多肿瘤标志物的联合检测和分析对胰腺癌诊断的价值探讨

目的探讨肿瘤标志物的联合检测和分析对胰腺癌诊断的价值。方法应用蛋白芯片技术同时检测CA19-9、CEA、CA242、β-HCG、AFP、Free-PSA、Ferritin、NSE、PSA、CA125、CA15—3和HGH共12种肿瘤标志物在患者血清中的表达。试验分3组：胰腺癌组81例，良性胰腺病组57例，正常对照组547例。结果12种肿瘤标志物在胰腺癌、良性胰腺病和健康对照组之间表达的差异明显。总的表达强度为胰腺癌组〉良性胰腺病组〉健康对照组。胰腺癌组中CA19—9、CEA、CA242、B-HCG、AFP、CA125和HGH的表达强度显著高于良性胰腺病组（P〈0．05）。同时CA19-9、CEA、CA242、Ferritin、pHCG、AFP、CA125、HGH和CA15—3的阳性率也明显高于良性胰腺病组（P〈0．05）。CA242、CA19—9、CEA和CA125对胰腺癌诊断的敏感性均高于50％，特异性均高于70％，准确性均高于60％。其中以CA242的敏感性、特异性和准确性最高，分别为72．8％、89．5％和79．7％。同时CA242、CA19—9和CEA联合检测的敏感性和准确性较之单项检测明显升高。两两联合的准确性均为85．9％以上，3种联合准确性则高达97．8％。结论肿瘤标志物CA242、CA19—9和CEA的联合检测可明显提高胰腺癌的诊断率。     

多肿瘤标志物的联合检测和分析对胰腺癌诊断的价值探讨

目的探讨肿瘤标志物的联合检测和分析对胰腺癌诊断的价值。方法应用蛋白芯片技术同时检测CA19-9、CEA、CA242、-βHCG、AFP、Free-PSA、Ferritin、NSE、PSA、CA125、CA15-3和HGH共12种肿瘤标志物在患者血清中的表达。试验分3组:胰腺癌组81例,良性胰腺病组57例,正常对照组547例。结果12种肿瘤标志物在胰腺癌、良性胰腺病和健康对照组之间表达的差异明显。总的表达强度为胰腺癌组>良性胰腺病组>健康对照组。胰腺癌组中CA19-9、CEA、CA242、β-HCG、AFP、CA125和HGH的表达强度显著高于良性胰腺病组(P<0.05)。同时CA19-9、CEA、CA242、Fer-ritin、-βHCG、AFP、CA125、HGH和CA15-3的阳性率也明显高于良性胰腺病组(P<0.05)。CA242、CA19-9、CEA和CA125对胰腺癌诊断的敏感性均高于50%,特异性均高于70%,准确性均高于60%。其中以CA242的敏感性、特异性和准确性最高,分别为72.8%、89.5%和79.7%。同时CA242、CA19-9和CEA联合检测的敏感性和准确性较之单项检测明显升高。两两联合的准确性均为85.9%以上,3种联合准确性则高达97.8%。结论肿瘤标志物CA242、CA19-9和CEA的联合检测可明显提高胰腺癌的诊断率。     

十二种肿瘤标志物联合检测在胆管癌诊断中的价值

目的 了解肿瘤标志物的联合检测和分析对胆管癌鉴别诊断的价值.方法 应用蛋白芯片技术同时检测 CA19-9,CEA,CA242,CA153,Bata-HCG,AFP,Free-PSA,Ferritin,NSE,PSA,CA125和HGH共12种肿瘤标志物在受试者血清中的表达.试验分三组:胆管癌组64例,胆道结石病组86例,正常对照组547例.结果 12种肿瘤标志物总的表达强度和阳性率为胆管癌组＞胆管结石病组＞健康对照组.胆管癌组中CA19-9,AFP,CEA,CA242和CA125的表达强度显著高于胆道结石病组(P＜0.05).同时胆管癌组中CA19-9、CEA和Bata-HCG的阳性率也明显高于胆道结石病组(P＜0.05).CA19-9、CA242和CEA对胆管癌诊断的敏感性均高于50%,其中CA19-9的敏感性最高达75.0%.CA19-9、CA242、CEA和CA125特异性和准确性均高于50%,其中以CA19-9的准确性最高,达60.7%.肿瘤标志物CA19-9、CEA、CA242和CA125与胆管结石相比较的ROC曲线下面积分别为0.574、0.555、0.554和0.551.结论 CA19-9、CEA、CA242和CA125在胆管癌诊断中具有较低的准确性,难以与胆管结石鉴别,诊断价值有限.     

血清CA19-9、CA242、CEA及CA125在胰腺癌诊断和预后中的价值

目的探讨CA19-9、CA242、CEA和CA125四种肿瘤标志物单独检测或联合检测在胰腺癌诊断和预后中的价值。方法测定并分析我院2007年1月至2009年12月期间收治的63例胰腺癌患者、33例胆管癌和27例胰腺良性疾病患者血清中CA19-9、CA242、CEA和CA125水平,并对术后胰腺癌患者进行随访。结果胰腺癌患者血清中CA19-9、CA242、CEA和CA125水平明显高于胰腺良性疾病患者和胆管癌患者(P<0.05)。单项检测中血清CA19-9的敏感性最高,达79.4%(50/63),但其特异性(61.7%)低于CA242(83.3%)和CEA(80.0%)。联合检测CA19-9+CA242+CEA的特异性最高,达93.3%(56/60)。当肿瘤位于胰腺体/尾部时CA19-9水平显著高于其在胰腺头部或全胰腺时(P<0.05)。胰腺癌Ⅳ期患者的CA19-9和CA242水平显著高于Ⅰ或Ⅱ/Ⅲ期患者(P<0.05)。本组失访15例,48例获得随访,随访时间平均6个月(2~12个月)。胰腺癌患者术后0.5及3个月血清中CA242、CA19-9较术前明显降低(P<0.05)。结论单项检测CA19-9可以提高胰腺癌诊断的敏感性,联合检测CA19-9+CA242+CEA可以提高胰腺癌诊断的特异性,CA19-9和CA242对胰腺癌的治疗效果及预后判断更具有价值。     

血清肿瘤标志物在胰腺占位鉴别诊断中作用的评估

目的评价4种血清肿瘤标志物在胰腺占位良恶性鉴别诊断中作用的大小。方法运用ROC(receiver-operating characteristics)曲线法对173例胰腺癌病人和71例胰腺良性疾病病人的血清学糖类抗原CA_(19-9)、CA_(242)、CA_(50)和癌胚抗原(CEA)4种肿瘤标志物检测结果进行分析,同时对结果进行统计学检验。结果单项肿瘤标志物检测,4种肿瘤标志物的水平在胰腺癌组均高于良性胰腺疾病组,且差异均有显著性意义(P<0.001)。同时分别计算各个肿瘤标志物的特异性、敏感性、阳性似然比和阴性似然比。CA_(19-9)敏感性和阴性似然比最好,分别为77.46%和0.3138,CA_(50)特异性和阳性似然比最好,分别为94.37%和6.2629。然后运用ROC曲线法对4种肿瘤标志物的检测结果进行处理。4种肿瘤标志物糖类抗原CA_(19-9)、CA_(242)、CA_(50)和癌胚抗原(CEA)的AUC分别为0.812、0.760、0.756和0.741。通过分层分析,CA_(19-9)和CA_(242)在手术无法切除组高于手术可切除组。处理结果统计学均有显著性意义(P<0.001)。结论CA_(19-9)等4种血清肿瘤标志物对鉴别胰腺占位良恶性均有一定的临床意义,其中CA_(19-9)的综合诊断能力较强。     

多种肿瘤标志物联合检测对肝门胆管癌诊断的意义

目的:探讨联合检测肿瘤标志物CA50,CA125,CA242,CA19-9及CEA对肝门胆管癌诊断的意义.方法:选择近2年间住院且术后病理证实为肝门胆管癌患者90例作为观察组,同期胆道良性病变患者91例作为对照组,采用全自动电化学发光分析仪测定两组患者术前血清中CA50,CA125,CA242,CA19-9及CEA的水平.分别计算两组血清中5种肿瘤标志物的敏感性、特异性及准确性.结果:观察组血清CA50,CA242,CA19-9及CEA的水平明显高于对照组(均P＜0.01),而观察组血清CA125水平与对照组血清CA125水平比较无统计学差异(P＞0.05).血清CA19-9在肝门胆管癌中阳性率最高(86.67％),次为CA242( 63.33％)及CA50 (60％);两组患者血清中5种标志物的阳性率比较,除CA125外,各相应组间差异具有统计学意义(P＜0.05).对于肝门胆管癌的诊断,血清CA19-9灵敏度最好(93.98％),而CEA的特异度最好(94.60％).结论:联合检测CA50,CA242,CA19-9和CEA有助于肝门胆管癌与胆道良性疾病鉴别.     

唾液肿瘤标志物诊断胰腺癌的研究

目的 :分析唾液肿瘤标志物在胰腺癌中的诊断及评估。方法 :选取胰腺癌病人26例、胰腺良性肿瘤9例、健康对照16例。比较3组唾液肿瘤标志物的浓度,包括AFP、CEA、CA125、CA19-9、CA724、CA242。筛选出其中有诊断作用的标志物,分析其与胰腺癌的诊断、局部进展及预后的关系。结果:胰腺癌病人唾液AFP、CEA、CA125、CA724浓度高于胰腺良性病变组和健康对照组,胰腺癌组与健康对照组差异存在统计学意义(P0.05)。唾液CEA和CA125诊断胰腺癌的曲线下面积分别为0.91、0.94,灵敏度和特异度均为92.31%、84.62%。唾液CEA和CA125浓度与生存期半年以及局部进展有关联(P0.05)。结论:唾液CEA及CA125对胰腺癌具有一定的诊断意义,有待今后进一步研究。     

胰腺癌血清CA19-9和CEA的表达及意义

目的:探讨胰腺癌患者手术前后血清CA19-9和CEA变化情况。方法:回顾性分析收治的胰腺疾病患者56例，分为胰腺癌患者组（29例）和胰腺系统良性病对照组（27例），分别测定其CA19-9和CEA指标。结果:胰腺癌组血清CA19-9和CEA较对照组明显升高；胰腺癌术后血清CA19-9和CEA较术前明显下降。结论:血清CA19-9和CEA的检测对胰腺癌的术前诊断和术后疗效判断可能有一定参考意义。     

四种血清肿瘤标志物联合检测对大肠癌临床意义的探讨

目的：探讨CEA、CA19-9、CA242和CA72-4四项血清肿瘤标志物在大肠癌的诊断、手术疗效评价和术后检测的临床价值。方法 应用免疫放射分析法测定80例大肠癌患者和50例大肠良性疾病患者的CEA、CA19-9、CA242和CA72-4等4项血清肿瘤标志物,并随访2年。结果 4种血清肿瘤标志物CEA、CA19-9、...     

肿瘤标志物CA19-9、CA242、CEA和CA125联合检测在胰腺癌诊断中的意义

目的 探讨肿瘤标志物CA19-9、CA242、CEA和CA125单项检测和联合检测对胰腺癌患者的临床诊断价值.方法 检测48例胰腺癌患者以及48例健康体检者外周血清中四种肿瘤标志物的水平,并对结果进行分析.结果 胰腺癌患者血清中CA19-9、CA242、CEA与CA125的含量显著高于正常时照组,两者比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.01).单项检测时CA19-9、CA242、CEA与CA125的敏感性分别为79.2%、54.2%、50.0%和35.4%.特异性分别为87.5%、89.6%、79.2%和70.8%.联合检测时敏感性为93.8%,特异性为100%.结论 CA19-9、CA242、CEA与CA125联合检测敏感性和特异性都明显高于单项检测.联合检测较单项血清标志物检测能提高胰腺癌的诊断率.     

血清肿瘤标记物联合检测在胰腺癌诊治中的作用

目的：观察胰腺癌患者血清肿瘤标记物的表达,分析血清肿瘤标记物联合检测在胰腺癌诊治中的作用。方法：采用荧光免疫分析法和放射免疫法检测９５例胰腺癌患者的８种血清ＡＦＰ、ＣＥＡ、ＣＡ５０、ＣＡ１５－３、ＣＡ１９－９、ＣＡ７２－４、ＣＡ１２５和ＣＡ２４２肿瘤标记物的表达,并与其他７０例恶性肿瘤患者和７３例良性疾病患者作对照,分析其临床诊断价值。对２５例胰腺癌手术切除患者进行术后肿瘤标记物的连续监测。结果：８种肿瘤标记物中ＣＡ１９－９、ＣＡ２４２、ＣＡ５０和ＣＡ１２５对胰腺癌诊断有较高价值;平行法联合检测可使诊断的灵敏度提高至９０．２％,系列法联合检测可使特异度提高至９３．５％。介入治疗对肿瘤标记物的表达影响不明显,手术切除肿瘤后,肿瘤标记物的水平显著下降。结论：血清ＣＡ１９－９、ＣＡ２４２、ＣＡ５０和ＣＡ１２５的检测对胰腺癌的诊断和随访是有临床价值的,联合检测可以增加诊断的特异度和灵敏度。     

Value of 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography in the Management of Patients With Cystic Tumors of the Pancreas

OBJECTIVE: To assess the reliability of 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18-FDG PET) in distinguishing benign from malignant cystic lesions of the pancreas. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The preoperative differential diagnosis of cystic lesions of the pancreas remains difficult: the most important point is to identify malignant or premalignant cysts that require resection. 18-FDG PET is a new imaging procedure based on the increased glucose metabolism by tumor cells and has been proposed for the diagnosis and staging of pancreatic cancer. METHODS: During a 4-year period, 56 patients with a suspected cystic tumor of the pancreas underwent 18-FDG PET in addition to computed tomography scanning, serum CA 19-9 assay, and in some instances magnetic resonance imaging or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. The 18-FDG PET was analyzed visually and semiquantitatively using the standard uptake value. The accuracy of 18-FDG PET and computed tomography was determined for preoperative diagnosis of a malignant cyst. RESULTS: Seventeen patients had malignant tumors. Sixteen patients (94%) showed 18-FDG uptake with a standard uptake value of 2.6 to 12.0. Twelve patients (70%) were correctly identified as having malignancy by computed tomography, CA 19-9 assay, or both. Thirty-nine patients had benign tumors: only one mucinous cystadenoma showed increased 18-FDG uptake (standard uptake value 2.6). Five patients with benign cysts showed computed tomography findings of malignancy. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for 18-FDG PET and computed tomography scanning in detecting malignant tumors were 94%, 97%, 94%, and 97% and 65%, 87%, 69%, and 85%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: 18-FDG PET is more accurate than computed tomography in identifying malignant pancreatic cystic lesions and should be used, in combination with computed tomography and tumor markers assay, in the preoperative evaluation of patients with pancreatic cystic lesions. A positive result on 18-FDG PET strongly suggests malignancy and, therefore, a need for resection; a negative result shows a benign tumor that may be treated with limited resection or, in selected high-risk patients, with biopsy, follow-up, or both.     

Value of serum CA 19-9 determination in the diagnosis of pancreatic carcinoma

In this communication, serum Ca19-9 was determined in a series of patients with benign and malignant GI diseases. It was found that CA19-9 was positive in 86.7% of 30 pancreatic cancer patients with an average level of 427.53 u/ml, the value was statistically different from that found in non-malignant control group. Serum CA19-9 determination, in this series, helped to make definite diagnosis of pancreatic cancer in 6 cases, in which B-mode ultrasonography failed to diagnose, and in another 3 cases in which CT scanning was unable to 'see' the tumors. The combination of CA19-9, B-mode ultrasonography, and CT made definite diagnosis in 100% of all 30 pancreatic cancer patients. The authors discussed the significance of CA19-9 determination in the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of pancreatic cancer.     

Cancer antigens 19-9 and 125 in the differential diagnosis of pancreatic mass lesions

HYPOTHESIS: Accurate differentiation between inflammatory and neoplastic tumors of the pancreas remains a diagnostic dilemma for surgeons. The aim of the study was to assess the utility of 2 neoplastic markers, cancer antigen (CA) 19-9 and CA 125, in the differential diagnosis of pancreatic tumors. DESIGN: The patients were assigned to a malignant or benign group based on cytological and histological evaluation of pancreatic lesion samples. The serum from each patient was tested for CA 19-9 and CA 125.Setting and PATIENTS: One hundred ten patients with heterogeneous pancreatic lesions (inflammatory and malignant tumors) treated at a surgical department of a university hospital were analyzed. INTERVENTIONS: Samples for cytological and histological evaluation were taken during ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy or open surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of each test in the differential diagnosis of pancreatic tumors were determined. RESULTS: The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the CA 19-9 test were 80.8%, 89.1%, 93.7%, and 89.2%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the CA 125 test were 60.8%, 83.3%, 88.2%, and 50.8%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of a combined evaluation of both CA 19-9 and CA 125 tests were 87.8% and 77.8%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Taking into account the high but still limited sensitivity and specificity of the CA 19-9 and CA 125 tests, their results in the differential diagnosis of pancreatic tumors should be interpreted consistently and in reference to imaging techniques such as ultrasonography and computed tomography.     

血清学肿瘤标志物与胰腺癌诊断及分期的关系

目的 探索血清学肿瘤标志物CA19-9、CEA及CA50与胰腺癌的早期诊断及分期的关系.方法 通过收集分析安徽医科大学附属省立医院普外科2013年1月-2015年10月收治入院的51例胰腺癌患者、10例胰腺良性肿瘤患者、12例慢性胰腺炎患者血清中CA19-9、CEA及CA50的测量值,比较它们在不同分期的胰腺癌及其他胰腺疾病中血清含量的不同.结果 CA19-9在不同分期胰腺癌及其他胰腺疾病中表达差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).CEA及CA50在胰腺癌与胰腺其他疾病中表达差异具有统计学意义(P＜0.05).但CEA在Ⅰ期与Ⅱ期、Ⅰ期与Ⅲ期、Ⅱ期与Ⅲ期患者血清中的表达差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).CA50在胰腺癌Ⅰ期与Ⅲ期、Ⅱ期和Ⅳ期中表达差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).CA19-9诊断胰腺癌的阳性率高于CEA及CA50,CA19-9、CEA及CA50三者同时检测诊断胰腺癌的阳性率最高.结论 CA19-9、CEA及CA50在血清中的表达水平对于胰腺癌的早期诊断有一定的相关性,在胰腺癌分期中CA19-9的诊断价值最高.     

Tumour markers in pancreatic cancer

Patients with pancreatic cancer usually lack signs and symptoms in the early course of the disease. Even when malignancy is suspected, differential diagnosis between benign and malignant pancreatic disorders may be difficult with current methods. An increasing interest has been focused on the utility of immunological tumour markers. CEA has been widely used since the early seventies, but the results in diagnosis of pancreatic cancer have been disappointing. Tumour marker tests for CA 19-9 and CA 50 are based on monoclonal antibodies to colonic carcinoma cell lines. CA 19-9 and CA 50 are strongly expressed in most tissue specimens from pancreatic carcinomas, but are also found in normal pancreas and benign pancreatic diseases. The CA 19-9 and CA 50 antigens are shed or released into the circulation, and are found in increased concentrations in 70-80% of patients with pancreatic cancer. Also 50-65% of patients with small resectable carcinomas have elevated CA 19-9 and CA 50 levels, although very high serum concentrations usually indicate advanced disease. Slightly elevated serum CA 19-9 and CA 50 levels are seen in some patients with benign pancreatic diseases, more often in acute than in chronic pancreatitis. Elevated values are often observed in patients with benign obstruction of the common bile duct, particularly in patients with cholangitis. In patients with jaundice of hepatocellular origin, the CA 19-9 and CA 50 levels are lower than in extrahepatic cholestasis. CA 19-9 and CA 50 have better diagnostic accuracy for pancreatic cancer than CEA, CA 125, DU-PAN-2, TPA and PSTI/TATI. However, the sensitivities and specificities of CA 19-9 and CA 50 are too low for screening of an asymptomatic population. Nevertheless, CA 19-9 and CA 50 have in our experience shown to be useful complements to other diagnostic methods in symptomatic patients with suspicion of pancreatic cancer. Combinations of different markers improve the sensitivity only slightly compared to the use of CA 19-9 or CA 50 alone. Follow-up using CA 19-9 and CA 50 is a simple and sensitive way of monitoring the postoperative course of patients with pancreatic cancer, and may give a lead time of several months for a recurrence compared to conventional methods.     

胰腺癌血清肿瘤标记物联合检测的临床研究

目的：观察胰腺癌患者血清肿瘤标记物的表达,寻找对胰腺癌诊断与随访的有价值血清肿瘤标记物。方法：采用免疫分析法和放射免疫法检测92例胰腺癌患者的血清AFP、CEA、CA50、CA15－3、CA19－9、CA72－4、CA125和CA242共8种肿瘤标记物的表达,并与其它恶性肿瘤患者70例和良性疾病患者73例作对照,分析其临床诊断价值。结果：8种肿瘤标记物中CA19－9、CA242、CA50和CA125对胰腺癌诊断的相对价值较高,尤以CA19－9的诊断价值最高,灵敏度和特异度分别为82．6％和81．3％,平行法联合检测提高灵敏度至90．2％,系列法联合检测提高特异度93．5％,25例获手术切除者术后上述四项指标呈下降趋势。结论：血清CA19－9、CA242、CA50和CA125的检测对胰腺癌的诊断和随访是价值的,联合检测可以增加检测效率。     

联合应用肿瘤标记物在胰腺癌诊断中的意义

目的 探讨肿瘤标记物糖链抗原199(CA 199)、肿瘤抗原242(CA 242)与癌胚抗原(CEA)联合检测对胰腺癌诊断及预后判断的意义.方法 用化学发光技术分别检测胰腺癌50例、胰腺良性疾病42例和健康体检者60例的血清CA 199、CA 242与CEA表达.结果 胰腺癌组CA199、CA 242与CEA等3种标志物血清值分别为(226.26±42.06)、(68.82±7.63)与(9.63±5.84)μg/L,均明显高于其他组(P<0.05);胰腺癌组CA 199、CA 242与CEA阳性率分别为82.61%、76.09%与60.87%,与其他两组比较.差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);CA 199、CA 242与CEA等3项联检准确性达97.83%.CA 199与胰腺癌分期呈正相关,与患者生存期呈负相关.结论 肿瘤标志物联合检测可明显提高胰腺癌早期确诊率,CA 199对判断预后有一定参考价值.     

肿瘤标志物联合检测在胰腺癌诊断和疗效评价中的作用

目的：探讨CA199、CA242、CA125、CEA和OPN联合检测对胰腺癌诊断和疗效评价的临床价值。方法检测41胰腺癌患者术前及术后1个月和40例健康体检者外周血清中肿瘤标志物CA199、CA242、CA125、CEA和OPN的水平,比较胰腺癌组术前和术后的变化。并计算肿瘤标志物诊断胰腺癌的敏感性、特异性及准确性。结果胰腺癌组各肿瘤标志物测定值及阳性率明显高于正常对照组,术前测定值明显高于术后,差异有统计学意义,P均〈0．05。标志物联合检测的敏感性和诊断准确性均比单项检测高,其中单项以CA199敏感性最高。结论CA199、CA242、CA125、CEA和OPN联合检测对胰腺癌的诊断、疗效观察及复发预测是较理想的指标,具有重要的临床意义。