Ultrasound-based ADNEX model for differentiating between benign, borderline, and malignant epithelial ovarian tumours

W Xie; Q Zhang; Y Wang; Z Xiang; P Zeng; R Huo; Z Du; L Tang

doi:10.1016/j.crad.2024.106761

Ultrasound-based ADNEX model for differentiating between benign, borderline, and malignant epithelial ovarian tumours

Clin Radiol. 2024 Nov 29:81:106761. doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2024.106761. Online ahead of print.

Authors

W Xie¹, Q Zhang¹, Y Wang¹, Z Xiang², P Zeng¹, R Huo³, Z Du¹, L Tang⁴

Affiliations

¹ Department of Ultrasound, Clinical Oncology School of Fujian Medical University, Fujian Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou 350014, Fujian Province, China.
² Department of Epidemiology, Clinical Oncology School of Fujian Medical University, Fujian Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou 350014, Fujian Province, China.
³ Department of Clinical Laboratory, Clinical Oncology School of Fujian Medical University, Fujian Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou, 350014, Fujian Province, China.
⁴ Department of Ultrasound, Clinical Oncology School of Fujian Medical University, Fujian Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou 350014, Fujian Province, China. Electronic address: tanglina@fjzlhospital.com.

PMID: 39721319
DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2024.106761

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ability of the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis-Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (IOTA-ADNEX) model to distinguish among benign, borderline, and malignant epithelial ovarian tumours (BeEOTs, BEOTs, and MEOTs, respectively).

Methods: The study included 813 patients with BeEOTs, BEOTs, and MEOTs who underwent ultrasound examinations and pelvic operations. Comparisons were made between the clinical information and ultrasonographic features of the three patient groups, and the histopathological diagnosis was the gold standard. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of the ADNEX model were calculated.

Results: This was a single-centre retrospective study. Of the 813 patients, 257 (31.6%) had BeEOTs, 114 (14.0%) had BEOTs, and 442 (54.4%) had MEOTs. For a cut-off value of 10% to identify the overall risk for ovarian cancer (OC), the sensitivity and specificity were 99.1% and 73.2%, respectively. According to the receiver operating characteristicscurves, the AUC was 0.987 (95% CI: 0.981-0.993) for BeEOTs compared with MEOTs, 0.820 (95% CI: 0.768-0.872) for BeEOTs compared with BEOTs, 0.912 (95% CI: 0.876-0.948) for BeEOTs compared with stage I OC, and 0.995 (95% CI: 0.992-0.998) for BeEOTs compared with stages II-IV OC. The AUC was 0.614 (95% CI: 0.519-0.709) for BEOTs compared with stage I OC, 0.903 (95% CI: 0.869-0.937) for BEOTs compared with stages II-IV OC, and 0.851 (95% CI: 0.800-0.902) for stage I OC compared with stages II-IV OC.

Conclusions: The IOTA-ADNEX model demonstrated good diagnostic performance for the three categories of EOTs and may have the potential to be popularised in assisting radiologists in the assessment of adnexal masses in the future.