ArticleOncology letters2016
Diagnostic usefulness of the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm using the electrochemiluminescence immunoassay for HE4 and the chemiluminescence microparticle immunoassay for CA125.
Article in Oncology letters, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic value of the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) index in the detection of ovarian cancer in postmenopausal women: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC women's health · 2025Pooled it
- Diagnostic measures comparison for ovarian malignancy risk in Epithelial ovarian cancer patients: a meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2021Pooled it
- A Dual Immunosensor Based on Optical Weak Value Amplification for Simultaneous Detection of CA125 and HE4.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Phytosterol intake and overall survival in newly diagnosed ovarian cancer patients: An ambispective cohort study.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
- A nomogram model based on clinical markers for predicting malignancy of ovarian tumors.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2022Article
- Current clinical application of serum biomarkers to detect and monitor ovarian cancer - update.Przeglad menopauzalny = Menopause review · 2021Review
- CPH-I and HE4 Are More Favorable Than CA125 in Differentiating Borderline Ovarian Tumors from Epithelial Ovarian Cancer at Early Stages.Disease markers · 2019Article
- Suitability assessment of baseline concentration of MMP3, TIMP3, HE4 and CA125 in the serum of patients with ovarian cancer.Journal of ovarian research · 2018Article
- Does the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm Provide Better Diagnostic Performance Than HE4 and CA125 in the Presurgical Differentiation of Adnexal Tumors in Polish Women?Disease markers · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study aimed to investigate the usefulness of the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) in the preoperative stratification of patients with ovarian tumors using a novel combination of laboratory tests. The study group (n=619) consisted of 354 premenopausal and 265 postmenopausal patients. The levels of carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA125) and human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) were determined, and ROMA calculations were performed for each pre- and postmenopausal patient. HE4 levels were determined using an electrochemiluminescence immunoassay, while CA125 levels were determined by a chemiluminescence microparticle immunoassay. A contingency table was applied to calculate the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV). Receiver operating characteristic curves were also constructed, and areas under the curves (AUCs) were compared between the marker determinations and ROMA algorithms. In terms of distinguishing between ovarian cancer and benign disease, the sensitivity of ROMA was 88.3%, specificity was 88.2%, PPV was 75.3% and NPV was 94.9% among all patients. The respective parameters were 71.1, 90.1, 48.2 and 91.1% in premenopausal patients and 93.6, 82.9, 86.6 and 91.6% in postmenopausal patients. The AUC value for the ROMA algorithm was 0.926 for the ovarian cancer vs. benign groups in all patients, 0.813 in premenopausal patients and 0.939 in postmenopausal patients. The respective AUC values were 0.911, 0.879 and 0.934 for CA125; and 0.879, 0.783 and 0.889 for HE4. In this combination, the ROMA algorithm is characterized by an extremely high sensitivity of prediction of ovarian cancer in women with pelvic masses, and may constitute a precise tool with which to support the qualification of patients to appropriate surgical procedures. The ROMA may be useful in diagnosing ovarian endometrial changes in young patients.
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.