O-RADS и ADNEX MR scoring system: стандартизация оценки и современные подходы к стратификации рисков злокачественности образований яичников

В обзоре проанализированы результаты работ, опубликованных за последние 10 лет, посвященные лучевой диагностике образований яичников (ОЯ), современным подходам к классификации с учетом основных визуализационных критериев и рисков злокачественности, основной целью которой является оптимизация тактики ведения этой группы пациентов. Существует большое количество методов оценки и интерпретации диагностических данных, полученных с использованием ультразвукового исследования (УЗИ), как метода выбора первой линии лучевой диагностики ОЯ. Для описания существует единая терминологическая система O-RADS (англ. Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System), разработанная для УЗИ. В 2013 г. с целью стандартизации магнитно-резонансных (МР) данных была разработана система оценки – ADNEX MR (англ. Adnexal lesions magnetic resonance imaging) scoring system (AMRSS). Данная система объединяет анализ базовых анатомических и функциональных МР-изображений и позволяет классифицировать опухолевые образования яичников по степени риска злокачественности. Поскольку O-RADS и AMRSS основаны на различных диагностических данных и являются взаимодополняющими системами оценки, проанализированы корреляции и возможности использования их в совокупности, что позволит комплексно подойти к вопросу диагностики рака яичников.

1. Ranaee M., Yazdani Sh., Modarres S.R., Rajabi-Moghaddam M. Two cases of clear cell ovarian cancer in young patients. Caspian J Intern Med. 2016;7(3):228–31.

2. Webb P.M., Jordan S.J. Epidemiology of epithelial ovarian cancer. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2017;41:3–14. DOI: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2016.08.006.

3. Brun J.L., Fritel X., Aubard Y. et al; Collège National des Gynécologues Obstétriciens Français. Management of presumed benign ovarian tumors: updated French guidelines. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014;183:52–8. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2014.10.012.

4. Buys S.S., Partridge E., Black A. et al; PLCO Project Team. Effect of screening on ovarian cancer mortality: the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Randomized Controlled Trial. JAMA. 2011;305(22):2295–303. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2011.766.

5. Gilbert L., Basso O., Sampalis J. et al; DOvE Study Group. Assessment of symptomatic women for early diagnosis of ovarian cancer: results from the prospective DOvE pilot project. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13(3):285–91. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70333-3.

6. Menon U., Gentry-Maharaj A., Hallett R. et al. Sensitivity and specificity of multimodal and ultrasound screening for ovarian cancer, and stage distribution of detected cancers: results of the prevalence screen of the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS). Lancet Oncol. 2009;10(4):327–40. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70026-9.

7. Kadan Y., Fiascone S., McCourt C. et al. Predictive factors for the presence of malignant transformation of pelvic endometriosis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2015;185:23–7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2014.11.029.

8. Sölétormos G., Duffy M.J., Othman Abu Hassan S. et al. Clinical use of cancer biomarkers in epithelial ovarian cancer: updated guidelines from the European Group on Tumor Markers. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2016;26(1):43–51. DOI: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000586.

9. Huchon C., Bats A.S., Bensaïd C. et al. Adnexal masses management: a prospective multicentric observational study. Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2008;36(11):1084–90. (In French). DOI: 10.1016/j.gyobfe.2008.08.014.

10. Coccia M.E., Rizzello F., Romanelli C., Capezzuoli T. Adnexal masses: what is the role of ultrasonographic imaging? Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2014;290(5):843–54. DOI: 10.1007/s00404-014-3327-0.

11. Timmerman D., Ameye L., Fischerova D. et al. Simple ultrasound rules to distinguish between benign and malignant adnexal masses before surgery: prospective validation by IOTA group. BMJ. 2010;341:c6839. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.c6839.

12. Timmerman D., Van Calster B., Testa A. et al. Predicting the risk of malignancy in adnexal masses based on the Simple Rules from the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis group. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;214(4):424–37. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2016.01.007.

13. Anthoulakis C., Nikoloudis N. Pelvic MRI as the “gold standard” in the subsequent evaluation of ultrasound-indeterminate adnexal lesions: a systematic review. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;132(3):661–8. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.10.022.

14. Khiewvan B., Torigian D.A., Emamzadehfard S. et al. An update on the role of PET/CT and PET/MRI in ovarian cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;44(6):1079–91. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-017-3638-z.

15. Burges A., Schmalfeldt B. Ovarian cancer: diagnosis and treatment. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2011;108(38):635–41. DOI: 10.3238/arztebl.2011.0635.

16. Iyer V.R., Lee S.I. MRI, CT, and PET/CT for ovarian cancer detection and adnexal lesion characterization. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194(2):311–21. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.09.3522.

17. Kyriazi S., Kaye S.B., de Souza N.M. Imaging ovarian cancer and peritoneal metastases—current and emerging techniques. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2010;7(7):381–93. DOI: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2010.47.

18. Lalwani N., Prasad S.R., Vikram R. et al. Histologic, molecular, and cytogenetic features of ovarian cancers: implications for diagnosis and treatment. Radiographics. 2011;31(3):625–46. DOI: 10.1148/rg.313105066.

19. Mohaghegh P., Rockall A.G. Imaging strategy for early ovarian cancer: characterization of adnexal masses with conventional and advanced imaging techniques. Radiographics. 2012;32(6):1751–73. DOI: 10.1148/rg.326125520.

20. Thomassin-Naggara I., Cuenod C.A., Darai E. et al. Dynamic contrastenhanced MR imaging of ovarian neoplasms: current status and future perspectives. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2008;16(4):661–72. DOI: 10.1016/j.mric.2008.07.012.

21. Medeiros L.R., Freitas L.B., Rosa D.D. et al. Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in ovarian tumor: a systematic quantitative review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;20(1):67.e1–10. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2010.08.031.

22. Bazot M., Nassar-Slaba J., Thomasin-Naggara I. et al. MR imaging compared with intraoperative frozen-section examination for the diagnosis of adnexal tumors: correlation with final histology. Eur Radiol. 2006;16(12):2687–99. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-006-0163-z.

23. Thomassin-Naggara I., Aubert E., Rockall A. et al. Adnexal masses: development and preliminary validation of an MR imaging scoring system. Radiology. 2013;267(2):432–43. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.13121161.

24. Thomassin-Naggara I., Toussaint I., Perrot N. et al. Characterization of complex adnexal masses: value of adding perfusion- and diffusionweighted MR imaging to conventional MR imaging. Radiology. 2011;258(3):793–803. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.10100751.

25. Vargas H.A., Barrett T., Sala E. MRI of ovarian masses. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2013;37(2):265–81. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.23721.

26. Forstner R., Thomassin-Naggara I., Cunha T.M. et al. ESUR recommendations for MR imaging of the sonographically indeterminate adnexal mass: an update. Eur Radiol. 2017;27(2):2248–57.

27. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-016-4600-3.

28. Allen B.C., Hosseinzadeh K., Qasem S.A. et al. Practical approach to MRI of female pelvic masses. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;202(6):1366–75. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.13.12023.

29. Andreotti R.F., Timmerman D., Benacerraf B.R. et al. Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting Lexicon for Ultrasound: A White Paper of the ACR Ovarian- Adnexal Reporting and Data System Committee. J Am Coll Radiol. 2018;15(10):1415–29. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2018.07.004.

30. An J.Y., Unsdorfer K.M.L., Weinreb J.C. BI-RADS, C-RADS, CAD-RADS, LI-RADS, Lung-RADS, NI-RADS, O-RADS, PI-RADS, TI-RADS: Reporting and Data Systems. Radiographics. 2019;39(5):1435–6. DOI: 10.1148/rg.2019190087.

31. Sasaguri K., Yamaguchi K., Nakazono T. et al. External validation of ADNEX MR SCORING system: a single-centre retrospective study. Clin Radiol. 2019;74(2):131–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2018.10.014.

32. Sadowski E.A., Rockall A.G., Maturen K.E. et al. Adnexal lesions: Imaging strategies for ultrasound and MR imaging. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2019;100(10):635–46. DOI: 10.1016/j.diii.2018.06.003.

33. Ikeda D.M., Hylton N.M., Kuhl C.K. Breast imaging reporting and data system, BI-RADS: magnetic resonance imaging. Reston, Va: American College of Radiology, 2003.

34. Ruiz M., Labauge P., Louboutin A. et al. External validation of the MR imaging scoring system for the management of adnexal masses. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;205:115–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.07.493.

35. Sadowski E.A., Robbins J.B., Rockall A.G., Thomassin-Naggara I. A systematic approach to adnexal masses discovered on ultrasound: the ADNEx MR scoring system. Abdom Radiol. 2018;43(3):679–95. DOI: 10.1007/s00261-017-1272-7.

36. Pereira P.N., Sarian L.O., Yoshida A. et al. Accuracy of the ADNEX MR scoring system based on a simplified MRI protocol for the assessment of adnexal masses. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2018;24(2):63–71. DOI: 10.5152/dir.2018.17378.