CPH-I and HE4 Are More Favorable Than CA125 in Differentiating Borderline Ovarian Tumors from Epithelial Ovarian Cancer at Early Stages

Joint Authors

Wang, Zhiheng
Tao, Xiang
Ying, Chunmei

Source

Disease Markers

Issue

Vol. 2019, Issue 2019 (31 Dec. 2019), pp.1-10, 10 p.

Publisher

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

Publication Date

2019-10-13

Country of Publication

Egypt

No. of Pages

10

Main Subjects

Diseases

Abstract EN

Aim.

To evaluate the diagnosis value of serum human epididymis protein 4 (HE4), cancer antigen 125 (CA125), the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA), and Copenhagen Index (CPH-I) at early stages for differentiating borderline ovarian tumors from epithelial ovarian cancer.

Methods.

We recruited 144 borderline ovarian tumors in FIGO stages I and II (BOT I+II), 108 epithelial ovarian cancers in FIGO stages I and II (EOC I+II), and 238 benign ovarian tumor patients with surgical treatment in the retrospective study.

The concentration of HE4 and CA125 and the values of CPH-I and ROMA were assessed separately.

Results.

The HE4 level and ROMA and CPH-I values of EOC I+II were all higher than that of BOT I+II and benign groups whether in all, pre-, or postmenopausal groups (P<0.01).

When distinguishing BOT I+II from EOC I+II, the AUC-ROC of CPH-I and HE4 were bigger than CA125 (P<0.001), while the CPH-I has the highest sensitivities in all and postmenopausal groups (78.7%, 85.1%), and HE4 has the highest specificity and PPV (90.91%, 88.64%) in postmenopausal groups.

Under pathological stratification, HE4, ROMA, and CPH-I of the serous EOC I+II were higher than that of BOT I+II (P<0.001) and the AUC of the three indices were significantly bigger than CA125 (P<0.001).

However, the concentration of HE4 and CA125 and the values of CPH-I and ROMA have no significant difference between the two endometrioid subgroups.

The index with the highest sensitivity and NPV among the four indices of different pathological subtype groups was CPH-I, and the index with the highest specificities and PPV was HE4.

Conclusion.

CPH-I was more valuable than CA125 for differentiating BOT I+II from EOC I+II regardless of menopausal status, while HE4 might be better than CA125 for postmenopausal subgroups.

HE4 and CPH-I were more favorable than CA125 for differentiating BOT I+II from EOC I+II in the case of unknown pathology or in serous type.

American Psychological Association (APA)

Wang, Zhiheng& Tao, Xiang& Ying, Chunmei. 2019. CPH-I and HE4 Are More Favorable Than CA125 in Differentiating Borderline Ovarian Tumors from Epithelial Ovarian Cancer at Early Stages. Disease Markers،Vol. 2019, no. 2019, pp.1-10.
https://search.emarefa.net/detail/BIM-1147559

Modern Language Association (MLA)

Wang, Zhiheng…[et al.]. CPH-I and HE4 Are More Favorable Than CA125 in Differentiating Borderline Ovarian Tumors from Epithelial Ovarian Cancer at Early Stages. Disease Markers No. 2019 (2019), pp.1-10.
https://search.emarefa.net/detail/BIM-1147559

American Medical Association (AMA)

Wang, Zhiheng& Tao, Xiang& Ying, Chunmei. CPH-I and HE4 Are More Favorable Than CA125 in Differentiating Borderline Ovarian Tumors from Epithelial Ovarian Cancer at Early Stages. Disease Markers. 2019. Vol. 2019, no. 2019, pp.1-10.
https://search.emarefa.net/detail/BIM-1147559

Data Type

Journal Articles

Language

English

Notes

Includes bibliographical references

Record ID

BIM-1147559