ArticleTumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine2016
Development of a multi-marker model combining HE4, CA125, progesterone, and estradiol for distinguishing benign from malignant pelvic masses in postmenopausal women.
Article in Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Diagnostic value of urinary-to-serum human epididymis protein 4 ratio in ovarian cancer.Biomedical reports · 2017Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate HE4, CA125, progesterone (Prog), and estradiol (E2) for differentiating pelvic masses in postmenopausal women and aimed to build a multi-marker model which may improve the diagnostic value. HE4, CA125, Prog, and E2 were detected in 57 benign pelvic masses (BPM) and 92 epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) patients. A total of 66.66 % of the BPM and EOC serum samples were used for building the differentiation model, and the remaining 33.33 % of the BPM and EOC serum samples were used for validation of the differentiation model. After comparing by Z score statistics, HE4 + CA125 + E2 model was chosen as the best multi-marker model. In the training group, the area under curve of the HE4 + CA125 + E2 model was 0.97 (0.93, 1.00), sensitivities of the model for distinguishing BPM from EOC, from early EOC, and from advanced EOC were 90.16, 86.21, and 95.65 %; specificities were 92.11, 92.11, and 92.11 %. In the validation group, sensitivities of HE4 + CA125 + E2 model for distinguishing BPM from EOC, from early EOC, and from advanced EOC were 96.77, 100.00, and 87.50 %, specificities were 84.21, 100.00, and 84.21 %. The multi-marker model showed significant improvement when compared to CA125 or HE4, and it might be an effective pelvic mass differentiation method.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.