Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32166682›Full record

ArticleCurrent medical science2020

Ultrasound Features Improve Diagnostic Performance of Ovarian Cancer Predictors in Distinguishing Benign and Malignant Ovarian Tumors.

Yong-Ning Chen, Fei Ma, Ya-di Zhang, Li Chen, Chan-Yuan Li, Shi-Peng Gong

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Current medical science, 2020. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Yong-Ning ChenDepartment of Gynecology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Guangzhou, 510632, China.
Fei MaDepartment of Ultrasonography, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, China.
Ya-di ZhangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, China.
Li ChenDepartment of PET Center, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, China.
Chan-Yuan LiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, China.
Shi-Peng GongDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, China. gsp2103@163.com.
Southern Medical University · CNFirst Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University · CNNanfang Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To determine whether ultrasound features can improve the diagnostic performance of tumor markers in distinguishing ovarian tumors, we enrolled 719 patients diagnosed as having ovarian tumors at Nanfang Hospital from September 2014 to November 2016. Age, menopausal status, histopathology, the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stages, tumor biomarker levels, and detailed ultrasound reports of patients were collected. The area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity of the bellow-mentioned predictors were analyzed using the receiver operating characteristic curve. Of the 719 patients, 531 had benign lesions, 119 had epithelial ovarian cancers (EOC), 44 had borderline ovarian tumors (BOT), and 25 had non-EOC. AUCs and the sensitivity of cancer antigen 125 (CA125), human epididymis-specific protein 4 (HE4), Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA), Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI1), HE4 model, and Rajavithi-Ovarian Cancer Predictive Score (R-OPS) in the overall population were 0.792, 0.854, 0.856, 0.872, 0.893, 0.852, and 70.2%, 56.9%, 69.1%, 60.6%, 77.1%, 71.3%, respectively. For distinguishing EOC from benign tumors, the AUCs and sensitivity of the above mentioned predictors were 0.888, 0.946, 0.947, 0.949, 0.967, 0.966, and 84.0%, 79.8%, 87.4%, 84.9%, 90.8%, 89.1%, respectively. Their specificity in predicting benign diseases was 72.9%, 94.4%, 87.6%, 95.9%, 86.3%, 90.8%, respectively. Therefore, we consider biomarkers in combination with ultrasound features may improve the diagnostic performance in distinguishing malignant from benign ovarian tumors.

Indexed as

AdultAlgorithmsBiomarkers, TumorCA-125 AntigenCarcinoma, Ovarian EpithelialDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleHumansMembrane ProteinsMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingOvarian NeoplasmsPregnancyRetrospective StudiesROC CurveUltrasonographyBiomarkers, TumorCA-125 AntigenMembrane ProteinsMUC16 protein, humanWAP Four-Disulfide Core Domain Protein 2WFDC2 protein, humancancer antigen 125human epididymis-specific protein 4ovarian massesRajavithi-Ovarian Cancer Predictive ScoreRisk of Malignancy IndexRisk of Malignancy Index modelRisk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm

Identifiers

PMID32166682
OpenAlexW3011492325

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.