Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27436085›Full record

ArticleJournal of ovarian research2016

Preoperative HE4, CA125 and ROMA in the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant adnexal masses.

Katarzyna M Terlikowska, Bozena Dobrzycka, Anna M Witkowska, Beata Mackowiak-Matejczyk, Tomasz Kamil Sledziewski, Maciej Kinalski, Slawomir J Terlikowski

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of ovarian research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
8.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Exhausted and Senescent CD4Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE Consensus Statement on pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian tumors.International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2021
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Katarzyna M TerlikowskaDepartment of Food Science and Technology, Medical University of Bialystok, 37 Szpitalna Street, 15-295, Bialystok, Poland.
Bozena DobrzyckaDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Maternity Care, Medical University of Bialystok, 15 Warszawska Street, 15-062, Bialystok, Poland.
Anna M WitkowskaDepartment of Food Science and Technology, Medical University of Bialystok, 37 Szpitalna Street, 15-295, Bialystok, Poland.
Beata Mackowiak-MatejczykDepartment of Gynaecologic Oncology, Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Bialystok Oncology Center, 12 Ogrodowa Street, 15-027, Bialystok, Poland.
Tomasz Kamil SledziewskiDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Maternity Care, Medical University of Bialystok, 15 Warszawska Street, 15-062, Bialystok, Poland.
Maciej KinalskiDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Jedrzej Sniadecki Memorial Hospital, 15 Warszawska Street, 15-062, Bialystok, Poland.
Slawomir J TerlikowskiDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Maternity Care, Medical University of Bialystok, 15 Warszawska Street, 15-062, Bialystok, Poland. sterlikowski@gmail.com.
Medical University of Białystok · PLWojewódzki Szpital Zespolony im. Jędrzeja Śniadeckiego · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate HE4, CA125 and ROMA in the preoperative differentiation benign ovarian diseases from epithelial ovarian cancer depending on the menopausal status.

methodsIn order to estimate markers' concentrations in the serum of women with benign ovarian disease (n = 128) and with epithelial ovarian carcinoma (n = 96) the electrochemiluminescence (ECLIA) technique has been applied.

resultsUsing the ROC analysis, although no statistical differences were found among their AUCs, the ROMA algorithm seems to be effective in gathering the diverse performance of HE4 and CA125. The AUC for HE4, CA125 and ROMA for all patients were: 0.895; 0.879 and 0.918, respectively. At established new optimal cutoff values for HE4, CA125 and ROMA we found higher specificity in postmenopausal compared to premenopausal women (96.9 vs 89.8 % and 97.7 vs 84.1 % and 95.9 vs 89.1 %, respectively). The sensitivity of HE4 in pre- and postmenopausal women was similar (83.5 vs 83.8 %), while for CA125 was the highest in premenopausal women (87.0 vs 84.1 %). For HE4, CA125 and ROMA the negative predictive value was high (97.6, 93.9 and 94.4 %, respectively).

conclusionsThe ROMA algorithm shows the best diagnostic performance to distinguish epithelial ovarian cancer from benign ovarian disease. We found the high specificity of HE4 and CA125 while differentiating ovarian benign diseases from epithelial ovarian cancer in postmenopausal women and the high sensitivity of CA125 in detecting epithelial ovarian cancer in premenopausal patients.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsAdnexal DiseasesAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkers, TumorCA-125 AntigenDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleHumansMembrane ProteinsMiddle AgedPostmenopausePremenopausePreoperative PeriodProteinsBiomarkers, TumorCA-125 AntigenMembrane ProteinsMUC16 protein, humanProteinsWAP Four-Disulfide Core Domain Protein 2WFDC2 protein, humanCA125HE4Ovarian cancerROMA

Identifiers

PMID27436085
PMCPMC4952144
OpenAlexW2478080461

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.