SynthesisScientific reports2021
Diagnostic measures comparison for ovarian malignancy risk in Epithelial ovarian cancer patients: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 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
- Meta-analysis of the diagnostic value ofFrontiers in oncology · 2022Pooled it
- Clinical Value of an LDH-CA125-NLR Panel for Diagnosis, Platinum Resistance, and Prognostic Assessment in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- Human biomarker navigator.iMeta · 2026Review
- Plasma level of human epididymis protein 4 is associated with risk of future venous thromboembolism-the Trøndelag Health study.Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH · 2026Article
- Superiority of the ROMA index over HE4 and CA125 for diagnosing ovarian cancer in a Bangladeshi cohort.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2026Article
- Diagnostic performance of serum CA-125 and ultrasonography in ovarian tumour differentiation.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Ovarian Tumor Biomarkers: Correlation Between Tumor Type and Marker Expression, and Their Role in Guiding Therapeutic Strategies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Diagnostic Power of the Fibrinogen-to-Albumin Ratio for Estimating Malignancy in Patients with Adnexal Masses: A Methodological Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Exhausted and Senescent CD4Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- How to differentiate primary mucinous ovarian tumors from ovarian metastases originating from primary appendiceal mucinous neoplasms: a review.Pathology oncology research : POR · 2025Review
- Article
- Serum anti-CFL1, anti-EZR, and anti-CYPA autoantibody as diagnostic markers in ovarian cancer.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm and Pelvic Mass Score for the prediction of malignant ovarian tumors: a prospective comparative study.Journal of ultrasonography · 2024Article
- Review
- Derivation and validation of a nomogram based on clinical characteristics to diagnose endometriosis associated ovarian cancer preoperatively.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2024Article
- Diagnostic biomarkers in ovarian cancer: advances beyond CA125 and HE4.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2024Review
- Coupled Electrostatic and Hydrophobic Destabilisation of the Gelsolin-Actin Complex Enables Facile Detection of Ovarian Cancer Biomarker Lysophosphatidic Acid.Biomolecules · 2023Article
- Clinical Significance of the Combination of Serum HE4 Levels, Hemoglobin-to-Red Cell Distribution Width Ratio, and CT Imaging for the Pretreatment Assessment of Adnexal Masses.Journal of Cancer · 2023Article
- HE4 Tissue Expression as A Putative Prognostic Marker in Low-Risk/Low-Grade Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer: A Review.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Epithelial ovarian cancer has become the most frequent cause of deaths among gynecologic malignancies. Our study elucidates the diagnostic performance of Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA), Human epididymis secretory protein 4 (HE4) and cancer antigen (CA125). To compare the diagnostic accuracy of ROMA, HE-4 and CA125 in the early diagnosis and screening of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer. Literature search in electronic databases such as Medicine: MEDLINE (through PUBMED interface), EMBASE, Google Scholar, Science Direct and Cochrane library from January 2011 to August 2020. Studies that evaluated the diagnostic measures of ROMA, HE4 and CA125 by using Chemilumincence immunoassay or electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA or ECLIA) as index tests. Using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2). We included 32 studies in our meta-analysis. We calculated AUC by SROC, pooled estimated like sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), Tau square, Cochran Q through random effect analysis and meta-regression. Data was retrieved from 32 studies. The number of studies included for HE4, CA125 and ROMA tests was 25, 26 and 22 respectively. The patients with EOC were taken as cases, and women with benign ovarian mass were taken as control, which was 2233/5682, 2315/5875 and 2281/5068 respectively for the markers or algorithm. The pooled estimates of the markers or algorithm were sensitivity: ROMA (postmenopausal) (0.88, 95% CI 0.86-0.89) > ROMA (premenopausal) 0.80, 95% CI 0.78-0.83 > CA-125(0.84, 95% CI 0.82-0.85) > HE4 (0.73, 95% CI 0.71-0.75) specificity: HE4 (0.90, 95% CI 0.89-0.91) > ROMA (postmenopausal) (0.83, 95% CI 0.81-0.84) > ROMA (premenopausal) (0.80, 95% CI 0.79-0.82) > CA125 (0.73, 95%CI 0.72-0.74), Diagnostic odd's ratio ROMA (postmenopausal) 44.04, 95% CI 31.27-62.03, ROMA (premenopausal)-18.93, 95% CI 13.04-27.48, CA-125-13.44, 95% CI 9.97-18.13, HE4-41.03, 95% CI 27.96-60.21 AUC(SE): ROMA (postmenopausal) 0.94(0.01), ROMA (premenopausal)-0.88(0.01), HE4 0.91(0.01), CA125-0.86(0.02) through bivariate random effects model considering the heterogeneity. Our study found ROMA as the best marker to differentiate EOC from benign ovarian masses with greater diagnostic accuracy as compared to HE4 and CA125 in postmenopausal women. In premenopausal women, HE4 is a promising predictor of Epithelial ovarian cancer; however, its utilisation requires further exploration. Our study elucidates the diagnostic performance of ROMA, HE4 and CA125 in EOC. ROMA is a promising diagnostic marker of Epithelial ovarian cancers in postmenopausal women, while HE4 is the best diagnostic predictor of EOC in the premenopausal group. Our study had only EOC patients as cases and those with benign ovarian masses as controls. Further, we considered the studies estimated using the markers by the same index test: CLIA or ECLIA. The good number of studies with strict inclusion criteria reduced bias because of the pooling of studies with different analytical methods, especially for HE4. We did not consider the studies published in foreign languages. Since a few studies were available for HE4 and CA125 in the premenopausal and postmenopausal group separately, data were inadequate for sub-group analysis. Further, we did not assess these markers' diagnostic efficiency stratified by the stage and type of tumour due to insufficient studies.
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.