External validation of the IOTA ADNEX model performed by two independent gynecologic centers

Szubert, Sebastian; Wójtowicz, Andrzej; Moszyński, Rafał; Żywica, Patryk; Dyczkowski, Krzysztof; Stachowiak, Anna; Sajdak, Stefan; Szpurek, Dariusz; Alcázar, Juan Luis

doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.06.020

Cited by 47 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The staging results based on the ADNEX model are similar to those reported previously [9]. The accuracy and sensitivity of the ADNEX model on early stage tumors were less than on late stage tumors.…”

Section: The Clinical Significance Of the Adnex Model In Staging Ovarsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…It was reported that when the two sets of data were used for the diagnosis of benign and malignant ovarian tumors, the accuracy of the ADNEX model was 79.9%, and 81.3%, respectively [9]. We found that the accuracy, sensitivity and specialty of the ADNEX model were 78.70%, 93%, and 72%, respectively with the positive predictive value of 60.6% and negative predictive value of 95.7%.…”

Section: The Clinical Significance Of the Adnex Model In The Diagnosimentioning

confidence: 66%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Clinical Performance of ADNEX (The Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa) Model in Early Diagnosis and Staging of Benign and Malignant Ovarian Tumors

Hu¹,

Shi²,

Li³

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To investigate the clinical value of ADNEX model in early diagnosis and staging of benign and malignant ovarian tumors. Method: 136 cases of ovarian cancer patients treated in our hospital were retrospectively analyzed using the ADNEX risk model and MRI data. The accuracy of the two diagnostic methods was compared with the results of pathological examination as gold standard. Results: For qualitative assessment, the accuracy and sensitivity of the ADNEX model were 78.70% and 93%, while the accuracy and sensitivity of MRI examination were 80.1%, and 90.7%, respectively. The diagnostic values of the two methods were not statistically different (P > 0.05). For ovarian tumor staging, the ADNEX model was significantly less accurate and specific for staging borderline tumor than MRI examination, although it had significantly higher sensitivity (P < 0.05). For tumors at other stages, there were no diagnostic differences between the methods (P > 0.05). Conclusion: ADNEX risk model has certain diagnostic and predictive value to distinguish benign from malignant ovarian tumors. It is useful to detect and exclude ovarian tumor. However, for early diagnosis, it is not accurate enough and further study is needed to validate this usefulness.

show abstract

Section: The Clinical Significance Of the Adnex Model In Staging Ovarsupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: The Clinical Significance Of the Adnex Model In The Diagnosimentioning

confidence: 66%

Clinical Performance of ADNEX (The Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa) Model in Early Diagnosis and Staging of Benign and Malignant Ovarian Tumors

Hu¹,

Shi²,

Li³

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As a multiclass prediction model, ADNEX not only calculates the likelihood of malignancy in adnexal masses, but also divides this into the likelihood that the mass is borderline malignant, stage I primary invasive ovarian cancer, stage II–IV primary invasive ovarian cancer, or a metastasis in the ovary from another primary tumor [25]. The performance of ADNEX is at least as good as the performance of previous IOTA methods, as confirmed by external validation studies [26,27,28,29,30]. The ADNEX model is available online and in mobile applications ().…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of the Performance of International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Methods in the Diagnosis of Early Stage Ovarian Cancer in a Non-Screening Population

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The aim of this study was to assess and compare the performance of different ultrasound-based International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) strategies and subjective assessment for the diagnosis of early stage ovarian malignancy. Methods: This is a secondary analysis of a prospective multicenter cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study that included 1653 patients recruited at 18 centers from 2009 to 2012. All patients underwent standardized transvaginal ultrasonography by experienced ultrasound investigators. We assessed test performance of the IOTA Simple Rules (SRs), Simple Rules Risk (SRR), the Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model and subjective assessment to discriminate between stage I-II ovarian cancer and benign disease. Reference standard was histology after surgery. Results: 230 (13.9%) patients proved to have stage I–II primary invasive ovarian malignancy, and 1423 (86.1%) had benign disease. Sensitivity and specificity with respect to malignancy (95% confidence intervals) of the original SRs (classifying all inconclusive cases as malignant) were 94.3% (90.6% to 96.7%) and 73.4% (71.0% to 75.6%). Subjective assessment had a sensitivity and specificity of 90.0% (85.4% to 93.2%) and 86.7% (84.9% to 88.4%), respectively. The areas under the receiver operator characteristic curves of SRR and ADNEX were 0.917 (0.902 to 0.933) and 0.905 (0.920 to 0.934), respectively. At a 1% risk cut-off, sensitivity and specificity for SRR were 100% (98.4% to 100%) and 38.0% (35.5% to 40.6%), and for ADNEX were 100% (98.4% to 100%) and 19.4% (17.4% to 21.5%). At a 30% risk cut-off, sensitivity and specificity for SRR were 88.3% (83.5% to 91.8%) and 81.1% (79% to 83%), and for ADNEX were 84.5% (80.5% to 89.6%) and 84.5% (82.6% to 86.3%). Conclusion: This study shows that all three IOTA strategies have good ability to discriminate between stage I-II ovarian malignancy and benign disease.

show abstract

“…We therefore read with interest the recent external validation study of the ADNEX model (Szubert et al, 2016). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Flawed external validation study of the ADNEX model to diagnose ovarian cancer

Calster

Bourne

Timmerman

et al. 2016

Gynecologic Oncology Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

External validation of the IOTA ADNEX model performed by two independent gynecologic centers

Cited by 47 publications

References 16 publications

Clinical Performance of ADNEX (The Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa) Model in Early Diagnosis and Staging of Benign and Malignant Ovarian Tumors

Clinical Performance of ADNEX (The Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa) Model in Early Diagnosis and Staging of Benign and Malignant Ovarian Tumors

Validation of the Performance of International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Methods in the Diagnosis of Early Stage Ovarian Cancer in a Non-Screening Population

Flawed external validation study of the ADNEX model to diagnose ovarian cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About