Improving strategies for diagnosing ovarian cancer: a summary of the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) studies.

In order to ensure that ovarian cancer patients access appropriate treatment to improve the outcome of this disease, accurate characterization before any surgery on ovarian pathology is essential. The International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) collaboration has standardized the approach to the ultrasound description of adnexal pathology. A prospectively collected large database enabled previously developed prediction models like the risk of malignancy index (RMI) to be tested and novel prediction models to be developed and externally validated in order to determine the optimal approach to characterize adnexal pathology preoperatively. The main IOTA prediction models (logistic regression model 1 (LR1) and logistic regression model 2 (LR2)) have both shown excellent diagnostic performance (area under the curve (AUC) values of 0.96 and 0.95, respectively) and outperform previous diagnostic algorithms. Their test performance almost matches subjective assessment by experienced examiners, which is accepted to be the best way to classify adnexal masses before surgery. A two-step strategy using the IOTA simple rules supplemented with subjective assessment of ultrasound findings when the rules do not apply, also reached excellent diagnostic performance (sensitivity 90%, specificity 93%) and misclassified fewer malignancies than did the RMI. An evidence-based approach to the preoperative characterization of ovarian and other adnexal masses should include the use of LR1, LR2 or IOTA simple rules and subjective assessment by an experienced examiner.

The role of novel biomarker HE4 in endometrial cancer: a case control prospective study.

The aim of the study was to explore the clinical value of serum human epididymis secretory protein E4 (HE4) and CA125 in endometrial carcinoma. From January 2010 to April 2012, serum specimens were collected from consecutive cases of endometrial carcinoma and from cases of uterus benign disease (control group). The CA125 normal value is considered less than 35 U/mL. Two HE4 cutoff are considered: less than 70 pmol/L and less than 150 pmol/L. The specificity analysis was performed using the Mann-Whitney test for the CA125 and HE4 series. The level of statistical significance is set at p < 0.05. The sensitivity of CA125 in detecting endometrial cancer is 19.8 %, whereas the sensitivity of HE4 is 59.4 and 35.6 % for 70 and 150 pmol/L cutoff, respectively. Thus the specificity of HE4 is 100 % (positive predictive value = 100 %, negative predictive value = 71.52 and 61.31 % considering the two HE4 cutoff, respectively), whereas the CA125 specificity is 62.14 % (positive predictive value = 33.9 %, negative predictive value = 44.14 %) in detection of endometrial cancer. Combining CA125 and HE4, the sensitivity to detect endometrial cancer is 60.4 and 34.6 %, at HE4 cutoff of 70 and 150 pmol/L, respectively, with a specificity of 100 %. HE4 may be a new tool for preoperative evaluation and postoperative surveillance of endometrial cancer patients, with a positive predictive value = 100 %. HE4 at cutoff of 70 pmol/L yields the best sensitivity and specificity.

HE4 in ovarian cancer: from discovery to clinical application.

Despite the relatively low prevalence, ovarian cancer is the fifth leading cause of death from cancer among women. As such, an early diagnosis for establishing a timely surgical and/or chemotherapeutic treatment is essential for improving the outcome. The most reliable, but not always straightforward, approach to diagnose ovarian cancer relies on multiple, time-consuming and expensive investigative tools. These typically include clinical presentation (i.e., pelvic or abdominal pain, urinary frequency or urgency, increased abdominal size or bloating) with pelvic examination, transvaginal ultrasonography (US), and measurement of carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA125). Although the conventional pathway to develop and market a clinically useful biomarker is challenging, recent advances in genomic and proteomic technologies have led to the identification of previously unknown candidate markers of ovarian cancer. Some of these are currently under clinical validation. The human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) has recently been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for monitoring recurrence or progression of epithelial ovarian cancer. Nevertheless, reliable clinical evidence demonstrates that HE4, used alone or in combination with CA125, substantially improves the accuracy of screening and/or disease monitoring. This chapter will review the current knowledge on biologic and clinical applications of ovarian cancer biomarkers, with particular emphasis on the newly proposed marker, HE4.

Effect of human epididymis protein 4 gene silencing on the malignant phenotype in ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Human epididymis secretory protein 4 (HE4) has been proved to be a promising novel biomarker for the detection of epithelial ovarian carcinomas. Compared with CA125, HE4 assay demonstrated an improved ability to discriminate between pelvic mass with malignant and benign disease. Though it is well known that HE4 is overexpressed in ovarian cancer, however, the role of HE4 in the carcinogenesis and progression of ovarian cancer remains unkown. METHODS: In this study, we explored the role of HE4 in the carcinogenesis and progression of ovarian cancer. We screened nine ovarian cancer cell lines for HE4 expression, and using RNA interference (RNAi), we silenced HE4 gene expression in CaoV3 and SKOV3.ip1 ovarian cancer cell lines. We assessed the effect of HE4 gene silencing on the transformed phenotype by examining the cell cycle, apoptosis, proliferation and transwell migration/invasion in vitro. RESULTS: HE4 gene silencing induces G0/G1 arrest and blocks the progression from the G1 to S phase in CaoV3 and SKOV3.ip1 cells. HE4 knockdown also inhibited cell proliferation, migration and invasion in SKOV3.ip1 cells in vitro. CONCLUSION: HE4 may be involved in the regulation of the cell cycle and promote ovarian cancer migration and invasion.

Integration of cell phone imaging with microchip ELISA to detect ovarian cancer HE4 biomarker in urine at the point-of-care.

Ovarian cancer is asymptomatic in the early stages and most patients present with advanced levels of disease. The lack of cost-effective methods that can achieve frequent, simple and non-invasive testing hinders early detection and causes high mortality in ovarian cancer patients. Here, we report a simple and inexpensive microchip ELISA-based detection module that employs a portable detection system, i.e., a cell phone/charge-coupled device (CCD) to quantify an ovarian cancer biomarker, HE4, in urine. Integration of a mobile application with a cell phone enabled immediate processing of microchip ELISA results, which eliminated the need for a bulky, expensive spectrophotometer. The HE4 level detected by a cell phone or a lensless CCD system was significantly elevated in urine samples from cancer patients (n = 19) than healthy controls (n = 20) (p < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses showed that the microchip ELISA coupled with a cell phone running an automated analysis mobile application had a sensitivity of 89.5% at a specificity of 90%. Under the same specificity, the microchip ELISA coupled with a CCD had a sensitivity of 84.2%. In conclusion, integration of microchip ELISA with cell phone/CCD-based colorimetric measurement technology can be used to detect HE4 biomarker at the point-of-care (POC), paving the way to create bedside technologies for diagnostics and treatment monitoring.

Comparison of different ovarian cancer detection algorithms.

UNLABELLED: The objective of the study was to evaluate the accuracy of a combined-two step ovarian cancer screening tool consisting of the ovarian cancer symptom index combined with either a risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm (ROMA) or a risk of malignancy index. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The case-control study consisted of 31 patients with ovarian cancer, 30 patients with benign ovarian diseases and 27 age-matched healthy controls. RESULTS: Sensitivity and specificity of the ovarian cancer symptom index among menopausal women were 84.6% and 52.9%, respectively. ROMA revealed the highest discriminative value when compared to others (AUC 98.4%). When the cutoff level of 28 was applied for menopausal women, ROMA revealed sensitivity and specificity of 95.8% and 93.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The ovarian cancer symptom index could be used as the first step in ovarian cancer screening with subsequent application of ROMA as a second step screening tool. A larger sample size in both control and patient groups should be evaluated to reach clear conclusions.

The diagnostic accuracy of two human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) testing systems in combination with CA125 in the differential diagnosis of ovarian masses.

BACKGROUND: Cancer antigen 125 (CA125) is the best known single tumor marker for ovarian cancer (OC). We investigated whether the additional information of the human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) improves diagnostic accuracy. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed preoperative sera of 109 healthy women, 285 patients with benign ovarian masses (cystadenoma: n=78, leimyoma: n=66, endometriosis: n=52, functional ovarian cysts: n=79, other: n=10), 16 low malignant potential (LMP) ovarian tumors and 125 OC (stage I: 22, II: 15, III: 78, IV: 10). CA125 was analyzed using the ARCHITECT system, HE4 using the ARCHITECT(a) system and EIA(e) technology additionally. RESULTS: The lowest concentrations of CA125 and HE4 were observed in healthy individuals, followed by patients with benign adnexal masses and patients with LMP tumors and OC. The area under the curve (AUC) for the differential diagnosis of adnexal masses of CA125 alone was not significantly different to HE4 alone in premenopausal (CA125: 86.7, HE4(a): 82.6, HE4(e): 81.6% p>0.05) but significantly different in postmenopausal [CA125: 93.4 vs. HE4(a): 88.3 p=0.023 and vs. HE4(e): 87.8% p=0.012] patients. For stage I OC, HE4 as a single marker was superior to CA125, which was the best single marker in stage II-IV. The combination of CA125 and HE4 using risk of malignancy algorithm (ROMA) gained the highest sensitivity at 95% specificity for the differential diagnosis of adnexal masses [CA125: 70.9, HE4(a): 67.4, HE4(e): 66.0, ROMA(a): 76.6 and ROMA(e): 74.5%], especially in stage I OC [CA125: 27.3, HE4(a): 40.9, HE4(e): 40.9, ROMA(a): 45.5 and ROMA(e): 45.5%]. CONCLUSIONS: CA125 is still the best single marker in the diagnosis of OC. HE4 alone and even more the combined analysis of CA125 and HE4 using ROMA improve the diagnostic accuracy of adnexal masses, especially in early OC.

Evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of the risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm in women with a pelvic mass.

OBJECTIVE: It is often difficult to distinguish a benign pelvic mass from a malignancy and tools to help referring physician are needed. The purpose of this study was to validate the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm in women presenting with a pelvic mass. METHODS: This was a prospective, multicenter, blinded clinical trial that included women who presented to a gynecologist, a family practitioner, an internist, or a general surgeon with an adnexal mass. Serum HE4 and CA 125 were determined preoperatively. A Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm score was calculated and classified patients into high-risk and low-risk groups for having a malignancy. The sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and positive predictive value of the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm were estimated. RESULTS: A total of 472 patients were evaluated with 383 women diagnosed with benign disease and 89 women with a malignancy. The incidence of all cancers was 15% and 10% for ovarian cancer. In the postmenopausal group, a sensitivity of 92.3% and a specificity of 76.0% and for the premenopausal group the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm had a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 74.2% for detecting ovarian cancer. When considering all women together, the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm had a sensitivity of 93.8%, a specificity of 74.9%, and a negative predictive value of 99.0%. CONCLUSION: The use of the serum biomarkers HE4 and CA 125 with the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm has a high sensitivity for the prediction of ovarian cancer in women with a pelvic mass. These findings support the use of the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm as a tool for the triage of women with an adnexal mass to gynecologic oncologists. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Human epididymis protein 4 offers superior specificity in the differentiation of benign and malignant adnexal masses in premenopausal women.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the ability of human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) and CA-125 to distinguish among benign, borderline, and malignant pelvic masses in premenopausal women. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a subset analysis of data from a prospective clinical trial that enrolled women undergoing surgery for an adnexal mass. Diagnostic performance of CA-125 and HE4 for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) detection in premenopausal women was determined. RESULTS: Of 229 premenopausal patients, 195 (85%) had benign masses, 18 (8%) had EOC, and 16 (7%) had borderline ovarian tumor. The sensitivity of CA-125 and HE4 for EOC detection was 83.3% and 88.9%, respectively. The specificity of CA-125 and HE4 was 59.5% and 91.8%, respectively. A normal HE4 level ruled out invasive cancer in 98% of women with an elevated CA-125. CONCLUSION: HE4 offers superior specificity compared to CA-125 for the differentiation of benign and malignant adnexal masses in premenopausal women.

Human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) as a serum tumor biomarker in patients with ovarian carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Ovarian cancer remains a leading cause of death from gynecological malignancy. Early diagnosis is the most important determinant of survival. For more than 25 years, cancer antigen 125 (CA 125) has been the criterion standard biomarker for the diagnosis and management of women with epithelial ovarian cancer. This study evaluated human epididymis protein 4 (HE4), a novel ovarian cancer biomarker, both alone and in combination with CA 125 as a diagnostic marker for ovarian cancer in a Chinese population. METHODS: Sera from 491 Chinese women with ovarian cancer or nonmalignant disorders and healthy women were analyzed. Sensitivities and specificities for both biomarkers and the combination were determined using predefined cutoffs (HE4>150 pmol/L and CA 125>35 U/mL) and receiver operator characteristic curves to define cutoffs based on 95% and 98% sensitivities. RESULTS: At baseline, serum HE4 and CA 125 levels were significantly higher in the ovarian cancer group versus the 5 reference groups. Using predefined cutoffs, HE4 specificity for ovarian cancer ranged from 90% to 100%; CA 125 specificity ranged from 36% (benign gynecologic disease) to 99%. Combining both markers yielded specificity for ovarian cancer of 100%. Using receiver operator characteristic curve analysis, the cutoff for 95% and 98% specificity was 102.6 and 150.2 pmol/L for HE4, respectively, and 127.2 and 325.5 U/mL for CA 125, respectively; the sensitivity of CA 125 for distinguishing ovarian cancer from benign gynecologic disease was 54% (95% specificity) and 28% (98% specificity), improving to 78% and 68%, respectively, with the addition of HE4. CONCLUSIONS: Human epididymis protein 4 used in conjunction with CA 125 yields improved specificity for ovarian cancer compared with the use of CA 125 alone, generally similar to results seen in non-Chinese populations.

Topografia de ligação de proteínas do plasma seminal à membrana de espermatozoides bovinos epididimários e ejaculados / Binding patterns of seminal plasma plasma proteins on bovine epididymal and ejaculated sperm membrane

The present study was designed to investigate the topographical distribution of seminal plasma (SP) proteins on epididymal and ejaculated bovine sperm. Using immunocytochemistry and confocal microscopy the binding patterns of bovine SP proteins BSP-A3, albumin, transferrin, prostaglandin D-synthase (PGDS) and nucleobindin in ejaculated and cauda epididymal sperm from adult bulls were evaluated. Experiments were performed using sperm from 5 males. Data showed a positive signal, only detected for anti-PGDS, in the acrosomal cap of epididymal and ejaculated sperm. In ejaculated sperm, a very weak signal for nucleobindin 2 in the midpiece and equatorial regions was detected, using the anti-rat nucleobindin. BSP-A3 was detected on all sperm regions studied, with a more evidenced signal in acrosome and midpiece. However, no binding was detected for albumin or transferrin in neither epididymal nor ejaculated sperm. In conclusion, PGDS, BSP-A3 and nucleobindin interact directly with bovine sperm, with specific topographic distribution. These findings may add to the knowledge of how these proteins modulate sperm functions, thus providing fundamental support for studies designed to evaluate how they influence sperm functions.

Investigou-se a distribuição topográfica da ligação de proteínas seminais à membrana de espermatozoides bovinos epididimários e ejaculados. Utilizando imunocitoquímica e microscopia confocal, avaliaram-se a topografia de ligação das proteínas BSP-A3, albumina, transferrina, prostaglandina D sintetase (PGDS) e nucleobindina 2 (NUC2) à membrana espermática. Os experimentos foram realizados utilizando espermatozoides de cinco touros. Os resultados mostraram que, para espermatozoides epididimários, somente detectou-se a PGDS na crista do acrossomo. Nos espermatozoides ejaculados, a PGDS ligou-se de forma mais intensa à crista acrossômica, enquanto a NUC2 apresentou sinal bastante fraco na peça intermediária e região equatorial. A BSP-A3 ligou-se a todas as regiões estudadas, de forma mais intensa na peça intermediária e acrossomo. Nenhum sinal foi detectado para albumina ou transferrina, seja em espermatozoides epididimários ou ejaculados. Concluiu-se que PGDS, BSP-A3 e NUC2 interagem diretamente com espermatozoides bovinos, e mostrou distribuição topográfica específica. Estes achados permitem melhor compreensão sobre o papel desempenhado por essas proteínas na regulação da função espermática e da fertilidade.

HE4 and epithelial ovarian cancer: comparison and clinical evaluation of two immunoassays and a combination algorithm.

BACKGROUND: Two commercial immunoassays for HE4 have been compared and the diagnostic accuracy of HE4, CA 125 and the combinatory ROMA algorithm for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) has been evaluated. METHODS: HE4 and CA125 were measured on sera obtained from 259 women (73 healthy, 90 with benign ovarian or adnexal diseases, 96 with EOC). The ARCHITECT CMIA HE4 assay was compared with the Fujirebio EIA HE4, and the risk for EOC by the combinatory ROMA algorithm (HE4+CA 125) was assessed with both HE4 assays. RESULTS: The CMIA HE4 assay showed a good linearity (r>0.9998) and precision (interassay and total CVs <4%). The correlation with EIA HE4 was linear (r=0.994), with an average bias of 0.4%. By ROC curve analysis, the sensitivity for EOC at a fixed specificity of 90%, 95% and 99% was 89.6%, 84.4% and 79.2% by CMIA HE4, 84.4%, 83.3% and 79.2% by EIA HE4, 86.5%, 76.0% and 59.4% by CMIA CA125. The accuracy of the ROMA algorithm determined by CMIA or EIA HE4 was very similar (AUC 87.1% vs. 87.6%; p=n.s.) and greater in menopause. CONCLUSIONS: The two HE4 assays showed a good correlation and similar clinical value, with a greater precision for CMIA. HE4 was more specific and accurate than CA125, supporting its use in addition to clinical and imaging criteria for the discrimination of benign from malignant ovarian lesions. The ROMA algorithm showed a good accuracy for discriminating women at high risk for EOC.

No benefit from combining HE4 and CA125 as ovarian tumor markers in a clinical setting.

OBJECTIVE: About 70% of epithelial ovarian cancer patients (EOC) are diagnosed at advanced stage with a five-year survival rate of only 30%. Whilst CA125 detects peritoneally-spread disease, it has limited sensitivity for early cancers, many of which are potentially curable. METHODS: We compared the new commercially available tumor marker HE4 with CA125 individually, in combination, within the risk of malignancy index (RMI) and the newly defined risk of malignancy algorithm (ROMA). Our prospectively-collected cohort of 160 patients consisted of healthy controls, benign diseases, and borderline tumors/adenocarcinomas of ovarian, tubal, peritoneal and endometrial origin. HE4 and CA125 were measured in serum using standardized ELISA. RESULTS: Both markers showed similar diagnostic performance in the detection of EOC at clinically defined thresholds (CA125 35U/ml; HE4 70pM) but HE4 was not elevated in endometriosis. Comparison of non-malignant diagnoses (n=71) versus early stage ovarian and tubal cancers (n=19) revealed that HE4 and ROMA displayed the best diagnostic performance (AUC 0.86/0.87, specificity 85.9%/87.3% and sensitivity 78.9%/78.9%, respectively). Whilst RMICA125 detects peritoneal cancer better than all other models (AUC 0.99, specificity 97.2%, sensitivity 80.0%), there is no other detection benefit from RMI compared to HE4 alone or included in ROMA. CONCLUSIONS: The major advantage of HE4 lies in its specificity and improved detection of borderline tumors and early stage ovarian and tubal cancers. HE4 is superior to CA125 with or without RMI and ROMA indices. However, we see no benefit from combining both markers in clinical practice.

HE4 and CA125 as a diagnostic test in ovarian cancer: prospective validation of the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm.

BACKGROUND: Recently, a Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) utilising human epididymis secretory protein 4 (HE4) and CA125 successfully classified patients as presenting a high or low risk for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). We validated this algorithm in an independent prospective study. METHODS: Women with a pelvic mass, who were scheduled to have surgery, were enrolled in a prospective study. Preoperative serum levels of HE4 and CA125 were measured in 389 patients. The performance of each of the markers, as well as that of ROMA, was analysed. RESULTS: When all malignant tumours were included, ROMA (receiver operator characteristic (ROC)-area under curve (AUC)=0.898) and HE4 (ROC-AUC)=0.857) did not perform significantly better than CA125 alone (ROC-AUC=0.877). Using a cutoff for ROMA of 12.5% for pre-menopausal patients, the test had a sensitivity of 67.5% and a specificity of 87.9%. With a cutoff of 14.4% for post-menopausal patients, the test had a sensitivity of 90.8% and a specificity of 66.3%. For EOC vs benign disease, the ROC-AUC of ROMA increased to 0.913 and for invasive EOC vs benign disease to 0.957. CONCLUSION: This independent validation study demonstrated similar performance indices to those recently published. However, in this study, HE4 and ROMA did not increase the detection of malignant disease compared with CA125 alone. Although the initial reports were promising, measurement of HE4 serum levels does not contribute to the diagnosis of ovarian cancer.

Evaluation of the accuracy of serum human epididymis protein 4 in combination with CA125 for detecting ovarian cancer: a prospective case-control study in a Korean population.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the serum concentrations of CA125 and human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) in patients with ovarian cancer, and to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of these biomarkers for differentiating between patients with benign gynecological disease and those with ovarian cancer, when used alone and in combination in a Korean population. METHODS: We consecutively recruited 159 women with an adnexal mass, including 78 women with ovarian cancer. A total of 224 healthy women served as controls. The serum concentrations of HE4 and CA125 were analyzed using immunochemiluminescence assays. The concentrations of the markers were compared among the different subgroups, and the diagnostic accuracy of each marker and the combination of the two markers was assessed by plotting receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. In addition, the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) was utilized to categorize patients into low- and high-risk groups for epithelial ovarian cancer. RESULTS: Serum HE4 and CA125 concentrations were significantly higher in the ovarian cancer patients compared with those seen in patients with benign disease or in the healthy controls (p<0.0001 in both). In patients with an adnexal mass, the area under the ROC curve was higher when the combination of the markers was used compared with use of CA125 only. Using ROMA, patients could be successfully classified into high- and low-risk group, with 87.5% sensitivity at a specificity of 93.8%. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that measuring serum HE4 concentrations along with CA125 concentrations may provide higher accuracy for detecting ovarian cancer.

The ROMA (Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm) for estimating the risk of epithelial ovarian cancer in women presenting with pelvic mass: is it really useful?

BACKGROUND: The study is aimed at evaluating the performance of the predictive model ROMA (Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm), which utilizes the combination of human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) and CA125 values to assess the risk of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) in women with a pelvic mass. METHODS: One hundred and four women diagnosed with a pelvic mass (55 EOC and 49 benign cases) and scheduled to have surgery were enrolled, along with 49 healthy females. Preoperative serum concentrations of HE4 and CA125 were measured. Separate logistic regression algorithms ROMA for pre-menopausal and post-menopausal women were used to categorize patients into low- and high-risk groups for EOC. The area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity and specificity were calculated for HE4, CA125 and ROMA for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. RESULTS: The median CA125 and HE4 serum concentrations were significantly higher among EOC patients than in healthy females (both p<0.05) and those with a benign mass (both p<0.05). The pre-menopausal group included 36 benign cases (29 of which were classified by ROMA as low-risk with a specificity of 80.6%; 95% CI: 64.0%-91.8%), and 15 EOC (eight of which were classified by ROMA as high-risk, with a sensitivity of 53.3%; 95% CI: 26.6%-78.7%). The post-menopausal group enclosed 13 benign cases (11 of which were classified by ROMA as low-risk with a specificity of 84.6%; 95% CI: 54.6%-98.0%), and 40 EOC (33 of which were classified by ROMA as high-risk with a sensitivity of 82.5%; 95% CI: 67.2%-92.7%). In the pre-menopausal group, the AUC was 0.64 (p=0.12, 95% CI: 0.44-0.83) for CA125, 0.77 (p=0.003, 95% CI: 0.62-0.92) for HE4 and 0.77 (p=0.002, 95% CI: 0.63-0.92) for ROMA. In the post-menopausal group, the AUC was 0.84 (p=0.0003, 95% CI: 0.73-0.94) for CA125, 0.94 (p<0.0001, 95% CI: 0.88-0.99) for HE4 and 0.92 (p<0.0001, 95% CI: 0.85-0.99) for ROMA. CONCLUSIONS: The ROMA is a simple scoring system which shows excellent diagnostic performance for the detection of EOC in post-menopausal women, but not in pre-menopausal women. Moreover, the dual marker combination of HE4 and CA125 (ROMA) does not show better performance than HE4 alone.

Identification of luminal and secreted proteins in bull epididymis.

The epididymis plays a major role in the acquisition of sperm fertility. In order to shed light on specific features of epididymal function in mammalian species, we characterized the luminal proteins (luminal proteome) and secreted proteins (secretome) in the bovine epididymis. We identified 172 different luminal proteins in 9 distinct epididymal regions. The concentration and secretory activity of luminal proteins were quantified throughout the epididymis. Among the most abundant secreted proteins, we found lipocalin 5, (LCN5), NADP(+)dependent prostaglandin dehydrogenase (PTGDS), Niemann-Pick disease type C2 protein (NPC2), glutathione peroxidase type 5 (GPX 5), clusterin (CLU), hexosaminidase B (HEXB) and galactosidase (GLB1), each of which is released in distinct epididymal regions. Gelsolin, (GSN) previously not described in mammalian epididymal fluid, appeared to be a major protein secreted exclusively in the distal region of the bovine epididymis, where fully mature spermatozoa are stored. Although the major epididymal proteins are conserved between mammalian species, this study highlights the specificity and mechanisms of protein processing of epididymal secretion in the bull. In addition, this study provides a major insight into the sequential changes occurring in the sperm environment while gaining fertilizing capacity and could provide new information for the future identification of potential fertility markers.

[Measurement of serum human epididymis secretory protein 4 combined with CA125 assay in differential diagnosis of endometriosis cyst and ovarian benign and malignant tumors].

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the value of human epididymis secretory protein 4(HE4) combined with CA125 assay in differential diagnosis of endometriosis cyst and ovarian malignant tumor. METHODS: The level of HE4 and CA125 were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) in the serum specimens of 46 cases in endometriosis cyst group, 36 cases in malignant ovarian tumor group, 60 cases in benign ovarian diseases and 50 women in healthy women group. Those results were shown with median level. The normal range were 0-150 pmol/L in HE4 and 0-35 kU/L, which either one was more than the threshold value defined as positive index. The sensitivity of assay was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, the relation and value of HE4 or CA125 alone and combination assay in diagnosis of endometriosis was analyzed by Mann-Whitney U test and correlation analysis. RESULTS: (1) HE4: the median levels of HE4 were 52.4, 51.0, 50.0 pmol/L in group of endometriosis, normal control and benign ovarian tumor, which didn't show statistical difference. However, HE4 was 507.5 pmol/L in ovarian cancer group, which was significantly higher than those of 3 groups (P<0.05). (2) CA125: there were significant different in median level of CA125 was observed as 743.0 kU/L in ovarian cancer, 84.9 kU/L in endoemtriosis, 15.4 kU/L in benign ovarian disease, and 11.5 kU/L in healthy women (P<0.05). (3) The single assay: when compared with that in endometriosis group, receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (ROC-AUC) were 0.933 in HE4 alone and 0.821 in CA125 alone assay in ovarian cancer group. The specificity was 95% and the sensitivity was 79.6% and 49.0%. (4) The combination assay: when compared with those in endometriosis group, the ROC-AUC was 0.936, the specificity was 95% and the sensitivity was 81.0% in ovarian cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Measurement of HE4 could be used in differential diagnosis of endometriosis cyst. And the combination of HE4 and CA(125) assay could discriminate ovarian endometriosis cysts from ovarian malignant tumors effectively.

Comparison of a novel multiple marker assay vs the Risk of Malignancy Index for the prediction of epithelial ovarian cancer in patients with a pelvic mass.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare the Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI) to the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) to predict epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) in women with a pelvic mass. STUDY DESIGN: In all, 457 women with imaging results from ultrasound, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and serum HE4 and CA125 determined prior to surgery for pelvic mass were evaluable. RMI values were determined using CA125, imaging score, and menopausal status. ROMA values were determined using HE4, CA125, and menopausal status. RESULTS: At a set specificity of 75%, ROMA had a sensitivity of 94.3% and RMI had a sensitivity of 84.6% for distinguishing benign status from EOC (P = .0029). In patients with stage I and II disease, ROMA achieved a sensitivity of 85.3% compared with 64.7% for RMI (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: The dual marker algorithm utilizing HE4 and CA125 to calculate a ROMA value achieves a significantly higher sensitivity for identifying women with EOC than does RMI.