Assessing CT imaging features combined with CEA and CA125 levels to identify endometriosis-associated ovarian cancer

Purpose To improve the diagnosis and identification of ovarian clear cell carcinoma (CCC) and ovarian endometrioid carcinoma (EC), we evaluated CT imaging findings and cut-off values for CEA and CA125.

The CT features and tumour markers (tumour size, location, morphology, composition, number of cysts, growth pattern of the mural nodules, mural nodule HWR, enhancement of the mural nodules, ascites, complications, CEA level, CA125 level) of 55 tumours in 52 patients with CCC, confirmed by surgery and pathology at the Yunnan Cancer Hospital from January 1, 2012 to December 30, 2018, were compared with those of 41 tumours in 36 patients with EC. All patients had a long history of endometriosis. Statistical analysis was performed using t test, chi-square test, Mann–Whitney U test, univariate analysis, multivariate logistic regression analysis and receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

CCC and EC presented as large oval or irregular mixed cystic-solid masses in the pelvic region, with moderately delayed enhancement of the solid components. There was a statistically significant difference between the number of cysts, the growth pattern of the mural nodules, the presence/absence of ascites, and the levels of CEA and CA125 (P < 0.05). Most CCCs had unilocular cysts, mural nodules that were polypoid structures, and no ascites (46/55, 33/55, 42/55); most ECs had multilocular cysts and broad-based nodular structures and were ascites positive (28/41, 31/41, 21/41). The CEA positive rate was lower in the CCC group than in the EC group (2/52, 3.8% versus 11/36, 30.6%, P < 0.05), and the CA125 positive rate was high in both the CCC and EC groups (44/52, 84.6% versus EC = 35/36, 97.2%, P = 0.118). The ROC curves revealed that when the values of CEA and CA125 were higher than the cut-off values (CEA = 3.270 µg/L, CA125 = 589.400 kU/L), the diagnostic efficiency of CEA was 0.723, and the diagnostic specificity of CEA was as high as 0.903.

The number of cysts, growth pattern of the mural nodules, presence/absence of ascites, and levels of CEA and CA125 were useful factors for distinguishing CCC from EC; the best cut-off values of CEA and CA125 for distinguishing CCC from EC were 3.270 and 589.40, respectively. These findings may be helpful for correctly diagnosing and identifying CCC and EC. Similar content being viewed by others Data availability Availability of data and material Please contact author for data requests. Code availability SPSS software 24.0.

Wilbur, M., et al., Cancer Implications for Patients with Endometriosis. Seminars in Reproductive Medicine, 2017. 35(01): p. 110-116. Kobayashi, H., Ovarian cancer in endometriosis: epidemiology, natural history, and clinical diagnosis. Int J Clin Oncol, 2009. 14(5): p. 378-82. Robinson, K.A., et al., Understanding malignant transformation of endometriosis: imaging features with pathologic correlation. Abdominal Radiology, 2019. Armstrong, D.K., et al., NCCN Guidelines Insights: Ovarian Cancer, Version 1.2019. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2019. 17(8): p. 896-909. Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy or Primary Surgery in Stage IIIC or IV Ovarian Cancer. Qin, Y.Y., et al., Single and combined use of red cell distribution width, mean platelet volume, and cancer antigen 125 for differential diagnosis of ovarian cancer and benign ovarian tumors. J Ovarian Res, 2018. 11(1): p. 10. Stiekema, A., et al., Serum human epididymal protein 4 (HE4) as biomarker for the differentiation between epithelial ovarian cancer and ovarian metastases of gastrointestinal origin. Gynecol Oncol, 2015. 136(3): p. 562-6. Scholler, N. and N. Urban, CA125 in ovarian cancer. Biomark Med, 2007. 1(4): p. 513-23. Sturgeon, C.M., et al., National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry laboratory medicine practice guidelines for use of tumor markers in testicular, prostate, colorectal, breast, and ovarian cancers. Clin Chem, 2008. 54(12): p. e11-79. Bai, H., et al., The prognostic value of pretreatment CA-125 levels and CA-125 normalization in ovarian clear cell carcinoma: a two-academic-institute study. Oncotarget, 2016. 7(13): p. 15566-76. Moro, F., et al., Role of CA125/CEA ratio and ultrasound parameters in identifying metastases to the ovaries in patients with multilocular and multilocular-solid ovarian masses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2019. 53(1): p. 116-123. Morioka, S., et al., Magnetic resonance imaging findings for discriminating clear cell carcinoma and endometrioid carcinoma of the ovary. Journal of Ovarian Research, 2019. 12(1). Joo, H.L., et al., Preoperative discrimination of tumour stage in clear cell carcinoma of the ovary using computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. European Journal of Radiology, 2018. 109: p. 19-26. Ma, F., et al., Magnetic resonance imaging for distinguishing ovarian clear cell carcinoma from high-grade serous carcinoma. Journal of Ovarian Research, 2016. 9(1). Stern, R.C., et al., Malignancy in endometriosis: frequency and comparison of ovarian and extraovarian types. Int J Gynecol Pathol, 2001. 20(2): p. 133-9. Choi, J.H., et al., Preoperative serum levels of cancer antigen 125 and carcinoembryonic antigen ratio can improve differentiation between mucinous ovarian carcinoma and other epithelial ovarian carcinomas. Obstetrics & Gynecology Science, 2018. 61(3): p. 344. Zhang, L., Y. Chen and K. Wang, Comparison of CA125, HE4, and ROMA index for ovarian cancer diagnosis. Curr Probl Cancer, 2019. 43(2): p. 135-144. Ñiguez Sevilla, I., et al., Prognostic importance of atypical endometriosis with architectural hyperplasia versus cytologic atypia in endometriosis-associated ovarian cancer. Journal of Gynecologic Oncology, 2019. 30(4). Ye, S., et al., Comparative study of ovarian clear cell carcinoma with and without endometriosis in People’s Republic of China. Fertility and Sterility, 2014. 102(6): p. 1656-1662. Sorensen, S.S. and B.J. Mosgaard, Combination of cancer antigen 125 and carcinoembryonic antigen can improve ovarian cancer diagnosis. Dan Med Bull, 2011. 58(11): p. A4331. Manabe, T., et al., Magnetic resonance imaging of endometrial cancer and clear cell cancer. Journal of computer assisted tomography, 2007. 31(2): p. 229-235. Ma, F., et al., Magnetic resonance imaging for distinguishing ovarian clear cell carcinoma from high-grade serous carcinoma. Journal of ovarian research, 2016. 9(1): p. 40. Pozzati, F., et al., Imaging in gynecological disease (14): clinical and ultrasound characteristics of ovarian clear cell carcinoma. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2018. 52(6): p. 792-800. Tanase, Y., et al., Factors that Differentiate between Endometriosis-associated Ovarian Cancer and Benign Ovarian Endometriosis with Mural Nodules. Magn Reson Med Sci, 2018. 17(3): p. 231-237. Barreta, A., et al., Endometriosis-Associated Ovarian Cancer: Population Characteristics and Prognosis. International Journal of Gynecologic Cancer, 2018. 28(7): p. 1251-1257. Funding This work was supported by the Yunnan Applied Basic Research Projects-Joint Special Project [2019FE001(-246)]. Author information Authors and Affiliations Contributions ML contributed to the study conception and designed the study. Data acquisition was performed by ML and HZ. ML and YC performed the statistical analysis. All the authors contributed to the data analysis and interpretation. TJ, YZ, AH and YJ contributed equally to writing the manuscript. All the authors read and approved the final manuscript. Corresponding author Ethics declarations Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest and complied with ethical standards. Additional information Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Rights and permissions About this article Cite this article Li, M., Tan, J., Zhang, Y. et al. Assessing CT imaging features combined with CEA and CA125 levels to identify endometriosis-associated ovarian cancer. Abdom Radiol 46, 2367–2375 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-020-02571-x Published: Version of record: Issue date: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-020-02571-x