of the remaining proteins with AUC > 0.7. ITGAV was the only individual biomarker found to improve diagnostic performance of the reference model, to AUC 0.874 for benign tumors vs. cancer and AUC 0.818 for benign tumors vs. borderline tumors + cancer (p < 0.05). Cross-validation and LASSO regression was combined to select multiple biomarker combinations. The best performing model for discrimination between benign tumors and borderline tumors + cancer was a 6-biomarker combination (HE4, CA125, ITGAV, CXCL1, CEACAM1, IL-10RB) and age (AUC 0.868, sensitivity 0.86 and specificity 0.82, p = 0.016 for comparison with the reference model).ConclusionHE4 was the best performing individual biomarker for discrimination between benign ovarian tumors and EOC including borderline tumors. The addition of other carcinogenesis-related biomarkers in a multiplex biomarker panel can improve the diagnostic performance of the established biomarkers HE4 and CA125.
| S-EPMC7571712 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundsRisk for Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) and Human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) appear to be promising predictors for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), however, conflicting results exist in the diagnostic performance comparison among ROMA, HE4 and CA125.MethodsRemote databases (MEDLINE/PUBMED, EMBASE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, the Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov) and full texts bibliography were searched for relevant abstracts. All studies included were closely assessed with the QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2). EOC predictive value of ROMA was systematically evaluated, and comparison among the predictive performances of ROMA, HE4 and CA125 were conducted within the same population. Sensitivity, specificity, DOR (diagnostic odds ratio), LR ± (positive and negative likelihood ratio) and AUC (area under receiver operating characteristic-curve) were summarized with a bivariate model. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were used to explore the heterogeneity.ResultsData of 7792 tests were retrieved from 11 studies. The overall estimates of ROMA for EOC predicting were: sensitivity (0.89, 95% CI 0.84-0.93), specificity (0.83, 95% CI 0.77-0.88), and AUC (0.93, 95% CI 0.90-0.95). Comparison of EOC predictive value between HE4 and CA125 found, specificity: HE4 (0.93, 95% CI 0.87-0.96) > CA125 (0.84, 95% CI 0.76-0.90); AUC: CA125 (0.88, 95% CI 0.85-0.91) > HE4 (0.82, 95% CI 0.78-0.85). Comparison of OC predictive value between HE4 and CA125 found, AUC: CA125 (0.89, 95% CI 0.85-0.91) > HE4 (0.79, 95% CI 0.76-0.83). Comparison among the three tests for EOC prediction found, sensitivity: ROMA (0.86, 95%CI 0.81-0.91) > HE4 (0.80, 95% CI 0.73-0.85); specificity: HE4 (0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.96) > ROMA (0.84, 95% CI 0.79-0.88) > CA125 (0.78, 95%CI 0.73-0.83).ConclusionsROMA is helpful for distinguishing epithelial ovarian cancer from benign pelvic mass. HE4 is not better than CA125 either for EOC or OC prediction. ROMA is promising predictors of epithelial ovarian cancer to replace CA125, but its utilization requires further exploration.
| S-EPMC3443004 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSerum markers are used before pelvic imaging to improve specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) of ovarian cancer multimodal screening strategies.MethodsWe conducted a randomized controlled pilot trial to estimate surgical PPV of a "2 of 3 tests positive" screening rule, and to compare use of HE4 as a first-line (Arm 1) versus a second-line (Arm 2) screen, in women at high and elevated risk for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) at five study sites. Semiannual screening was offered to 208 women ages 25 to 80 years with deleterious BRCA germline mutations and to 834 women ages 35 to 80 years with pedigrees suggesting inherited susceptibility. Annual screening was offered to 130 women ages 45 to 80 years (Risk Group 3) with epidemiologic and serum marker risk factors. Rising marker levels were identified using the parametric empirical Bayes algorithm.ResultsBoth strategies yielded surgical PPV above 25%. Protocol-indicated surgery was performed in 6 women, identifying two ovarian malignancies and yielding a surgical PPV in both arms combined of 33% (95% confidence interval: 4%-78%), 25% in Arm 1 and 50% in Arm 2. Surgical consultation was recommended for 37 women (26 in Arm 1 and 11 in Arm 2). On the basis of 12 women with at least 2 of 3 tests positive (CA125, HE4, or imaging), an intent-to-treat analysis yielded PPV of 14% in Arm 1 and 20% in Arm 2.ConclusionsPositive screens were more frequent when HE4 was included in the primary screen.ImpactHE4 may be useful as a confirmatory screen when rising CA125 is used alone as a primary screen.
| S-EPMC4082470 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The symptoms of ovarian cancer are vague, and current risk assessment tools such as serum CA125 and transvaginal ultrasound scan fail to reliably detect the disease early. This study aimed to evaluate urine CA125 and HE4 as diagnostic biomarkers for ovarian cancer in symptomatic women. Paired urine and serum samples were collected from women undergoing treatment for ovarian cancer (cases) or investigations for gynaecological symptoms (controls). Biomarkers were measured using an automated chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay analyser. Standard diagnostic accuracy metrics were calculated. In total, 114 women were included, of whom 17 (15%) were diagnosed with an epithelial ovarian malignancy. Levels of urine CA125 and HE4 were significantly elevated in women with ovarian cancer compared to controls [CA125: 8.5 U/mL (IQR: 2.4-19.5) vs. 2.3 U/mL (IQR: 1.0-6.4), p = 0.01. HE4: 12.0 nmol/L (IQR: 10.3-23.1) vs. 6.7 nmol/L (IQR: 3.4-13.6), p = 0.006]. Urine CA125 and HE4 detected ovarian cancer with an AUC of 0.69 (95% CI: 0.55-0.82) and 0.71 (95% CI: 0.69-0.82), respectively (p = 0.73). A combination of urine CA125 and HE4 at optimal thresholds had a sensitivity of 82.4% (95% CI: 56.6-96.2) and was comparable to the sensitivity of serum CA125 [88.2% (95% CI: 63.6-98.5)]. Larger studies are required to confirm our findings, standardise urine collection, and evaluate optimal biomarker thresholds. Urine CA125 and HE4 may be useful non-invasive diagnostic tools to triage women for formal ovarian cancer investigations.
| S-EPMC9953976 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) is approved for clinical use with CA125 to predict epithelial ovarian cancer in women with a pelvic mass or in remission after chemotherapy. Previously reported reference ranges for HE4 are inconsistent.We report positivity thresholds yielding 90%, 95%, 98%, and 99% specificity for age-defined populations of healthy women for HE4, CA125, and Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA), a weighted average of HE4 and CA125. HE4 and CA125 were measured in 1,780 samples from 778 healthy women aged >25 years with a documented deleterious mutation, or aged >35 years with a significant family history. Effects on marker levels of a woman's age, ethnicity, and epidemiologic characteristics were estimated, as were the population-specific means, variances, and within- and between-woman variances used to generate longitudinal screening algorithms for these markers.CA125 levels were lower with Black ethnicity (P = 0.008). Smoking was associated with higher HE4 (P = 0.007) and ROMA (P < 0.019). Continuous oral contraceptive use decreased levels of CA125 (P = 0.041), and ROMA (P = 0.12). CA125 was lower in women age ?55, and HE4 increased with age (P < 0.01), particularly among women age ?55.Because of the strong effect of age on HE4, thresholds for HE4 are best defined for women of specific ages. Age-specific population thresholds for HE4 for 95% specificity ranged from 41.4 pmol/L for women age 30 to 82.1 pmol/L for women age 80.Incorporation of serial marker values from screening history reduces personalized thresholds for CA125 and HE4 but is inappropriate for ROMA.
| S-EPMC3493821 | biostudies-other
Project description:BACKGROUND:The risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm (ROMA) is used for assessing ovarian cancer risk in women with a pelvic mass. Its diagnostic accuracy is variable. We investigated whether the clinically acceptable minimal sensitivity of >80.0% could be obtained with the suggested cutoff of 7.4%/25.3% for pre/postmenopausal women and with adjusted cutoffs set to a specificity of ≥75.0% or a sensitivity of 95.0%, in a hospital with a lower ovarian cancer (OC) prevalence than previously reported. METHODS:ROMA scores were calculated from measurements of human epididymis protein 4 and cancer antigen 125 in blood specimens from 443 patients with a pelvic mass. The ROMA-based risk group was compared against biopsy (N=309) or clinical follow-up with imaging (N=134) results. The ROMA sensitivity and specificity for predicting epithelial OC (EOC) and borderline ovarian tumor (BOT) were calculated for the suggested and adjusted cutoff values. RESULTS:When targeting BOT and EOC, the prevalence was 7.4% and sensitivity and specificity at the suggested cutoff were 63.6% and 90.7%, respectively. Sensitivity was 81.8% at the 4.65%/13.71% cutoff set to a specificity of 75.0%. When targeting only EOC, the prevalence was 4.1% and sensitivity and specificity at the suggested cutoff were 77.8% and 89.4%, respectively. Sensitivity was 88.9% at the 4.78%/14.35% cutoff set to a specificity of 75.0%. CONCLUSIONS:The sensitivity of ROMA was lower than expected when using the suggested cutoff. When using the adjusted cutoff, its sensitivity reached 80.0%.
| S-EPMC6340842 | biostudies-other
Project description:Longitudinal CA125 algorithms are the current basis of ovarian cancer screening. We report on longitudinal algorithms incorporating multiple markers. In the multimodal arm of United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS), 50,640 postmenopausal women underwent annual screening using a serum CA125 longitudinal algorithm. Women (cases) with invasive tubo-ovarian cancer (WHO 2014) following outcome review with stored annual serum samples donated in the 5 years preceding diagnosis were matched 1:1 to controls (no invasive tubo-ovarian cancer) in terms of the number of annual samples and age at randomisation. Blinded samples were assayed for serum human epididymis protein 4 (HE4), CA72-4 and anti-TP53 autoantibodies. Multimarker method of mean trends (MMT) longitudinal algorithms were developed using the assay results and trial CA125 values on the training set and evaluated in the blinded validation set. The study set comprised of 1363 (2-5 per woman) serial samples from 179 cases and 181 controls. In the validation set, area under the curve (AUC) and sensitivity of longitudinal CA125-MMT algorithm were 0.911 (0.871-0.952) and 90.5% (82.5-98.6%). None of the longitudinal multi-marker algorithms (CA125-HE4, CA125-HE4-CA72-4, CA125-HE4-CA72-4-anti-TP53) performed better or improved on lead-time. Our population study suggests that longitudinal HE4, CA72-4, anti-TP53 autoantibodies adds little value to longitudinal serum CA125 as a first-line test in ovarian cancer screening of postmenopausal women.
| S-EPMC7409061 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveIt is often difficult to distinguish a benign pelvic mass from a malignancy and tools to help referring physician are needed. The purpose of this study was to validate the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm in women presenting with a pelvic mass.MethodsThis was a prospective, multicenter, blinded clinical trial that included women who presented to a gynecologist, a family practitioner, an internist, or a general surgeon with an adnexal mass. Serum HE4 and CA 125 were determined preoperatively. A Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm score was calculated and classified patients into high-risk and low-risk groups for having a malignancy. The sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and positive predictive value of the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm were estimated.ResultsA total of 472 patients were evaluated with 383 women diagnosed with benign disease and 89 women with a malignancy. The incidence of all cancers was 15% and 10% for ovarian cancer. In the postmenopausal group, a sensitivity of 92.3% and a specificity of 76.0% and for the premenopausal group the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm had a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 74.2% for detecting ovarian cancer. When considering all women together, the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm had a sensitivity of 93.8%, a specificity of 74.9%, and a negative predictive value of 99.0%.ConclusionThe use of the serum biomarkers HE4 and CA 125 with the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm has a high sensitivity for the prediction of ovarian cancer in women with a pelvic mass. These findings support the use of the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm as a tool for the triage of women with an adnexal mass to gynecologic oncologists.Level of evidenceII.
| S-EPMC3594110 | biostudies-literature