胰腺癌患者血清中CA19-9、CA50、CA242、CEA的水平变化及意义

目的探讨胰腺癌患者血清肿瘤标志物血清糖类抗原(CA)19-9、CA50、CA242、癌胚抗原(CEA)水平,及其与胰腺癌术前诊断、临床分期、肿瘤大小以及预后的关系。方法分别测定38例胰腺癌(观察组)和25例胰腺良性病变(对照组)患者血清中CA19-9、CA50、CA242和CEA。探讨其与胰腺癌临床分期、肿瘤大小及预后的关系。结果观察组血清CA19-9、CA50、CA242和CEA水平明显高与于对照组,术后血清CA19-9、CA50、CA242和CEA水平较术前明显下降,TS3+TS4、Ⅲ+Ⅳ期患者血清CA19-9、CA50、CA242和CEA水平分别高于TS1+TS2、Ⅰ+Ⅱ期者(P均<0.05)。结论胰腺癌患者血清CA19-9、CA50、CA242和CEA水平对胰腺癌患者术前诊断、临床分期和肿瘤大小的判断有一定的参考意义。     

肿瘤标志物CA242与CA19-9对胰腺癌的诊断价值

目的:比较血清肿瘤标志物CA242与CA19-9对胰腺癌的诊断价值。方法:1996年4月至1997年6月,北京医院对门诊及住院197例患者进行了血清CA19-9的检测,148例进行了CA242的检测,其中25例为临床明确诊断为胰腺癌,12例为急性胰腺炎,18例为良性阻塞性黄疸。结果显示:胰腺癌患者血清CA19-9和CA242较对照明显增高,其中25例胰腺癌患者有21例CA19-9阳性,检测的灵敏度为84％,特异性为74.4％,有17例CA242阳性,检测的灵敏度为68％,特异性为87.8％。CA242与CA19-9比较,灵敏度无显著差异(0.10相似文献   

联合检测CA 19-9、CA50、MG—AG在诊断消化系统肿瘤中的价值

目的 探讨肿瘤标记物CAl9-9、CA50、MG-AG在消化道肿瘤诊断上的价值及联合检测的优越性。方法 采用放免法(RIA)和免疫放射分析法(IRMA)分别测定69例消化道肿瘤患者血清中CAl9-9、CA50、MG-AG的含量，并与其各自的良恶性疾病进行对照，分析各种肿瘤标记物联合检测与单项检测的相关性结果。结果 单项检测中，除MG-AG在胰腺良恶性疾病中无明显差异外。其他肿瘤标记物在消化道良恶性疾病中均有显著性差异。MG-AG在胃癌中表现最佳。其敏感性、特异性、准确性分别为54．1％、91．3％和77．8％，而胰腺癌以CA19-9和CA50(均为77．7％)效果最佳。若三项联合检测可明显提高临床检测效果。使敏感性、准确性上升，其中胃癌分别上升至75．7％和83．3％，胰腺癌均上升至100％。结论 肿瘤标记物CA19-9、CA50、MG-AG对消化系恶性肿瘤的临床诊断有一定价值，而联合检测可提高其敏感性和准确性，效果优于单项检测。     

肿瘤标记物联合检测在大肠癌诊断及随访中的价值

目的 评价血清学肿瘤标记物对大肠癌诊断和随访的价值。方法 采用微粒酶免疫法检测184例大肠癌和35例大肠良性疾病血清肿瘤标记物CAl9-9、CA50、CA242及CEA的表达，并利用其对52例行根治术的大肠癌进行随访。结果 大肠癌病人4种肿瘤标记物水平高于大肠良性疾病病人，其水平随着大肠癌病程的进展逐渐增高；4种肿瘤标记物中以CA242敏感性和特异性最高，分别为52．6％和79．7％；4种肿瘤标记物对诊断的敏感性与大肠癌的分期有关；平行法联合检测可使诊断的敏感性提高至82．6％，系列法联合检测可使特异性提高至88．6％；根治术后，肿瘤标记物水平显著下降；根治术后肿瘤标记物水平至正常的病人复发或转移率为77．8％；根治术后肿瘤标记物水平重新升高者复发或转移率为84．8％。结论 血清肿瘤标记物CAl9-9、CAS0、CA242及CEA对大肠癌的诊断和随访有一定的价值，并可用于监测肿瘤复发和转移。肿瘤标记物的联合检测有助于大肠癌的早期诊断，并可增加诊断的敏感性和特异性。     

胰腺癌患者血清CEMIP、CA19-9和CA242水平变化及其临床意义*

目的 研究胰腺癌患者血清CEMIP、CA19-9和CA242水平变化及其临床意义。方法 2013年4月～2016年8月我院诊治的92例胰腺癌患者、105例胰腺良性疾病患者和选择的83例健康人，采用ELISA法检测血清细胞迁移诱导透明质酸结合蛋白（CEMIP）水平，采用放射免疫法检测血清CA19-9和CA242水平。应用受试者工作特征曲线（ROC）下面积（AUC）评价各指标的诊断效能。采用Kaplan-Meier和Cox风险比例模型行生存分析。采用Logistic回归分析影响术后生存的因素。结果 胰腺癌患者血清CEMIP、CA19-9和CA242水平分别为0.7（0.4，1.0） ng/mL、180.1（89.1，230.3） U/mL和61.7（20.7，93.5）U/mL，均显著高于胰腺良性疾病患者和健康人，差异有统计学意义（P均<0.05）；应用血清CEMIP、CA19-9和CA242联合诊断胰腺癌的AUC为0.966，其诊断效能显著高于任一指标单独诊断；应用血清CEMIP、CA19-9和CA242水平预测胰腺癌患者根治术后1年生存的效能均较高；经Kaplan-Meier和Cox多因素分析，结果表明肿瘤分化程度、血管侵犯、术后化疗、血清CEMIP≥0.7 ng/mL、CA19-9≥90.3 U/mL和CA242≥32.8 U/mL均是影响胰腺癌患者根治术后生存的独立危险因素。结论 检测胰腺癌患者血清CEMIP、CA19-9和CA242水平可有助于对疾病的诊断和预后评估。     

联合检测CEA、CA199和CA242在胰腺癌诊断中的应用价值

目的探讨用蛋白芯片法检测CEA、CA199和CA242在胰腺癌诊断中应用价值。方法用蛋白芯片法测定38例胰腺癌患者、65例非胰腺恶性肿瘤患者、37例良性疾病患者和20例健康人群血清CEA、CA199和CA242含量。结果CEA、CA199和CA242对胰腺癌有诊断价值，其中敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值分别为60．3％、61．4％、36．3％和80．3％；81．3％、72．5％、52．6％和89．3％；79．0％、84．2％、64．5％和90．3％；联合检测可提高检测的特异性和阳性预测值。结论联合检测CEA、CA199和CA242有利于胰腺癌临床诊断。     

血清TSGF、CA125、CA19-9联合SCC检测在老年宫颈癌诊断中的价值

目的探讨血清肿瘤特异性生长因子(TSGF)、糖类抗原125(CA125)、糖类抗原19-9(CA19-9)联合鳞状细胞癌抗原(SCC)检测对老年宫颈癌的诊断价值。方法选择宫颈癌患者45例、宫颈上皮内瘤样病变(CIN)患者34例和健康志愿者30例,分别设为恶性组、良性组和对照组,检测三组受试者血清TSGF、CA125、CA19-9、SCC,分析单项及联合检测对宫颈癌的诊断价值。结果恶性组TSGF、CA125、CA19-9、SCC分别为(78.29±19.82)U/ml、(44.43±16.08)U/ml、(40.69±15.26)U/ml、(3.61±1.98)ng/L,均显著高于良性组和对照组(P<0.05);良性组TSGF显著高于对照组(P<0.05),两组CA125、CA19-9、SCC比较无统计学差异(P>0.05)。TSGF、CA125、CA19-9、SCC单项检测诊断宫颈癌敏感度较低,联合诊断后敏感度升高,而特异度降低,其中四项联合诊断的敏感度最高,为93.33%,与其他诊断方式相比有统计学差异(P<0.05)。结论宫颈癌患者血清TSGF、CA125、CA19-9、SCC出现不同程度升高,四项联合检测可以提高对宫颈癌的诊断敏感度。     

胰腺癌患者血清CEA、CA19-9和CA50水平变化及意义

目的观察胰腺癌患者血清癌胚抗原（CEA）、糖类抗原19-9（CA19-9）和CA50水平变化及其对胰腺癌分期和手术可切除性的术前预测价值。方法测定60例胰腺癌患者（胰癌组）血清CEA、CA19-9及CA50,根据手术和病理学检查判定TNM分期。以40例良性胰腺疾病患者作对照（对照组）,分析血清CEA、CA19-9、CA50水平与胰腺癌分期以及手术可切除性之间的关系。结果胰癌组血清CEA、CA19-9、CA50水平均明显高于对照组（P〈0.01）。胰癌组Ⅲ＋Ⅳ期患者的血清CEA、CA19-9、CA50水平明显高于Ⅰ＋Ⅱ期患者（P〈0.01）;姑息性手术患者的血清CEA、CA19-9、CA50水平显著高于根治性手术患者。结论血清CEA、CA19-9、CA50水平与胰腺癌分期有关,可作为判定胰腺癌能否行根治性手术切除的参考指标。     

43例胰腺癌患者血清CA19-9、CA125、CEA水平检测及分析

目的 探讨血清肿瘤标志物CA19-9、CA125及癌胚抗原（CEA）联合检测对胰腺癌诊断及疗效监测的价值.方法 采用全自动电化学发光分析仪测定43例胰腺癌患者（胰腺癌组）及40例健康查体者（对照组）血清CA19-9、CA125及CEA水平,其中胰腺癌组手术前及术后1个月各测定1次;根据试剂厂家提供的参考值计算三种标志物诊断胰腺癌的敏感性、特异性及准确性.结果 胰腺癌组手术前后血清CA19-9、CA125及CEA水平均显著高于对照组（P＜0.01）,尤以术前为著（P＜0.05）;三种肿瘤标志物术后阳性率均显著低于术前（P＜0.05）,联合检测上述三种肿瘤标志物诊断胰腺癌的敏感性、特异性及准确性均显著高于单一标志物检测（P＜0.05）. 结论联合检测血清CA19-9、CA125、CEA水平对胰腺癌的辅助诊断、疗效判定、病情监测等均有重要价值.     

HE4、TSGF和CA125联合检测诊断卵巢癌的价值

目的探讨血清肿瘤标志物联合检测诊断卵巢癌的价值。方法分别采用ELISA法、电化学发光法、化学比色法检测27例卵巢浆液性腺癌（经手术病理证实）患者（观察组）及51例卵巢良性浆液性肿瘤患者（对照组）血清附睾蛋白4（HE4）、恶性肿瘤特异性生长因子（TSGF）和肿瘤抗原CA125水平,分析其与卵巢浆液性腺癌临床病理参数的关系。结果观察组HE4、TSGF和CA125水平均明显高于对照组P〈0.01;卵巢癌Ⅱ～Ⅲ期者明显高于Ⅰ期患者,淋巴结转移明显高于无转移者、复发者明显高于无复发者,P均〈0.05;诊断卵巢癌的敏感性由高到低依次为CA125、TSGF、HE4;特异性依次为HE4、CA125、TSGF;三者联合检测的敏感性明显高于单项检测。结论CA125、HE4、TSGF联合检测可提高卵巢癌的诊断率。     

Serum level of TSGF, CA242 and CA19-9 in pancreatic cancer

AIM: To establish a method to detect the expression of the tumor specific growth factor TSGF, CA242 and CA19-9 in serum and evaluate their value in diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. METHODS: ELISA and Biochemical colorimetric assay were used to detect the serum content of TSGF, CA242 and CA19-9 in 200 normal cases, 52 pancreatitis patients and 96 pancreatic cancer patients. RESULTS: The positive likelihood ratios of TSGF, CA242 and CA19-9 were 5.4, 12.6 and 6.3, respectively, and their negative likelihood ratios were 0.10, 0.19 and 0.17, respectively. With single tumor marker diagnosed pancreatic cancer, the highest sensitivity and specificity of TSGF were 91.6% and 93.5%. In combined test with 3 markers, when all of them were positive, the sensitivity changed to 77.0% and the specificity and the positive predictive value were 100%. The levels of TSGF and CA242 were significantly higher in the patients with pancreatic cancer of head than those in the patients with pancreatic cancer of body, tail and whole pancreas, but the expression of CA19-9 had no correlation with the positions of the pancreatic cancer. The sensitivity of TSGF, CA242 and CA19-9 was increased with the progress in stages of pancreatic cancer. In stage I, the sensitivity of TSGF was markedly higher than CA242 and CA19-9. CONCLUSION: The combined use of TSGF, CA242 and CA19-9 expressions can elevate the specificity for pancreatic cancer diagnosis. And it shows that it plays an important role to differentiate positions and tissue typing. It is a forepart diagnosis for the pancreatic cancer by combination checking. There is very important correlation between the three markers and the pancreatic cancer.     

Comparison of tumor marker CA 242 with CA 19-9 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Although there are a variety of tumor markers used for diagnosis of pancreatic carcinoma, the sensitivity and specificity of those markers have not yet reached an ideal level. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic value of CA 242 with CA 19-9 and CEA in the patients with pancreatic cancer. METHODOLOGY: Serum CA 242, CA 19-9 and CEA levels were determined in 135 subjects in the following groups: Pancreatic cancer (n = 40), cholangiocellular carcinoma (n = 15), hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 10), cirrhosis (n = 7), chronic active hepatitis (n = 7), choledochal stone (n = 12), chronic pancreatitis (n = 9), acute pancreatitis (n = 6), and healthy controls (n = 29). RESULTS: An elevated serum CA 242 concentration (> 20 U/mL) was found in 30 out of 40 (70%) (mean; 2163 +/- 838 U/mL) patients with pancreas cancer, in 11 out of 15 patients with cholangiocellular carcinoma (93.3%) (mean 916 +/- 529 U/mL), in none of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and healthy controls. Slightly elevated CA 242 concentration was found in 6 out of 41 patients with benign hepatobiliary and pancreatic disease (range 0.4-97.8 U/mL) (1 acute pancreatitis, 2 chronic pancreatitis, 1 cirrhosis, 2 choledochal stone). Mean serum CA 242, CA 19-9 and CEA levels of the pancreas cancer group were significantly higher than those of the other groups except the cholangiocellular carcinoma group. There was no significant difference between the stage of pancreas cancer regarding mean serum CA 242, CA 19-9 and CEA level. There was positive correlation between serum CA 242 and CA 19-9 level. In the pancreas cancer, the sensitivity of CA 242, CA 19-9 and CEA was 75%, 80%, 40%, respectively and the specificity of those markers was 85.5%, 67.5% and 73%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the advantage of CA 242 compared to CA 19-9 is that its specificity is higher than that of CA 19-9 in the diagnosis of pancreas cancer.     

胰腺癌患者血清中巨噬细胞因子-1、糖链抗原19-9、糖链抗原242及癌胚抗原的检测分析

目的 探讨血清巨噬细胞因子-1（MIC-1）、糖链抗原（CA）19-9 、CA242及癌胚抗原（CEA）在胰腺癌中的应用价值.方法 分析129例胰腺癌患者和120例健康体检者4项肿瘤标志物的检测结果,计算各肿瘤标志物组合方式对提高胰腺癌诊断的作用.结果 胰腺癌患者血清中各项肿瘤标志物的水平与对照组比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）.MIC-1＋CA19-9组合的敏感性与单项检测敏感性最高的MIC-1比较,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）;MIC-1＋CA19-9组合的特异性与单项检测特异性最高的CA19-9比较,差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）.Ⅲ~Ⅳ期胰腺癌患者血清CA19-9、CA242水平与Ⅰ~Ⅱ期比较,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）.结论 4项肿瘤标志物的检测对胰腺癌的诊断均有一定的价值,MIC-1＋CA19-9联合检测可提高诊断的敏感性,同时未降低其特异性.CA19-9、CA242对判断胰腺癌的预后有一定价值.     

Diagnostic value of serum CA242, CA 19-9, CA 15-3 and CA 125 in patients with carcinoma of the gallbladder.

BACKGROUND: Tumor markers have an increasing significance in the diagnosis and evaluation of tumor, but their role in gallbladder cancer has not been established. The present study was undertaken to determine the utility of serological markers in carcinoma of the gallbladder (CaGB). METHODS: This study was carried out in 55 cases and 8 healthy controls presenting to a single surgical unit of the University Hospital, Varanasi, India. CA242, CA19-9, CA15-3 and CA125 were assayed preoperatively in serum of patients with carcinoma of the gallbladder (39), cholelithiasis (16) and healthy controls (8) using ELISA technique. RESULTS: Mean concentration of all tumor markers was significantly raised in carcinoma of the gallbladder when compared with cholelithiasis. CA 242 was 12.10 vs 42.19 u/ ml, CA19-9 was 211.27 vs 86.06 uml, CA 15-3 was 71.42 vs 1.93u/ml and CA125 was 253.61 vs 65.5 u/ml <0.05). Sensitivity and specificity were calculated at various cut off points. Significant changes in CAl9-9 and CA242 occurred with advanced stage (p <0.05) and grade of tumor (p<0.00 1). When two tumor markers were combined, like CA242 and CA125, sensitivity and specificity improved to 87.5% and 85.7% respectively. Diagnostic accuracy is highest with a combination of CA 19-9 and CA 125 (80.65%). However, combination of tumor markers did not improve any further sensitivity or specificity of markers. CONCLUSION: Assay of CA242, CA15-3, CA19-9 and CA 125 are fairly good markers for discriminating patients of carcinoma of the gallbladder from cholelithiasis. CA242 and CA125 when used together achieved best sensitivity and specificity. Serum markers seem to be less sensitive when used individually in carcinoma of the gallbladder but may prove useful in combination.     

The diagnostic importance of CEA and CA 19-9 for the early diagnosis of pancreatic carcinoma

BACKGROUND/AIMS: CA 19-9 and CEA were evaluated for their specificity and sensitivity in the early diagnosis of pancreatic carcinoma. METHODOLOGY: This prospective study included 40 patients with pancreatic carcinoma. A control group of 60 patients were divided into two subgroups as upper gastrointestinal system malignancies and benign pancreatic disorders. CEA and CA 19-9 levels were measured in all the patients. RESULTS: When the reference value of CA 19-9 was accepted as 74 U/mL, the specificity was 100% when pancreatic carcinoma was compared with benign disorders of the pancreas, but it's specificity for upper gastrointestinal malignancies was 60-90%. When the reference value of CEA was increased, the sensitivity had been decreased but the specificity had been increased when compared with the control group. If the reference value of CEA was accepted as 5 ng/mL, the specificity was 100% when pancreatic carcinoma was compared with acute or chronic pancreatitis, but it is less specific for the differential diagnosis of pancreatic carcinoma from the upper gastrointestinal malignancies. CONCLUSIONS: With the progression of the pancreatic carcinoma, serum CEA level and the specificity of CEA were elevated similar to that of CA 19-9. However, the elevation of CEA specificity when compared with the control group was lower than the specificity of the CA 19-9 and the sensitivity of CA 19-9 was superior to that of CEA for pancreatic carcinoma. The level of CA 19-9 was increased with the development of early pancreatic cancer and this elevation steadily continued with the progression of the cancer.     

������־���������ٰ���Ϻ�Ԥ�������еļ�ֵ�о�

??Abstract??Objective To investigate the roles of tumor markers in diagnosis and prognosis assessment of patients with pancreatic carcinoma.Methods We collected 198 cases of pancreatic carcinoma??50 cases of benign pancreatic diseases and 61 cases of normal controls.Radioimmunoassay was used to detect the tumor markers such as CA19-9??CA242??CA125??CA50 and CEA.A total of 120 cases of pancreatic carcinoma were followed up and the factors influencing their prognosis were analyzed.Results The average levels of CA19-9??CA242 and CA125 in pancreatic carcinoma cases were significantly higher than those in the controls and benign pancreatic disease cases (P<0.05).We obtained sensitivities of 80.84%??72.50%??56.67%??56.12% and 45.31% for CA19-9??CA242??CA125??CA50 and CEA??respectively??and specificities of 76.80%??69.32%??72.96 %??65.33% and 57.40% for CA19-9??CA242??CA125??CA50 and CEA??respectively.Combined detection increased the sensitivity but reduced the specificity.The median survival time of the pancreatic cancer patients was 5.5 months.Patients with tumors located at pancreatic body??tail and the whole pancreas had less survival time than those with tumors located at pancreatic head and neck.Patients with higher levels of CA19-9??CA242 and CA125 had less survival time (P<0.05).Cox multivariate proportional hazards model showed that CA19-9 and CA242 were independent prognostic factors (P<0.05).Conclusion Early diagnosis of pancreatic carcinoma depends on serum examinations of tumor marker.Combined detection increases the sensitivity and reduces the specificity of the markers.Patients with tumor located at the pancreatic body??pancreatic tail??and with higher levels of CA19-9??CA242 and CA125 may have less survival time.CA19-9 and CA242 are independent prognostic factors that may help to assess the prognosis of pancreatic carcinoma.     

肿瘤标志物、K-ras和p53突变对胰腺癌诊断的价值

目的评价血清肿瘤标志物CA19-9、CA242、CA50、癌胚抗原和粪便K-ras以及p53基因突变对胰腺癌诊断的价值。方法收集2002年2月至2004年3月在北京协和医院、中国医学科学院肿瘤医院和沈阳军区总医院确诊的新发胰腺癌患者136例,良性消化系统疾病患者240例,进行血清肿瘤标志物和粪便K-ras、p53基因突变的检测。根据结果绘制不同检测方法的受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线,计算ROC曲线下面积,并确定最佳阳性分界值。结果血清CA19-9和CA242的ROC曲线下面积分别为0·855±0·031(95%可信区间0·794~0·916)和0·859±0·031(95%可信区间0·799~0·920),最佳阳性分界值分别为68U/ml和25U/ml,其诊断胰腺癌的敏感性分别为84·4%(98/116)和88·4%(84/95),特异性分别为84·3%(145/172)和79·1%(144/182)。粪便K-ras和p53基因突变诊断胰腺癌的敏感性分别为77·8%和27·8%,特异性分别为82·2%和95·2%。将粪便K-ras和p53基因突变与血清CA19-9和CA242测定相结合计算胰腺癌诊断评分,绘制有序分类资料的ROC曲线,其曲线下面积为0·946±0·017(95%可信区间0·912~0·980),最佳阳性分界值为2分。结论血清CA19-9及CA242对胰腺癌诊断具有相似价值;联合粪便K-ras及p53突变的检测,通过胰腺癌可能性积分,可以显著提高胰腺癌的诊断效率。     

Low efficacy of serum levels of CA 19-9 in prediction of malignant diseases in asymptomatic population in Taiwan

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Serum levels of carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 have long been employed as a biomarker in diagnosing pancreatic cancer in symptomatic patients. We assessed the clinical usefulness of serum CA 19-9 in screening pancreatic cancer and other malignancies in individuals without symptoms. METHODOLOGY: The study enrolled 5,343 consecutive asymptomatic individuals who completed a health check-up comprising serum CA 19-9, chest film, abdominal ultrasonography, esophagogastroduodenoscopy, and colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy. The sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive rate of CA 19-9 in detecting cancers were analyzed. RESULTS: There were 385 patients (7.2%) with CA 19-9 higher than 37 U/mL. Two patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer had CA 19-9 levels of 46,885 U/mL and 88.4 U/mL, respectively. Thirteen among 58 patients with other cancers had CA 19-9 levels higher than 37 U/mL. If the cut-off value of CA 19-9 was set at 37 U/mL, the sensitivity and specificity for pancreatic cancer and other cancers were 100% and 92.8%, as well as 22.4% and 92.9%, respectively. However, the positive predictive rates for pancreatic cancer and other cancers were as low as 0.5% and 3.4%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy of CA 19-9 in predicting either pancreatic cancer or other cancers in the asymptomatic population is low.     

Clinical value of serum CA19-9 levels in evaluating resectability of pancreatic carcinoma

AIM： To evaluate the clinical value of serum CA19-9 levels in predicting the respectability of pancreatic carcinoma according to receiver operating characteristic （ROC） curve analysis.
METHODS： Serum CA19-9 levels were measured in 104 patients with pancreatic cancer which were possible to be resected according to the imaging. ROC curve was plotted for the CA19-9 levels. The point closest to the upper left-hand corner of the graph were chosen as the cut-off point. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of CA19-9 at this cut-off point were calculated.
RESULTS： Resectable pancreatic cancer was detected in 58 （55.77%） patients and unresectable pancreatic cancer was detected in 46 （44.23%） patients. The area under the ROC curve was 0.918 and 95% CI was 0.843-0.992. The CA19-9 level was 353.15 U/mL, and the sensitivity and specificity of CA19-9 at this cutoff point were 93.1% and 78.3%, respectively. The positive and negative predictive value was 84.38% and 90%, respectively.
CONCLUSION： Preoperative serum CA19-9 level is a useful marker for further evaluating the resectability of pancreatic cancer. Obviously increased serum levels of CA19-9 （〉 353.15 U/mL） can be regarded as an ancillary parameter for unresectable pancreatic cancer.