Preoperative measurement of serum c-reactive protein: Is it useful in the differential diagnosis of adnexal masses?

4Citations
Citations of this article
12Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Serum biomarkers may help to discriminate malignant from benign adnexal masses with equivocal features on imaging. Adequate discrimination of such tumors is crucial for referring patients to either a specialized cancer center or a nonspecialized gynecology service. Aim: We aimed to investigate whether the preoperative level of serum C-reactive protein (CRP), alone or combined with CA125 and menopausal status in the Ovarian Score (OVS), is useful in the prediction of malignancy in women with ovarian tumors. Methods: This cross-sectional study included 293 patients who underwent surgery in a tertiary cancer center. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) areas under the curves (AUC) for CRP, CA125 and OVS were calculated in different scenarios, as well as their sensitivity and specificity, using standard cutoff points (for CRP, 10 mg/L; for CA125, 35 U/mL). Results: CA125 and the OVS performed significantly better than CRP alone in the differentiation of benign disease from epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) (AUC = 0.86 for CA125, 0.79 for OVS, and 0.73 for CRP). OVS and CRP alone were superior to CA125 only in the differentiation of borderline ovarian tumors from advanced stages of EOC and non-EOC. Sensitivity and specificity were 52.5% and 83%, respectively, for CRP, 77.9% and 66.7% for CA125, and 71.3% and 67.8% for OVS. Conclusions: OVS is as good as CA125 in the differentiation of benign tumors from ovarian cancer. The addition of CA125 and menopausal status to CRP enhanced the relatively low discriminatory power of isolated CRP.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Yoshida, A., Derchain, S. F., Pitta, D. R., Crozatti, N., Andrade, L. A. L. A., Da Silva, R. F., & Sarian, L. O. (2017). Preoperative measurement of serum c-reactive protein: Is it useful in the differential diagnosis of adnexal masses? International Journal of Biological Markers, 32(1), e83–e89. https://doi.org/10.5301/jbm.5000226

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free