Dataset Information

Evaluating the risk of ovarian cancer before surgery using the ADNEX model: a multicentre external validation study.

ABSTRACT: The International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) group have developed the ADNEX (The Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa) model to predict the risk that an ovarian mass is benign, borderline, stage I, stages II-IV or metastatic. We aimed to externally validate the ADNEX model in the hands of examiners with varied training and experience.This was a multicentre cross-sectional cohort study for diagnostic accuracy. Patients were recruited from three cancer centres in Europe. Patients who underwent transvaginal ultrasonography and had a histological diagnosis of surgically removed tissue were included. The diagnostic performance of the ADNEX model with and without the use of CA125 as a predictor was calculated.Data from 610 women were analysed. The overall prevalence of malignancy was 30%. The area under the receiver operator curve (AUC) for the ADNEX diagnostic performance to differentiate between benign and malignant masses was 0.937 (95% CI: 0.915-0.954) when CA125 was included, and 0.925 (95% CI: 0.902-0.943) when CA125 was excluded. The calibration plots suggest good correspondence between the total predicted risk of malignancy and the observed proportion of malignancies. The model showed good discrimination between the different subtypes.The performance of the ADNEX model retains its performance on external validation in the hands of ultrasound examiners with varied training and experience.

SUBMITTER: Sayasneh A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4997550 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluating the risk of ovarian cancer before surgery using the ADNEX model: a multicentre external validation study.

Sayasneh A A Ferrara L L De Cock B B Saso S S Al-Memar M M Johnson S S Kaijser J J Carvalho J J Husicka R R Smith A A Stalder C C Blanco M C MC Ettore G G Van Calster B B Timmerman D D Bourne T T

British journal of cancer 20160802 5

<h4>Background</h4>The International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) group have developed the ADNEX (The Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa) model to predict the risk that an ovarian mass is benign, borderline, stage I, stages II-IV or metastatic. We aimed to externally validate the ADNEX model in the hands of examiners with varied training and experience.<h4>Methods</h4>This was a multicentre cross-sectional cohort study for diagnostic accuracy. Patients were recruited from three c ...[more]

PMID: 27482647

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo develop a risk prediction model to preoperatively discriminate between benign, borderline, stage I invasive, stage II-IV invasive, and secondary metastatic ovarian tumours.DesignObservational diagnostic study using prospectively collected clinical and ultrasound data.Setting24 ultrasound centres in 10 countries.ParticipantsWomen with an ovarian (including para-ovarian and tubal) mass and who underwent a standardised ultrasound examination before surgery. The model was developed on 3506 patients recruited between 1999 and 2007, temporally validated on 2403 patients recruited between 2009 and 2012, and then updated on all 5909 patients.Main outcome measuresHistological classification and surgical staging of the mass.ResultsThe Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model contains three clinical and six ultrasound predictors: age, serum CA-125 level, type of centre (oncology centres v other hospitals), maximum diameter of lesion, proportion of solid tissue, more than 10 cyst locules, number of papillary projections, acoustic shadows, and ascites. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for the classic discrimination between benign and malignant tumours was 0.94 (0.93 to 0.95) on temporal validation. The AUC was 0.85 for benign versus borderline, 0.92 for benign versus stage I cancer, 0.99 for benign versus stage II-IV cancer, and 0.95 for benign versus secondary metastatic. AUCs between malignant subtypes varied between 0.71 and 0.95, with an AUC of 0.75 for borderline versus stage I cancer and 0.82 for stage II-IV versus secondary metastatic. Calibration curves showed that the estimated risks were accurate.ConclusionsThe ADNEX model discriminates well between benign and malignant tumours and offers fair to excellent discrimination between four types of ovarian malignancy. The use of ADNEX has the potential to improve triage and management decisions and so reduce morbidity and mortality associated with adnexal pathology.

Project description:ObjectivesTo validate externally the performance of the Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model and compare this model with other frequently used models in the differentiation between benign and malignant adnexal masses.MethodsIn this retrospective diagnostic accuracy study, we assessed data collected prospectively from patients with adnexal pathology who underwent real-time transvaginal or transrectal ultrasound by a single expert ultrasonographer in a tertiary care hospital between July 2011 and July 2015. The presence of a malignancy was determined by subjective assessment and use of four prediction models: the ADNEX model, simple ultrasound-based rules (simple rules), Logistic Regression model 2 (LR2) and the Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI), of which three different variants were assessed. Pathology was the clinical reference standard.ResultsIn total, 851 consecutive patients underwent ultrasound examination for an adnexal mass. For 326 patients (128 premenopausal and 198 postmenopausal), pathology results were available (211 (64.7%) benign; 115 (35.3%) malignant) and these were included in the analysis. The area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve (AUC) of the ADNEX model for the discrimination between benign and malignant tumors was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.89-0.95). AUCs for the subtypes of malignancy (i.e. borderline, Stage I-IV and metastatic adnexal tumors) ranged between 0.60 and 0.90. Only subjective assessment (AUC, 0.96 (95% CI, 0.93-0.98)) was superior to the ADNEX model (P = 0.01) in differentiating malignant from benign tumors. AUCs for the other models were 0.92 (95% CI, 0.89-0.95) for LR2, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.81-0.89) for RMI-I, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.77-0.86) for RMI-II and 0.84 (95% CI, 0.80-0.88) for RMI-III. At the proposed cut-off of ≥ 10%, the ADNEX model had the highest sensitivity (0.98 (95% CI, 0.93-1.00)) but the lowest specificity (0.62 (95% CI, 0.55-0.68)) compared with the other models. Both subjective assessment (sensitivity, 0.90 (95% CI, 0.83-0.95); specificity 0.91 (95% CI, 0.86-0.94)) and the simple rules model with inconclusive cases classified by subjective assessment (sensitivity, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.81-0.94); specificity, 0.90 (95% CI, 0.85-0.94)) had lower sensitivity, but their sensitivity and specificity were better balanced.ConclusionsAlthough the test performance of subjective assessment by an expert remains superior, the ADNEX model can help in the differentiation between benign and malignant ovarian tumors. The advantage of the ADNEX model as a polytomous model remains to be shown. © 2016 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Project description:ObjectivePrevious work has suggested that the ultrasound-based benign simple descriptors (BDs) can reliably exclude malignancy in a large proportion of women presenting with an adnexal mass. This study aimed to validate a modified version of the BDs and to validate a two-step strategy to estimate the risk of malignancy, in which the modified BDs are followed by the Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model if modified BDs do not apply.MethodsThis was a retrospective analysis using data from the 2-year interim analysis of the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Phase-5 study, in which consecutive patients with at least one adnexal mass were recruited irrespective of subsequent management (conservative or surgery). The main outcome was classification of tumors as benign or malignant, based on histology or on clinical and ultrasound information during 1 year of follow-up. Multiple imputation was used when outcome based on follow-up was uncertain according to predefined criteria.ResultsA total of 8519 patients were recruited at 36 centers between 2012 and 2015. We excluded patients who were already in follow-up at recruitment and all patients from 19 centers that did not fulfil our criteria for good-quality surgical and follow-up data, leaving 4905 patients across 17 centers for statistical analysis. Overall, 3441 (70%) tumors were benign, 978 (20%) malignant and 486 (10%) uncertain. The modified BDs were applicable in 1798/4905 (37%) tumors, of which 1786 (99.3%) were benign. The two-step strategy based on ADNEX without CA125 had an area under the receiver-operating-characteristics curve (AUC) of 0.94 (95% CI, 0.92-0.96). The risk of malignancy was slightly underestimated, but calibration varied between centers. A sensitivity analysis in which we expanded the definition of uncertain outcome resulted in 1419 (29%) tumors with uncertain outcome and an AUC of the two-step strategy without CA125 of 0.93 (95% CI, 0.91-0.95).ConclusionA large proportion of adnexal masses can be classified as benign by the modified BDs. For the remaining masses, the ADNEX model can be used to estimate the risk of malignancy. This two-step strategy is convenient for clinical use. © 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Project description:ImportanceThe Simple Postoperative AKI Risk (SPARK) index is a prediction model for postoperative acute kidney injury (PO-AKI) in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. External validation has not been performed.ObjectiveTo externally validate the SPARK index.Design, setting, and participantsThis single-center retrospective cohort study included adults who underwent noncardiac surgery under general anesthesia from 2007 to 2011. Those with obstetric or urological surgery, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of less than 15 mL/min/1.73 m2, preoperative dialysis, or an expected surgical duration of less than 1 hour were excluded. The study was conducted at Nara Medical University Hospital. Data analysis was conducted from January to July 2021.ExposuresRisk factors for AKI included in SPARK index.Main outcomes and measuresPO-AKI, defined as an increase in serum creatinine of at least 0.3 mg/dL within 48 hours or 150% compared with preoperative baseline value or urine output of less than 0.5 mL/kg/h for at least 6 hours within 1 week after surgery, and critical AKI, defined as either AKI stage 2 or greater and/or any AKI connected to postoperative death or requiring kidney replacement therapy before discharge. The discrimination and calibration of the SPARK index were examined with area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) and calibration plots, respectively.ResultsAmong 5135 participants (2410 [46.9%] men), 303 (5.9%) developed PO-AKI, and 137 (2.7%) developed critical AKI. Compared with the SPARK cohort, participants in our cohort were older (median [IQR] age, 56 [44-66] years vs 63 [50-73] years), had lower baseline eGFR (median [IQR], 82.1 [71.4-95.1] mL/min/1.73 m2 vs 78.2 [65.6-92.2] mL/min/1.73 m2), and had a higher prevalence of comorbidities (eg, diabetes: 3956 of 51 041 [7.8%] vs 802 [15.6%]). The incidence of PO-AKI and critical AKI increased as the scores on the SPARK index increased. For example, 10 of 593 participants (1.7%) in SPARK class A, indicating lowest risk, experienced PO-AKI, while 53 of 332 (16.0%) in SPARK class D, indicating highest risk, experienced PO-AKI. However, AUCs for PO-AKI and critical AKI were 0.67 (95% CI, 0.63-0.70) and 0.62 (95% CI, 0.57-0.67), respectively, and the calibration was poor (PO-AKI: y = 0.24x + 3.28; R2 = 0.86; critical AKI: y = 0.20x + 2.08; R2 = 0.51). Older age, diabetes, expected surgical duration, emergency surgery, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockade use, and hyponatremia were not associated with PO-AKI in our cohort, resulting in overestimation of the predicted probability of AKI in our cohort.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, the incidence of PO-AKI increased as the scores on the SPARK index increased. However, the predicted probability might not be accurate in cohorts with older patients with more comorbidities.

Project description:IntroductionAmong industrialized countries, endometrial cancer is a common malignancy with generally an excellent outcome. To personalize medicine, we ideally compile as much information as possible concerning patient prognosis prior to effecting an appropriate treatment decision. Endometrial cancer preoperative risk stratification (ENDORISK) is a machine learning-based computational Bayesian networks model that predicts lymph node metastasis and 5-year disease-specific survival potential with percentual probability. Our objective included validating ENDORISK effectiveness in our patient cohort, assessing its application in the current use of sentinel node biopsy, and verifying its accuracy in advanced stages.MethodsThe ENDORISK model was evaluated with a retrospective cohort of 425 patients from the University Hospital Brno, Czech Republic. Two hundred ninety-nine patients were involved in our disease-specific survival analysis; 226 cases with known lymph node status were available for lymph node metastasis analysis. Patients were included undergoing either pelvic lymph node dissection (N = 84) or sentinel node biopsy (N =70) to explore the accuracy of both staging procedures.ResultsThe area under the curve was 0.84 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77-0.9) for lymph node metastasis analysis and 0.86 (95% CI, 0.79-0.93) for 5-year disease-specific survival evaluation, indicating quite positive concordance between prediction and reality. Calibration plots to visualize results demonstrated an outstanding predictive value for low-risk cancers (grades 1-2), whereas outcomes were underestimated among high-risk patients (grade 3), especially in disease-specific survival. This phenomenon was even more obvious when patients were subclassified according to FIGO clinical stages.ConclusionsOur data confirmed ENDORISK model's laudable predictive ability, particularly among patients with a low risk of lymph node metastasis and expected favorable survival. For high-risk and/or advanced stages, the ENDORISK network needs to be additionally trained/improved.

Dataset Information

Evaluating the risk of ovarian cancer before surgery using the ADNEX model: a multicentre external validation study.

Publications

Evaluating the risk of ovarian cancer before surgery using the ADNEX model: a multicentre external validation study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets