External Validation of O-RADS US Risk Stratification and Management System.

Background The Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) US risk stratification and management system (O-RADS US) was designed to improve risk assessment and management of ovarian and adnexal lesions. Validation studies including both surgical and nonsurgical treatment as the reference standard remain lacking. Purpose To externally validate O-RADS US in women who underwent either surgical or nonsurgical treatment and to determine if incorporating acoustic shadowing as a benign finding improves diagnostic performance. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included consecutive women who underwent pelvic US between August 2015 and April 2017 at a tertiary referral oncology center. Two independent readers blinded to clinical and histologic outcome assigned an O-RADS risk category and an International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model risk of malignancy score to assessable lesions. Reference standards were surgical histopathology or 2-year imaging follow-up. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to evaluate performance of the O-RADS US, ADNEX, and modified O-RADS models incorporating acoustic shadowing. Results In total, 227 women (mean age, 52 years ± 16 [SD]) with 262 ovarian or adnexal lesions were evaluated. Of these lesions, 187 (71%) were benign and 75 (29%) were malignant. The proportion of malignancy was 0% (0 of 100) for O-RADS 2, 3% (one of 32) for O-RADS 3, 35% (22 of 63) for O-RADS 4, and 78% (52 of 67) for O-RADS 5. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) for O-RADS and ADNEX was 0.91 (95% CI: 0.88, 0.94) and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.92, 0.97; P = .01), respectively. The addition of acoustic shadowing as a benign finding improved O-RADS AUC to 0.94 (95% CI: 0.91, 0.96; P = .01). Use of O-RADS 4 as a threshold yielded a sensitivity of 99% (74 of 75; 95% CI: 96, 100) and a specificity of 70% (131 of 187; 95% CI: 64, 77). Conclusion In a tertiary referral oncology center, the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System US risk stratification and management system enabled accurate distinction of benign from malignant ovarian and adnexal lesions. Adding acoustic shadowing as a benign finding improved its diagnostic performance. © RSNA, 2022 See also the editorial by Levine in this issue.

[1]  P. Katlariwala,et al.  Diagnostic accuracy and inter-observer reliability of the O-RADS scoring system among staff radiologists in a North American academic clinical setting , 2021, Abdominal Radiology.

[2]  Jianhua Zhou,et al.  Validation of American College of Radiology Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System Ultrasound (O-RADS US): Analysis on 1054 adnexal masses. , 2021, Gynecologic oncology.

[3]  O. Harb,et al.  Comparison of O-RADS, GI-RADS, and IOTA simple rules regarding malignancy rate, validity, and reliability for diagnosis of adnexal masses , 2020, European Radiology.

[4]  T. Bourne,et al.  Validation of models to diagnose ovarian cancer in patients managed surgically or conservatively: multicentre cohort study , 2020, BMJ.

[5]  P. Katlariwala,et al.  Solid Hypoechoic Adnexal Lesions with Acoustic Shadowing Warrant an MRI Recommendation in the O-RADS Risk Stratification and Management System. , 2020, Radiology.

[6]  N. Brasic,et al.  Reservations Regarding O-RADS Recommendations. , 2020, Radiology.

[7]  T. Bourne,et al.  Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting Lexicon for Ultrasound: A White Paper of the ACR Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System Committee. , 2018, Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR.

[8]  T. Bourne,et al.  First International Consensus Report on Adnexal Masses: Management Recommendations , 2017, Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.

[9]  T. Bourne,et al.  Predicting the risk of malignancy in adnexal masses based on the Simple Rules from the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis group. , 2016, American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology.

[10]  Dirk Timmerman,et al.  Evaluating the risk of ovarian cancer before surgery using the ADNEX model to differentiate between benign, borderline, early and advanced stage invasive, and secondary metastatic tumours: prospective multicentre diagnostic study , 2014, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[11]  D Timmerman,et al.  Strategies to diagnose ovarian cancer: new evidence from phase 3 of the multicentre international IOTA study , 2014, British Journal of Cancer.

[12]  Sabine Van Huffel,et al.  Simple ultrasound rules to distinguish between benign and malignant adnexal masses before surgery: prospective validation by IOTA group , 2010, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[13]  B. Rosen,et al.  Who should operate on patients with ovarian cancer? An evidence-based review. , 2005, Gynecologic oncology.

[14]  U Menon,et al.  Recent developments in ovarian cancer screening , 2000, Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology.

[15]  S M McKinlay,et al.  Defining the perimenopause for application in epidemiologic investigations. , 1994, American journal of epidemiology.

[16]  E. DeLong,et al.  Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. , 1988, Biometrics.

[17]  T. Bourne,et al.  O-RADS US Risk Stratification and Management System: A Consensus Guideline from the ACR Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System Committee. , 2019, Radiology.