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?
Table 4
Diagnostic performance of HE4, CA125, and ROMA for discriminating stage I FIGO malignant adnexal tumors and epithelial ovarian cancer from nonmalignant adnexal tumors.
Groups assessed by diagnostic tests
Diagnostic test
Sensitivity (%) (95% CI)
Specificity (%) (95% CI)
Positive predictive value (%) (95% CI)
Negative predictive value (%) (95% CI)
Diagnostic accuracy (%) (95% CI)
Stage I FIGO malignant adnexal tumor () versus nonmalignant adnexal tumors ()
HE4
31.3% (8.5%–54%)
92.5% (89.2%–95.7%)
20.8% (4.6%–37.1%)
95.5% (92.9%–98.1%)
88.8% (85%–92.6%)
CA125
43.8% (19.4%–68.1%)
68.3% (62.5%–74%)
8% (2.3%–13.8%)
95% (91.9%–98.2%)
66.8% (61.2%–72.4%)
ROMA
43.8% (19.4%–68.1%)
82.5% (77.9%–87.2%)
13.7% (4.3%–23.2%)
95.9% (93.2%–98.5%)
80.2% (75.5%–85%)
Epithelial ovarian cancer () versus nonmalignant adnexal tumors ()
HE4
76.1% (63.8%–88.4%)
92.5% (89.2%–95.7%)
64.8% (52%–77.6%)
95.5% (92.9%–98.1%)
89.9% (86.5%–93.3%)
CA125
84.8% (74.4%–95.2%)
68.3% (62.5%–74%)
32.8% (24.3%–41.2%)
96.1% (93.3%–98.9%)
70.8% (65.6%–76%)
ROMA
82.6% (71.7%–93.6%)
82.5% (77.9%–87.2%)
46.3% (35.5%–57.1%)
96.3% (93.8%–98.8%)
82.6% (78.2%–86.9%)
FIGO: Fédération Internationale de Gynécologie et d’Obstétrique; CI: confidence interval; ROMA: Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm.
