Multivariate Index Assay Is Superior to CA125 and HE4 Testing in Detection of Ovarian Malignancy in African-American Women.

Biomarkers in cancer Pub Date : 2019-06-14 eCollection Date: 2019-01-01 DOI:10.1177/1179299X19853785
Charles Dunton, Rowan G Bullock, Herbert Fritsche
{"title":"Multivariate Index Assay Is Superior to CA125 and HE4 Testing in Detection of Ovarian Malignancy in African-American Women.","authors":"Charles Dunton,&nbsp;Rowan G Bullock,&nbsp;Herbert Fritsche","doi":"10.1177/1179299X19853785","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To review and analyze the serum values of risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm (ROMA) and multivariate index assay (MIA) in subgroups of women who underwent surgery for adnexal masses to determine sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for the detection of malignancy in different ethnic populations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Serum samples from 2 prospective trials of 1029 women in which 274 women diagnosed with malignancy were analyzed for ROMA scores and MIA results. Biomarker data were obtained from the previous prospective studies that validated the MIA test. Of these, 250 women were Caucasian (C) and 24 were African-American (AA). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and confidence intervals for preoperative test results were calculated using DTComPair package of the R programming language. In premenopausal women, a ROMA value equal to or greater than 1.14 indicates a high risk of finding epithelial ovarian cancer. In premenopausal women, MIA values greater than 5.0 are associated with a greater risk of malignancy. In postmenopausal women, a ROMA value equal to or greater than 2.99 indicates a high risk of finding epithelial ovarian cancer. In postmenopausal women, MIA values greater than 4.4 are associated with a greater risk of malignancy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Primary ovarian malignancy was diagnosed in 179 cases (167 C/12 AA) and metastatic disease to the ovary in an additional 27 cases (22 C/5 AA). Overall results are shown below.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our results demonstrate that ROMA in AA women with adnexal masses have lower sensitivity for the detection of malignancy than does MIA. Implementation of MIA in the evaluation of adnexal masses will increase the sensitivity of the detection of malignancy compared with ROMA, with the most marked results in AA women.</p>","PeriodicalId":72377,"journal":{"name":"Biomarkers in cancer","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1179299X19853785","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomarkers in cancer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1179299X19853785","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Objective: To review and analyze the serum values of risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm (ROMA) and multivariate index assay (MIA) in subgroups of women who underwent surgery for adnexal masses to determine sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for the detection of malignancy in different ethnic populations.

Methods: Serum samples from 2 prospective trials of 1029 women in which 274 women diagnosed with malignancy were analyzed for ROMA scores and MIA results. Biomarker data were obtained from the previous prospective studies that validated the MIA test. Of these, 250 women were Caucasian (C) and 24 were African-American (AA). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and confidence intervals for preoperative test results were calculated using DTComPair package of the R programming language. In premenopausal women, a ROMA value equal to or greater than 1.14 indicates a high risk of finding epithelial ovarian cancer. In premenopausal women, MIA values greater than 5.0 are associated with a greater risk of malignancy. In postmenopausal women, a ROMA value equal to or greater than 2.99 indicates a high risk of finding epithelial ovarian cancer. In postmenopausal women, MIA values greater than 4.4 are associated with a greater risk of malignancy.

Results: Primary ovarian malignancy was diagnosed in 179 cases (167 C/12 AA) and metastatic disease to the ovary in an additional 27 cases (22 C/5 AA). Overall results are shown below.

Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that ROMA in AA women with adnexal masses have lower sensitivity for the detection of malignancy than does MIA. Implementation of MIA in the evaluation of adnexal masses will increase the sensitivity of the detection of malignancy compared with ROMA, with the most marked results in AA women.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

在非裔美国妇女卵巢恶性肿瘤的检测中,多变量指标法优于CA125和HE4检测。
目的:回顾分析卵巢恶性肿瘤风险算法(ROMA)和多变量指数测定法(MIA)在不同民族附件肿物手术妇女亚组中的血清值,以确定不同民族人群恶性肿瘤检测的敏感性、特异性和阳性、阴性预测值。方法:对来自2项前瞻性试验的1029名女性的血清样本进行ROMA评分和MIA结果分析,其中274名女性被诊断为恶性肿瘤。生物标志物数据是从先前验证MIA测试的前瞻性研究中获得的。其中,250名女性是白种人(C), 24名是非裔美国人(AA)。使用R编程语言DTComPair软件包计算术前检测结果的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值以及置信区间。在绝经前妇女中,ROMA值等于或大于1.14表明发现上皮性卵巢癌的风险很高。在绝经前妇女中,MIA值大于5.0与恶性肿瘤的高风险相关。在绝经后妇女中,ROMA值等于或大于2.99表明发现上皮性卵巢癌的风险很高。在绝经后妇女中,MIA值大于4.4与恶性肿瘤的高风险相关。结果:原发性卵巢恶性肿瘤179例(167 C/12 AA),卵巢转移性疾病27例(22 C/5 AA)。总体结果如下所示。结论:我们的研究结果表明,与MIA相比,患有附件肿块的AA女性的ROMA对恶性肿瘤的检测敏感性较低。与ROMA相比,在附件肿物的评估中实施MIA将提高检测恶性肿瘤的敏感性,其中AA女性的结果最为显著。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信