4.7 Article

Clinical Utility of Risk Models to Refer Patients with Adnexal Masses to Specialized Oncology Care: Multicenter External Validation Using Decision Curve Analysis

Journal

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
Volume 23, Issue 17, Pages 5082-5090

Publisher

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-3248

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Internal Funds KU Leuven [C24/15/037]
  2. Flemish government [Research Foundation-Flanders (FWO)] [G049312N, G0B4716N]
  3. Flemish government [Flanders' Agency for Innovation by Science and Technology (IWT)] [IWT-TBM 070706-IOTA3]
  4. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust
  5. Swedish Medical Research Council [K2001-72X-11605-06A, K2002-72X-1160507B, K2004-73X-11605-09A, K2006-73X-11605-11-3]
  6. Swedish governmental grants ALF-medel [20150411]
  7. Swedish Cancer research fund Radiumhemmets forskningsfonder [154112]
  8. Malmo University Hospital
  9. Allmanna Sjukhusets i Malmo Stiftelse for bekampande av cancer
  10. Imperial College London
  11. Skane University Hospital
  12. Swedish governmental grants (ALF-medel)
  13. Swedish governmental grants (Landstingsfinansierad Regional Forskning)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To evaluate the utility of preoperative diagnostic models for ovarian cancer based on ultrasound and/or biomarkers for referring patients to specialized oncology care. The investigated models were RMI, ROMA, and 3 models from the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) group [LR2, ADNEX, and the Simple Rules risk score (SRRisk)]. Experimental Design: A secondary analysis of prospectively collected data from 2 cross-sectional cohort studies was performed to externally validate diagnostic models. A total of 2,763 patients (2,403 in dataset 1 and 360 in dataset 2) from 18 centers (11 oncology centers and 7 nononcology hospitals) in 6 countries participated. Excised tissue was histologically classified as benign or malignant. The clinical utility of the preoperative diagnostic models was assessed with net benefit (NB) at a range of risk thresholds (5%-50% risk of malignancy) to refer patients to specialized oncology care. We visualized results with decision curves and generated bootstrap confidence intervals. Results: The prevalence of malignancy was 41% in dataset 1 and 40% in dataset 2. For thresholds up to 10% to 15%, RMI and ROMA had a lower NB than referring all patients. SRRisks and ADNEX demonstrated the highest NB. At a threshold of 20%, the NBs of ADNEX, SRrisks, and RMI were 0.348, 0.350, and 0.270, respectively. Results by menopausal status and type of center (oncology vs. nononcology) were similar. Conclusions: All tested IOTA methods, especially ADNEX and SRRisks, are clinically more useful than RMI and ROMA to select patients with adnexal masses for specialized oncology care. (C) 2017 AACR.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available