The Use of HE4 With Simple Ultrasound Rules to Predict Malignancy in a Pelvic Mass

Pelvic Mass Clinical Trial

Official title:

The Use of a New Biomarker, HE4, in Combination With Simple Ultrasound Rules in the Prediction of Malignancy in a Pelvic Mass Detected on Ultrasound

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Active, not recruiting

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT03982914
• Other study ID #: UW 17-551
• Status: Active, not recruiting
• Start date: April 1, 2018
• Est. completion date: August 31, 2021

Study information

• Verified date: June 2021
• Source: The University of Hong Kong
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Observational

Clinical Trial Summary

Our objective is to determine if the combination of simple ultrasound features (IOTA simple rules) and a new biomarker (HE4) together with a common tumour marker (CA 125) can accurately predict ovarian cancer in women found to have a pelvic mass on ultrasound. The investigators hypothesize that the use of two biomarkers (HE4 and CA 125) in a mathematical algorithm (Risk of Malignancy Algorithm, ROMA) can be used to predict malignancy in a pelvic mass which has indeterminate ultrasound features. This is a prospective cohort study involving women undergoing operation for a pelvic mass. 720 women scheduled to have an operation to remove a pelvic mass would be recruited from 3 hospitals (QMH, UCH and PYNEH). Pre-operatively, each woman will have an ultrasound assessment using the IOTA simple rules criteria and have blood taken for tumour markers HE4 and CA 125. In women where IOTA ultrasound rules are inconclusive, 2 strategies for prediction will be compared - calculation of risk by ROMA (Strategy A) vs referral for an expert ultrasound (Strategy B). These pre-operative risk predictions will be correlated with the final pathology found at the operations.

Main outcome measures include the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive powers for Strategy A compared to Strategy B. Sensitivity and specificity will be compared using the McNemar test. Area Under the ROC Curve (AUC) will be calculated and compared using the Delong method for the 2 strategies.

The investigators expect AUC of both strategies will be similar. This would suggest that ROMA can replace expert ultrasound in the pre-operative prediction of ovarian cancer.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Active, not recruiting
• Enrollment: 814
• Est. completion date: August 31, 2021
• Est. primary completion date: August 10, 2020
• Accepts healthy volunteers: No
• Gender: Female
• Age group: 18 Years and older

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• Women over the age of 18

• Found to have a pelvic mass on ultrasound, MRI, CT or PET scan

• Scheduled for operation (laparoscopic or open) for a pelvic mass (including ovarian cystectomy and oophorectomy)

• Women who would understand the informed consent

Exclusion Criteria:

• Women who refused a transvaginal scan

• Pregnant women

• Surgical removal is delayed for more than 120 days from the date of the ultrasound examination

• Previous history of ovarian, peritoneal or fallopian tube cancer or unknown malignancy

• History of bilateral oophorectomy

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Neoplasms
• Pelvic Mass

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
Hong Kong	Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern Hospital	Hong Kong
Hong Kong	Queen Mary Hospital	Hong Kong
Hong Kong	United Christian Hospital	Hong Kong

Sponsors (3)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
The University of Hong Kong	Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern Hospital, Hong Kong, United Christian Hospital

Country where clinical trial is conducted

Hong Kong, 

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	sensitivity, specificity and predictive powers	The group of women with inconclusive IOTA assessment will undergo further assessment by both tumour markers assessment by ROMA (Strategy A) and expert ultrasound (Strategy B). The prediction of risk of malignancy (high or low) will be correlated with the final histopathology result from the surgery. The sensitivity, specificity and predictive powers for the 2 strategies will be compared.	3 months after last subject enrolled
Secondary	Best method for predicting malignancy in pelvic mass in HK	The sensitivity, specificity and predictive powers for 4 different predicting methods - (i) IOTA simple rules followed by ROMA (if IOTA inconclusive), (ii) IOTA simple rules followed by expert ultrasound assessments (if IOTA inconclusive), (iii) ROMA, or (iv) RMI will be compared.	3 months after last subject enrolled
Secondary	Accuracy of these 4 different prediction methods in different hospital settings	The sensitivity, specificity and predictive powers for these 4 different prediction methods for the 3 hospitals will be compared and factors influencing the accuracy will be explored.	3 months after last subject enrolled
Secondary	Performance of IOTA simple rules followed by ROMA (if IOTA inconclusive) in different histological subtypes	Since the tumour markers assessed by ROMA may be more commonly raised in some subtypes (eg serous adenocarcinoma) compared to other subtypes (eg mucinous adenocarcinoma), it is possible that the performance of IOTA followed by ROMA may differ in different histological subtypes. The final histological subtypes will be obtained from the pathology reports from the surgery. The sensitivity and specificity of IOTA followed by ROMA will be compared amongst the different major histological subtypes.	3 months after last subject enrolled