Follow-Up of Ovarian Cancer: Correlation Between Imaging Findings and CA 125 Serum Value
Objectives: To assess the correlation between imaging findings and Cancer Antigen (CA) 125 serum value in the follow-up of ovarian cancer.
Methods: We included 41 consecutive patients with malignant ovarian epithelial cancer who underwent surgical debulking at our institution (Jan 2014–Dec 2018). Computed Tomography (CT) / Positron Emission Tomography (PET)-CT images obtained during follow-up were reviewed for the presence of disease (yes/no). Imaging findings were compared with the CA 125 serum values at the time of examination.
Results: Of the 211 imaging studies, 117 (55.5%) were negative for the presence of disease, whereas 94 (44.5%) were positive. The median CA 125 value was 87 U/mL in patients with positive imaging findings and 10 U/mL in patients with negative ones (Mann-Whitney U test, p<0.0001). Of the 129 examinations performed in patients with normal CA 125 serum value, 110 (85.3%) were negative for disease, whereas 19 (14.7%) were positive; the median CA 125 serum value of the latter were 10 U/mL in patients with negative imaging findings and 23 U/mL in patients with positive ones (Mann-Whitney U test, p<0.0001). Only 3/129(2.3%) patients with normal CA 125 serum value, no CA 125 increasing trend and no clinical suspicion of progression showed positive imaging findings.
Conclusion: A strict correlation between CA 125 serum value and imaging finding was observed. Imaging should be avoided in patients with normal CA 125 serum value and no clinical suspicion of disease progression.
1. Dyba T, Randi G, Bray F, Martos C, Giusti F, Nicholson N, et al. The European cancer burden in 2020: Incidence and mortality estimates for 40 countries and 25 major cancers. Eur J Cancer 2021;157:308–47. [CrossRef]
2. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin 2022;72:7–33. [CrossRef]
3. Kurman RJ, Shih IeM. The origin and pathogenesis of epithelial ovarian cancer: a proposed unifying theory. Am J Surg Pathol 2010;34:433–43. [CrossRef]
4. Forstner R, Sala E, Kinkel K, Spencer JA; European Society of Urogenital Radiology. ESUR guidelines: ovarian cancer staging and follow-up. Eur Radiol 2010;20:2773–80.
5. Ferraro S, Mozzi R, Panteghini M. Tumor marker ordering: do not lose control: a prospective clinical trial. Am J clin Pathol 2015;144:649–58.
6. Clarke T, Galaal K, Bryant A, Naik R. Evaluation of follow-up strategies for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer following completion of primary treatment. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014;2014:CD006119. [CrossRef]
7. Geurts SME, van Altena AM, de Vegt F, Tjan-Heijnen VCG, Massuger LFAG, van Dijck JAAM, et al. No supportive evidence for clinical benefit of routine follow-up in ovarian cancer: a Dutch multicenter study. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2011;21:647–53.
8. Rustin GJ, van der Burg ME. A randomized trial in ovarian cancer (OC) of early treatment of relapse based on CA125 level alone versus delayed treatment based on conventional clinical indicators (MRC OV05/EORTC 55955 trials). J Clin Oncol 2009;27:1–1.
9. Rustin GJ, Vergote I, Eisenhauer E, Pujade-Lauraine E, Quinn M, Thigpen T, et al; Gynecological Cancer Intergroup. Definitions for response and progression in ovarian cancer clinical trials incorporating RECIST 1.1 and CA 125 agreed by the Gynecological Cancer Intergroup (GCIG). Int J Gynecol Cancer 2011;21:419–23. [CrossRef]
10. Miller RE, Rustin GJ. How to follow-up patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. Curr Opin Oncol 2010;22:498–502. [CrossRef]
11. Colombo N, Sessa C, Bois A du, Ledermann J, McCluggage WG, McNeish I, et al. ESMO–ESGO consensus conference recommendations on ovarian cancer: pathology and molecular biology, early and advanced stages, borderline tumours and recurrent disease. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2019;29:728–60.
12. Redondo A, Guerra E, Manso L, Martin-Lorente C, Martinez-Garcia J, Perez-Fidalgo JA, et al. SEOM clinical guideline in ovarian cancer (2020). Clin Transl Oncol 2021;23:961–8.
13. Expert Panel on Women’s Imaging:, Kang SK, Reinhold C, Atri M, Benson CB, Bhosale PR, et al. ACR appropriateness criteria® staging and follow-up of ovarian cancer. J Am Coll Radiol 2018;15:S198–S207. [CrossRef]
14. Harmandayan GZ, Gao F, Mutch DG, Virgo KS, Gibb RK, Johnson FE. Ovarian cancer patient surveillance after curative-intent initial treatment. Gynecol Oncol 2011;120:205–8.
15. Esselen KM, Cronin AM, Bixel K, Bookman MA, Burger RA, Cohn DE, et al. Use of CA-125 tests and computed tomographic scans for surveillance in ovarian cancer. JAMA Oncol 2016;2:1427–33. [CrossRef]
16. Ferraro S, Robbiano C, Tosca N, Panzeri A, Paganoni AM, Panteghini M. Serum human epididymis protein 4 vs. carbohydrate antigen 125 in ovarian cancer follow-up. Clin Biochem 2018;60:84–90. [CrossRef]
17. Charkhchi P, Cybulski C, Gronwald J, Wong FO, Narod SA, Akbari MR. CA125 and ovarian cancer: A comprehensive review. Cancers (Basel) 2020;12:3730. [CrossRef]