Comparison of the international ovarian tumor analysis simple rules scoring system and risk of malignancy index-4 as predictors of ovarian malignancy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20241608Keywords:
Diagnostic, IOTA simple rules, Ovarian cancer, RMI-4, ScoringAbstract
Background: Ovarian cancer is one of the top three most common cancers in women. Most are detected at an advanced stage, so early detection is essential. A scoring system can easily predict an ovarian malignancy. IOTA Simple Rules and RMI-4 are easy-to-implement scoring systems. This study aimed to evaluate the comparison between the accuracy of the IOTA simple rules scoring system and RMI-4 as a predictor of malignancy in ovarian tumor cases at Prof. Dr. IGNG Ngoerah general hospital.
Methods: This study used a diagnostic trial design involving 120 ovarian tumor patients undergoing surgery at Prof. Dr. IGNG Ngoerah general hospital, with 100 patients meeting the inclusion criteria. The collected data were tabulated and analyzed using SPSS for Windows ver. 22. Results were considered significant if p≤0.05.
Results: From 100 patient samples who met the inclusion criteria, 60 subjects (60%) were ovarian tumors with benign histopathologic results, and 40 (40%) subjects were tumors with malignant histopathology. The majority of ovarian tumors with malignant histopathology were found in the age group >50 years (52.5%), the menopausal group (57.5%), and multiparity (70%). CA-125 levels above 35 U/ml are found in 90% of the population, with details of 92.5% found in populations with malignant histopathological tumors. The AUC values for RMI-4 and IOTA simple rules are 0.846 and 0.925, with the p value for each scoring system being <0.001.
Conclusions: This study found that the IOTA simple rules scoring method has a better diagnostic value than RMI-4 scoring.
Metrics
References
Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J cancer. 2015;136(5):E359-86.
Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne, M Soerjomataram, I Jemal A, Bray F. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209-49.
Bray F, Laversanne M, Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Soerjomataram I, et al. Global cancer statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2024;74(3):229-63.
Razi S, Ghoncheh M, Mohammadian-Hafshejani A, Aziznejhad H, Mohammadian M, Salehiniya H. The incidence and mortality of ovarian cancer and their relationship with the Human Development Index in Asia. Cancer Med Sci. 2016;10:628.
Dhitayoni IA, Budiana ING. Profil pasien kanker ovarium di rumah sakit umum pusat sanglah denpasar. J Med. 2017;6(3):1-9.
Budiana ING, Prayudi PKA, Saspriyana KY, Darmayasa IM, Wiradnyana AAG, Suwiyoga K. Characteristics of ovarian malignancy in Bali province, Indonesia. Med J Malaysia. 2021;76(3):326-31.
Timmerman D, Valentin L, Bourne TH, Collins WP, Verrelst H, Vergote I. Terms, definitions and measurements to describe the sonographic features of adnexal tumors: a consensus opinion from the international ovarian tumor analysis (IOTA) Group. J Int Soc Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2000;16(5):500-5.
Timmerman D, Testa AC, Bourne T, Ferrazzi E, Ameye L, Konstantinovic ML, et al. 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 Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2005;23(34):8794-801.
Webb JR, Milne K, Kroeger DR, Nelson BH. PD-L1 expression is associated with tumor-infiltrating T cells and favorable prognosis in high-grade serous ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;141(2):293-302.
Zheng G, Yu H, Kanerva A, Försti A, Sundquist K, Hemminki K. Familial risks of ovarian cancer by age at diagnosis, proband type and histology. PLoS One. 2018;13(10):e0205000.
Ali AT, Al-Ani O, Al-Ani F. Epidemiology and risk factors for ovarian cancer. Prz Menopause Rev. 2023; 22(2):93-104.
Reid BM, Permuth JB, Sellers TA. Epidemiology of ovarian cancer: a review. Cancer Biol Med. 2017;14(1):9-32.
Timmerman D, Testa AC, Bourne T, Ameye L, Jurkovic D, Van Holsbeke C, et al. Simple ultrasound-based rules for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer. J Int Soc Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2008;31(6):681-90.
Timmerman D, Van Calster B, Testa A, Savelli L, Fischerova D, Froyman W, et al. Predicting the risk of malignancy in adnexal masses based on the Simple Rules from the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis group. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;214(4):424-37.
Nunes N, Ambler G, Foo X, Naftalin J, Widschwendter M, Jurkovic D. Use of IOTA simple rules for diagnosis of ovarian cancer: meta-analysis. J Int Soc Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014;44(5):503-14.
Yamamoto Y, Yamada R, Oguri H, Maeda N, Fukaya T. Comparison of four malignancy risk indices in the preoperative evaluation of patients with pelvic masses. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2009;144(2):163-7.
Feharsal Y, Putra AD. International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Scoring System to Predict Ovarian Malignancy Preoperatively. Indo J Obstet Gynecol. 2016.
Sayasneh A, Kaijser J, Preisler J, Johnson S, Stalder C, Husicka R, et al. A multicenter prospective external validation of the diagnostic performance of IOTA simple descriptors and rules to characterize ovarian masses. Gynecol Oncol. 2013;130(1):140-6.