Circulating tumor DNA as a biomarker for predicting progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is emerging as a potential prognostic biomarker in multiple tumor types. However, despite the many studies available on small series of patients with ovarian cancer, a recent systematic review and meta-analysis is lacking. The objective of this study was to determine the association of ctDNA with progression-free-survival and overall survival in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. METHODS: An electronic search was conducted using PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, CENTRAL (Cochrane Library), and CINAHL-Complete from January 2000 to September 15, 2023. To be included in the analysis the studies had to meet the following pre-specified inclusion criteria: (1) evaluable ctDNA; (2) progression-free-survival and overall survival reported as hazard ratio (HR); and (3) the patient population had epithelial ovarian cancer at the time of ctDNA detection. We evaluated the association of ctDNA with progression-free survival and overall survival. Secondary outcomes focused on sub-group analysis of genomic alterations and international Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage. RESULTS: A total of 26 studies reporting on 1696 patients with epithelial ovarian cancer were included. The overall concordance rate between plasma-based and tissue-based analyses was approximately 62%. We found that a high level of ctDNA in epithelial ovarian cancer was associated with worse progression-free survival (HR 5.31, 95% CI 2.14 to 13.17, p<0.001) and overall survival (HR 2.98, 95% CI 1.86 to 4.76, p<0.0001). The sub-group analysis showed a greater than threefold increase in the risk of relapse in patients with positive HOXA9 meth-ctDNA (HR 3.84, 95% CI 1.57 to 9.41, p=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: ctDNA was significantly associated with worse progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. Further prospective studies are needed. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023469390.

Accessory cavitated uterine malformation (ACUM): A scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Accessory cavitated uterine malformation (ACUM) is a relatively recent term used to describe a noncommunicating, accessory uterine cavity. ACUM have been published under different terms ranging from juvenile cystic adenomyosis to "uterus-like mass". The objective of this study was to systematically identify all cases of ACUM and definitions described in the literature, regardless of label, and identify morphological, epidemiological, and clinical characteristics as well as management, while also highlighting knowledge gaps. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic literature search of three databases was performed, reviewing all records of cystic myometrial lesions. Cases that fitted common definitions for ACUM were included and clinical and imaging characteristics were documented in detail. This work was registered to PROSPERO and reporting followed PRISMA guidelines for scoping reviews. RESULTS: A total of 53 articles were included, comprising 115 cases that met the minimal criteria for ACUM. The median age at onset of symptoms was 17 years, presenting with dysmenorrhea soon after menarche. A total of 19 women were parous. On ultrasound, ACUM appears as unilocular myometrial cysts, usually with ground-glass content. Hemorrhagic content is also observed on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), with high signal intensity on both T2 and T1-weighted images. Ninety-five (83%) cases were managed surgically, with a trend towards primary nonsurgical options. Although no adverse outcomes were reported, long-term follow-up on subsequent fertility and pregnancy was rare. CONCLUSIONS: Despite its increasing recognition as a clinical entity, ACUM often remains underdiagnosed as it shares similarities with other myometrial masses. We propose a unified terminology and definition for ACUM based on the data in this review. ACUM presents as a cavitated lesion, surrounded by a myometrial mantle, in continuity with the anterolateral uterine wall and located beneath the insertion of the round ligament and the interstitial portion of the fallopian tube. In contrast to other uterine abnormalities, a normal uterine cavity is visualized. Future studies are needed, using a clear definition for ACUM, and prospectively investigating management strategies, including long-term follow-up of patient-reported symptoms, fertility, and pregnancy outcomes.

Comparison of the ADNEX and ROMA risk prediction models for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer: a multicentre external validation in patients who underwent surgery.

BACKGROUND: Several diagnostic prediction models to help clinicians discriminate between benign and malignant adnexal masses are available. This study is a head-to-head comparison of the performance of the Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model with that of the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA). METHODS: This is a retrospective study based on prospectively included consecutive women with an adnexal tumour scheduled for surgery at five oncology centres and one non-oncology centre in four countries between 2015 and 2019. The reference standard was histology. Model performance for ADNEX and ROMA was evaluated regarding discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility. RESULTS: The primary analysis included 894 patients, of whom 434 (49%) had a malignant tumour. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.92 (95% CI 0.88-0.95) for ADNEX with CA125, 0.90 (0.84-0.94) for ADNEX without CA125, and 0.85 (0.80-0.89) for ROMA. ROMA, and to a lesser extent ADNEX, underestimated the risk of malignancy. Clinical utility was highest for ADNEX. ROMA had no clinical utility at decision thresholds <27%. CONCLUSIONS: ADNEX had better ability to discriminate between benign and malignant adnexal tumours and higher clinical utility than ROMA. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT01698632 and NCT02847832.

Multiclass risk models for ovarian malignancy: an illustration of prediction uncertainty due to the choice of algorithm.

BACKGROUND: Assessing malignancy risk is important to choose appropriate management of ovarian tumors. We compared six algorithms to estimate the probabilities that an ovarian tumor is benign, borderline malignant, stage I primary invasive, stage II-IV primary invasive, or secondary metastatic. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used 5909 patients recruited from 1999 to 2012 for model development, and 3199 patients recruited from 2012 to 2015 for model validation. Patients were recruited at oncology referral or general centers and underwent an ultrasound examination and surgery ≤ 120 days later. We developed models using standard multinomial logistic regression (MLR), Ridge MLR, random forest (RF), XGBoost, neural networks (NN), and support vector machines (SVM). We used nine clinical and ultrasound predictors but developed models with or without CA125. RESULTS: Most tumors were benign (3980 in development and 1688 in validation data), secondary metastatic tumors were least common (246 and 172). The c-statistic (AUROC) to discriminate benign from any type of malignant tumor ranged from 0.89 to 0.92 for models with CA125, from 0.89 to 0.91 for models without. The multiclass c-statistic ranged from 0.41 (SVM) to 0.55 (XGBoost) for models with CA125, and from 0.42 (SVM) to 0.51 (standard MLR) for models without. Multiclass calibration was best for RF and XGBoost. Estimated probabilities for a benign tumor in the same patient often differed by more than 0.2 (20% points) depending on the model. Net Benefit for diagnosing malignancy was similar for algorithms at the commonly used 10% risk threshold, but was slightly higher for RF at higher thresholds. Comparing models, between 3% (XGBoost vs. NN, with CA125) and 30% (NN vs. SVM, without CA125) of patients fell on opposite sides of the 10% threshold. CONCLUSION: Although several models had similarly good performance, individual probability estimates varied substantially.

O-RADS US v2022: An Update from the American College of Radiology's Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System US Committee.

First published in 2019, the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) US provides a standardized lexicon for ovarian and adnexal lesions, enables stratification of these lesions with use of a numeric score based on morphologic features to indicate the risk of malignancy, and offers management guidance. This risk stratification system has subsequently been validated in retrospective studies and has yielded good interreader concordance, even with users of different levels of expertise. As use of the system increased, it was recognized that an update was needed to address certain clinical challenges, clarify recommendations, and incorporate emerging data from validation studies. Additional morphologic features that favor benignity, such as the bilocular feature for cysts without solid components and shadowing for solid lesions with smooth contours, were added to O-RADS US for optimal risk-appropriate scoring. As O-RADS US 4 has been shown to be an appropriate cutoff for malignancy, it is now recommended that lower-risk O-RADS US 3 lesions be followed with US if not excised. For solid lesions and cystic lesions with solid components, further characterization with MRI is now emphasized as a supplemental evaluation method, as MRI may provide higher specificity. This statement summarizes the updates to the governing concepts, lexicon terminology and assessment categories, and management recommendations found in the 2022 version of O-RADS US.

External Validation of the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) Lexicon and the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis 2-Step Strategy to Stratify Ovarian Tumors Into O-RADS Risk Groups.

Importance: Correct diagnosis of ovarian cancer results in better prognosis. Adnexal lesions can be stratified into the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) risk of malignancy categories with either the O-RADS lexicon, proposed by the American College of Radiology, or the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) 2-step strategy. Objective: To investigate the diagnostic performance of the O-RADS lexicon and the IOTA 2-step strategy. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective external diagnostic validation study based on interim data of IOTA5, a prospective international multicenter cohort study, in 36 oncology referral centers or other types of centers. A total of 8519 consecutive adult patients presenting with an adnexal mass between January 1, 2012, and March 1, 2015, and treated either with surgery or conservatively were included in this diagnostic study. Twenty-five patients were excluded for withdrawal of consent, 2777 were excluded from 19 centers that did not meet predefined data quality criteria, and 812 were excluded because they were already in follow-up at recruitment. The analysis included 4905 patients with a newly detected adnexal mass in 17 centers that met predefined data quality criteria. Data were analyzed from January 31 to March 1, 2022. Exposures: Stratification into O-RADS categories (malignancy risk <1%, 1% to <10%, 10% to <50%, and ≥50%). For the IOTA 2-step strategy, the stratification is based on the individual risk of malignancy calculated with the IOTA 2-step strategy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Observed prevalence of malignancy in each O-RADS risk category, as well as sensitivity and specificity. The reference standard was the status of the tumor at inclusion, determined by histology or clinical and ultrasonographic follow-up for 1 year. Multiple imputation was used for uncertain outcomes owing to inconclusive follow-up information. Results: Median age of the 4905 patients was 48 years (IQR, 36-62 years). Data on race and ethnicity were not collected. A total of 3441 tumors (70%) were benign, 978 (20%) were malignant, and 486 (10%) had uncertain classification. Using the O-RADS lexicon resulted in 1.1% (24 of 2196) observed prevalence of malignancy in O-RADS 2, 4% (34 of 857) in O-RADS 3, 27% (246 of 904) in O-RADS 4, and 78% (732 of 939) in O-RADS 5; the corresponding results for the IOTA 2-step strategy were 0.9% (18 of 1984), 4% (58 of 1304), 30% (206 of 690), and 82% (756 of 927). At the 10% risk threshold (O-RADS 4-5), the O-RADS lexicon had 92% sensitivity (95% CI, 87%-96%) and 80% specificity (95% CI, 74%-85%), and the IOTA 2-step strategy had 91% sensitivity (95% CI, 84%-95%) and 85% specificity (95% CI, 80%-88%). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this external diagnostic validation study suggest that both the O-RADS lexicon and the IOTA 2-step strategy can be used to stratify patients into risk groups. However, the observed malignancy rate in O-RADS 2 was not clearly below 1%.

Uterine hemangioma in pregnancy: A case report and review of the literature.

INTRODUCTION: Uterine hemangioma is a rare benign vascular tumor which can cause bleeding problems in various age groups. Current knowledge on this rare condition in pregnancy is limited. We report on a recent case of uterine hemangioma in a pregnancy that was already diagnosed during her first trimester. We also provide a literature review to summarize the characteristics and outcomes of uterine hemangioma cases in pregnant women. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic search was done of all published literature up to February 2021 using PubMed and Scopus databases. The selection process was registered using the online tool Rayyan QCRI. All data was described in a narrative format. The protocol was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021237519). RESULTS: Fifteen case reports were included. In most cases, the diagnosis was established by antenatal ultrasound. More than half of the women developed a postpartum hemorrhage, necessitating a hysterectomy for bleeding control in half of the cases, although the risk for both seemed lower in those women in whom the hemangioma was diagnosed before delivery. One case of maternal mortality and two cases of fetal death were reported. There was one case of neonatal respiratory morbidity, although the neonatal data were not routinely reported upon. CONCLUSION: Current knowledge on uterine hemangioma in pregnancy is limited, but it seems to hold substantial risks for both pregnant women and their unborn child. We recommend routine screening for this condition at the standard mid-trimester anomaly scan. Pregnant women with uterine hemangioma should ideally be cared for in centers of expertise. An international registry will help to build a better understanding of this rare pathology.

Nucleosome footprinting in plasma cell-free DNA for the pre-surgical diagnosis of ovarian cancer.

Fragmentation patterns of plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) are known to reflect nucleosome positions of cell types contributing to cfDNA. Based on cfDNA fragmentation patterns, the deviation in nucleosome footprints was quantified between diagnosed ovarian cancer patients and healthy individuals. Multinomial modeling was subsequently applied to capture these deviations in a per sample nucleosome footprint score. Validation was performed in 271 cfDNAs pre-surgically collected from women with an adnexal mass. We confirmed that nucleosome scores were elevated in invasive carcinoma patients, but not in patients with benign or borderline disease. Combining nucleosome scores with chromosomal instability scores assessed in the same cfDNA improved prediction of malignancy. Nucleosome scores were, however, more reliable to predict non-high-grade serous ovarian tumors, which are characterized by low chromosomal instability. These data highlight that compared to chromosomal instability, nucleosome footprinting provides a complementary and more generic read-out for pre-surgical diagnosis of invasive disease in women with adnexal masses.

Peripherally-driven myeloid NFkB and IFN/ISG responses predict malignancy risk, survival, and immunotherapy regime in ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Tumors can influence peripheral immune macroenvironment, thereby creating opportunities for non-invasive serum/plasma immunobiomarkers for immunostratification and immunotherapy designing. However, current approaches for immunobiomarkers' detection are largely quantitative, which is unreliable for assessing functional peripheral immunodynamics of patients with cancer. Hence, we aimed to design a functional biomarker modality for capturing peripheral immune signaling in patients with cancer for reliable immunostratification. METHODS: We used a data-driven in silico framework, integrating existing tumor/blood bulk-RNAseq or single-cell (sc)RNAseq datasets of patients with cancer, to inform the design of an innovative serum-screening modality, that is, serum-functional immunodynamic status (sFIS) assay. Next, we pursued proof-of-concept analyses via multiparametric serum profiling of patients with ovarian cancer (OV) with sFIS assay combined with Luminex (cytokines/soluble immune checkpoints), CA125-antigen detection, and whole-blood immune cell counts. Here, sFIS assay's ability to determine survival benefit or malignancy risk was validated in a discovery (n=32) and/or validation (n=699) patient cohorts. Lastly, we used an orthotopic murine metastatic OV model, with anti-OV therapy selection via in silico drug-target screening and murine serum screening via sFIS assay, to assess suitable in vivo immunotherapy options. RESULTS: In silico data-driven framework predicted that peripheral immunodynamics of patients with cancer might be best captured via analyzing myeloid nuclear factor kappa-light-chain enhancer of activated B cells (NFκB) signaling and interferon-stimulated genes' (ISG) responses. This helped in conceptualization of an 'in sitro' (in vitro+in situ) sFIS assay, where human myeloid cells were exposed to patients' serum in vitro, to assess serum-induced (si)-NFκB or interferon (IFN)/ISG responses (as active signaling reporter activity) within them, thereby 'mimicking' patients' in situ immunodynamic status. Multiparametric serum profiling of patients with OV established that sFIS assay can: decode peripheral immunology (by indicating higher enrichment of si-NFκB over si-IFN/ISG responses), estimate survival trends (si-NFκB or si-IFN/ISG responses associating with negative or positive prognosis, respectively), and coestimate malignancy risk (relative to benign/borderline ovarian lesions). Biologically, we documented dominance of pro-tumorigenic, myeloid si-NFκB responseHIGHsi-IFN/ISG responseLOW inflammation in periphery of patients with OV. Finally, in an orthotopic murine metastatic OV model, sFIS assay predicted the higher capacity of chemo-immunotherapy (paclitaxel-carboplatin plus anti-TNF antibody combination) in achieving a pro-immunogenic peripheral milieu (si-IFN/ISG responseHIGHsi-NFκB responseLOW), which aligned with high antitumor efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: We established sFIS assay as a novel biomarker resource for serum screening in patients with OV to evaluate peripheral immunodynamics, patient survival trends and malignancy risk, and to design preclinical chemo-immunotherapy strategies.

ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE Consensus Statement on pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian tumors.

The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG), the International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) group, and the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE) jointly developed clinically relevant and evidence-based statements on the pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian tumors, including imaging techniques, biomarkers, and prediction models. ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE nominated a multidisciplinary international group, including expert practising clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian tumors and management of patients with ovarian cancer (19 experts across Europe). A patient representative was also included in the group. To ensure that the statements were evidence-based, the current literature was reviewed and critically appraised. Preliminary statements were drafted based on the review of the relevant literature. During a conference call, the whole group discussed each preliminary statement and a first round of voting was carried out. Statements were removed when a consensus among group members was not obtained. The voters had the opportunity to provide comments/suggestions with their votes. The statements were then revised accordingly. Another round of voting was carried out according to the same rules to allow the whole group to evaluate the revised version of the statements. The group achieved consensus on 18 statements. This Consensus Statement presents these ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE statements on the pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian tumors and the assessment of carcinomatosis, together with a summary of the evidence supporting each statement.

Ultrasound evaluation of ovarian masses and assessment of the extension of ovarian malignancy.

The current review sums up the literature on the diagnostic performance of models to predict malignancy in adnexal masses and the ability of ultrasound to make a specific diagnosis in adnexal masses. A summary of the role of ultrasound in assessing the extension of malignant ovarian disease is also provided.

Validation of models to diagnose ovarian cancer in patients managed surgically or conservatively: multicentre cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of diagnostic prediction models for ovarian malignancy in all patients with an ovarian mass managed surgically or conservatively. DESIGN: Multicentre cohort study. SETTING: 36 oncology referral centres (tertiary centres with a specific gynaecological oncology unit) or other types of centre. PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive adult patients presenting with an adnexal mass between January 2012 and March 2015 and managed by surgery or follow-up. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall and centre specific discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility of six prediction models for ovarian malignancy (risk of malignancy index (RMI), logistic regression model 2 (LR2), simple rules, simple rules risk model (SRRisk), assessment of different neoplasias in the adnexa (ADNEX) with or without CA125). ADNEX allows the risk of malignancy to be subdivided into risks of a borderline, stage I primary, stage II-IV primary, or secondary metastatic malignancy. The outcome was based on histology if patients underwent surgery, or on results of clinical and ultrasound follow-up at 12 (±2) months. Multiple imputation was used when outcome based on follow-up was uncertain. RESULTS: The primary analysis included 17 centres that met strict quality criteria for surgical and follow-up data (5717 of all 8519 patients). 812 patients (14%) had a mass that was already in follow-up at study recruitment, therefore 4905 patients were included in the statistical analysis. The outcome was benign in 3441 (70%) patients and malignant in 978 (20%). Uncertain outcomes (486, 10%) were most often explained by limited follow-up information. The overall area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was highest for ADNEX with CA125 (0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.92 to 0.96), ADNEX without CA125 (0.94, 0.91 to 0.95) and SRRisk (0.94, 0.91 to 0.95), and lowest for RMI (0.89, 0.85 to 0.92). Calibration varied among centres for all models, however the ADNEX models and SRRisk were the best calibrated. Calibration of the estimated risks for the tumour subtypes was good for ADNEX irrespective of whether or not CA125 was included as a predictor. Overall clinical utility (net benefit) was highest for the ADNEX models and SRRisk, and lowest for RMI. For patients who received at least one follow-up scan (n=1958), overall area under the receiver operating characteristic curve ranged from 0.76 (95% confidence interval 0.66 to 0.84) for RMI to 0.89 (0.81 to 0.94) for ADNEX with CA125. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found the ADNEX models and SRRisk are the best models to distinguish between benign and malignant masses in all patients presenting with an adnexal mass, including those managed conservatively. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01698632.

Intrauterine Fluid Instillation and Transtubal Flow: A Randomized Controlled In vitro Trial Comparing Gel and Water.

BACKGROUND: Possible transtubal spillage of malignant cells is a major concern in fluid instillation sonography, as it is in hysteroscopy. This study aims to compare the transtubal flow of gel and saline and validate the clinical hypothesis that application of fluids with higher viscosity causes less spillage. METHODS: Randomized controlled in vitro trial comparing gel and saline infusion on 15 tissue specimens after hysterectomy with bilateral salpingectomy. Instillations are performed with saline and gel dyed with a 1% ink solution. Qualitative assessment of tubal spill is investigated as primary outcome. Secondary outcomes are instillation-volume and -pressure, assessed by measuring endometrial cavity dilation at in vitro ultrasound examination and subjective numeric 10-point scoring of the instillation pressure by a dedicated examiner. RESULTS: Tubal flow was more often observed during saline instillation (odds ratio 4.88, P = 0.008). Median subjectively assessed instillation pressures were nine arbitrary units for gel and three for saline (P < 0.001). Tubal flow occurred from 2 cc onward in the saline group versus five cc in the gel instillation group. Cavitary dilation did not differ between both groups. CONCLUSION: Gel instillation sonography is in vitro associated with less tubal flow and therefore could be a safer diagnostic test compared to saline infusion sonography or hysteroscopy. In vivo studies are necessary to confirm these results.