超声BI-RADS联合血CA15-3和CEA在乳腺肿物诊断中的价值研究

目的 探讨超声BI-RADS与血CA15-3和CEA联合检测在乳腺肿物中的诊断价值。方法 选择2019年6月—2019年12月乳腺肿物患者111例,以病理结果为金标准,分析超声BI-RADS、血CA15-3和CEA联合对乳腺肿物诊断的敏感性及准确性。结果 病理示良性病变43例,乳腺癌68例。与良性病变患者相比,乳腺癌患者血CA15-3和CEA均升高(P＜0.05)。乳腺癌患者CA15-3和CEA呈正相关。超声BI-RADS、血CA15-3和CEA联合对乳腺癌诊断的敏感性达到73.5%,准确性升高至83.8%,AUC提高到0.957,均高于三者各自单独使用时的诊断效果。结论 超声BI-RADS、血CA15-3和CEA联合检测是一种提高乳腺肿物诊断敏感性和准确率的有效方法。     

CEA与CA15-3联合检测在乳腺癌诊断中的临床意义

目的：探讨癌胚抗原（carcinoembryo antigen,CEA）与肿瘤相关糖类抗原15-3（carbohydrate antigen15-3,CA15-3）联合检测在乳腺癌诊断中的应用价值。方法：采用电化学发光方法检测116例乳腺癌患者与94例乳腺良性肿瘤患者血清中CEA与CA15-3水平并进行统计学分析。结果：乳腺癌患者血清中CEA与CA15-3水平明显高于乳腺良性肿瘤对照组（P〈0.01）;二者联合检测诊断敏感性显著提高（P〈0.05）;治疗后CEA与CA15-3含量与治疗前相比显著无明显变化（P〉0.05）。结论：CEA与CA15-3联合检测可提高乳腺癌诊断敏感性,对临床诊断与疗效评价有一定的应用价值。     

三维超声与MRI联合血清CA15-3、CEA诊断老年乳腺癌

目的:研究三维超声与MRI联合血清CA15-3、CEA诊断老年乳腺癌的价值,为临床诊断提供选择方案。方法:选取我院于2016年1月至2018年1月期间收治的90例确诊乳腺癌患者作为乳腺癌组,另选取同期收治的90例乳腺良性肿瘤患者作为良性组及90例来院参加健康体检的志愿者作为对照组。两组术前均进行三维超声、MRI及血清CA15-3、CEA诊断。以病理结果为标准,对比两组患者的三维超声、MRI诊断阳性率,血清CA15-3、CEA水平,联合诊断的敏感度、特异度、阳性预测值及阴性预测值,并研究联合诊断不同分期乳腺癌阳性率。结果:三组对比,乳腺癌组患者的三维超声、MRI诊断阳性率均明显高于良性组及对照组(P<0.05),且血清CA15-3、CEA水平亦高于良性组及对照组(P<0.05)。三维超声、MRI及血清CA15-3、CEA联合诊断的特异度、敏感度、阴性预测值及阳性预测值均高于单项诊断,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。三维超声、MRI及血清CA15-3、CEA联合诊断Ⅰ-Ⅱ期及Ⅲ-Ⅳ期乳腺癌的阳性率高于单项诊断,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:三维超声与MRI联合血清CA15-3、CEA诊断老年乳腺癌,特异性及敏感性较高,联合诊断阳性率较高,且能有效诊断乳腺癌分期,值得临床借鉴。     

乳腺癌相关血清肿瘤标志物的临床研究进展

癌胚抗原(CEA)、糖类抗原(CA)15-3、CA125等血清肿瘤标志物异常表达提示肿瘤的发生风险.CA15-3过表达被认为与乳腺癌的疾病进展有关,不同临床分期乳腺癌患者血清CA15-3的阳性检出率对诊断临床分期有显著优势,灵敏度和特异度均较高.但目前认为,某项血清肿瘤标志物单独检测对乳腺癌的阳性检出率较低,对早期筛查及诊断的意义不大,因此,多主张血清肿瘤标志物联合检测以对乳腺肿瘤进行早期筛查和早期诊断.本文对CEA、CA15-3、CA125等已在临床一定范围内得到应用的肿瘤标志物,以及新发现、潜在可能用于指导乳腺癌临床决策及治疗方案的肿瘤生物标志物与乳腺癌诊断、治疗及预后相关的临床研究进行综述.     

CEA与CA15-3联合检测在乳腺癌诊断中的临床意义

目的:探讨癌胚抗原(carcinoembryo antigen,CEA)与肿瘤相关糖类抗原15-3(carbohydrate antigen15-3,CA15-3)联合检测在乳腺癌诊断中的应用价值。方法:采用电化学发光方法检测116例乳腺癌患者与94例乳腺良性肿瘤患者血清中CEA与CA15-3水平并进行统计学分析。结果:乳腺癌患者血清中CEA与CA15-3水平明显高于乳腺良性肿瘤对照组(P<0.01);二者联合检测诊断敏感性显著提高(P<0.05);治疗后CEA与CA15-3含量与治疗前相比显著无明显变化(P>0.05)。结论:CEA与CA15-3联合检测可提高乳腺癌诊断敏感性,对临床诊断与疗效评价有一定的应用价值。     

糖类抗原15-3、癌胚抗原、环氧合酶-2联合检测在乳腺癌诊断中的应用

 目的　探讨糖类抗原15-3（CA15-3）、癌胚抗原（CEA）、环氧合酶-2（COX-2）联合检测对乳腺癌早期诊断的应用价值。方法　选择经影像学和病理学诊断为乳腺癌患者53例,同时选择同期良性乳腺病患者61例及同期健康体检者68名,采用电化学发光技术与酶联免疫吸附法（ELISA）分别检测血清CA15-3、CEA、COX-2水平。结果　乳腺癌组CA15-3、CEA、COX-2血清水平分别为（34.67±13.20）U／ml、（7.38±3.87）ng／ml、（43.25±10.87）ng／ml,与良性乳腺病组和健康对照组血清含量比较差异具有统计学意义（均P＜0.01）;CA15-3、CEA、COX-2联合检测将各项指标单独检测的阳性检出率提高至84.9 %（45／53）,其敏感度提高至84.9 %,准确度提高至91.2 %。结论　三项肿瘤标志物联合应用能弥补单项肿瘤标志物临床应用的不足,对提高乳腺癌阳性检出率具有一定意义。     

癌胚抗原、糖类抗原15-3和细胞角蛋白片段19检测对乳腺癌临床应用的价值

 目的　研究血清肿瘤标志物癌胚抗原（CEA）、糖类抗原15-3 （CA15-3）、细胞角蛋白片段19 （CYFRA21-1）联合检测对乳腺癌的诊断及复发监测中的意义。方法　采用电化学发光免疫法检测62例乳腺癌患者、57例乳腺良性病患者及50名健康对照组CEA、CA15-3和CYFRA21-1水平,并计算上述指标联合检测在乳腺癌诊断中的敏感度、特异度、准确度和约登指数（YI）。结果　乳腺癌组3种肿瘤标志物水平均明显高于乳腺良性疾病组和健康对照组（P＜0.01）。临床分期越大3种血清肿瘤标志物水平越高;复发病例中3种肿瘤标志物水平均有不同程度升高。单项检测各种肿瘤标志物以CA15-3的敏感性最高（56.5 %）,CYFRA21-1特异性最好（89.7 %）,但CA15-3和CYFRA21-1的准确度及YI值都不高,分别为71.1 %、0.35和70.5 %、0.37。联合检测较单项检测敏感性、准确性和YI明显提高,3项联合检测敏感度高达88.7 %,特异度90.8 % ,准确度89.9 %,YI为0.80。结论　单项检测对乳腺癌的诊断价值有限,3种血清肿瘤标志物联合检测可显著提高乳腺癌的敏感性和准确性,在术后随访和监测复发中可发挥重要作用。     

乳腺癌血清ICTP、CA15-3水平与骨转移发生率的相关性研究北大核心CSCD

背景与目的:Ⅰ型胶原羧基端肽(carboxyterminal telopeptide of typeⅠcollagen,ICTP)为骨吸收标志物,糖类抗原15-3(carbohydrate antigen 15-3,CA15-3)属于肿瘤相关性抗原。本研究通过对乳腺癌术后患者ICTP与CA15-3水平的定期检测,并随访观察,探讨ICTP与CA15-3水平与乳腺癌骨转移发生率的相关性。方法:对61例乳腺癌术后患者定期检测血清ICTP与CA15-3水平,术后第1年每个月检测1次,第2年每2个月1次,第3年每3个月1次。观察临床分期与血清ICTP与CA15-3阳性率的关系,评估联合检测血清ICTP、CA15-3对乳腺癌骨转移的诊断价值。结果:临床分期Ⅰ、Ⅱ期ICTP与CA15-3阳性升高率低,Ⅲ、Ⅳ期阳性升高率明显增高,各分期比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。随着血清ICTP、CA15-3水平升高,各个区段骨转移发生率之间差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);两者均与骨转移发生有良好相关性(P<0.01),且两者之间呈中度相关。61例中有27例ICTP、CA15-3均升高并呈阳性,其中有21例出现临床骨转移症状,占77.78%;在11例ICTP与CA15-3均为阴性的术后患者中,有1例出现临床骨转移症状及相关证据,占9.01%;两者相比差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。ICTP与CA15-3联合检测对乳腺癌骨转移诊断的敏感性、特异性及阳性预测值、阴性预测值均高于单独检测。结论:定期检测乳腺癌术后患者血清ICTP与CA15-3,对预测骨转移有重要的临床应用价值。     

C-12型蛋白芯片在乳腺癌诊断中的临床价值

目的 探讨C-12型蛋白芯片10项肿瘤标志物在乳腺癌患者血清中的表达情况,并筛选出临床价值较高的标志物.方法 采用蛋白芯片检测系统测定32例乳腺癌患者、28例良性肿瘤患者和19例健康对照者血清中10项标志物(CA19-9、NSE、CEA、CA242、CA125、CAl5-3、AFP、Ferritin、HCG、HGH)的表达水平,用SPSS12.0软件包进行统计分析.结果 所检测的10项标志物单项对乳腺癌的敏感度依次为Ferritin(12.5%)CA242(6.25%)、HGH(6.25%)CEA(3.13%)、CA19-9、CA15-3CA125(0%)、AFP、NSE、HCG.筛选出CA15-3+CA242+HGH组合为诊断乳腺癌效率较高的组合.Ⅲ期Ferritin明显高于Ⅰ+ⅡA期(P《0.05).而CA15-3检测水平ER阴性患者明显高于阳性患者(P《0.05),CA242检测水平乳腺癌ER、PR阳性患者明显高于阴性患者(P《0.05).结论 Ferritin对于判断乳腺癌临床分期,可提供有价值的线索.CA15-3并非乳腺癌早期诊断有效标志物,但对于选择治疗方法及判断预后方面,仍可以提供帮助.CA15-3+CA242+HGH联合检测乳腺癌不具有足够的诊断价值.     

核素骨显像联合肿瘤标记物检测对乳腺癌骨转移的诊断价值

目的：观察核素骨显像联合肿瘤标记物对乳腺癌骨转移的诊断价值。方法选择乳腺癌患者82例,按照核素骨显像结果分为转移组43例及未转移组39例,另选取40例健康体检女性作为对照组。观察核素骨显像以及肿瘤标记物检测结果,并对其诊断价值进行考察。结果转移组血清CA125、CA15-3及CEA表达水平及阳性率显著高于未转移组及对照组,骨转移灶数目≤2患者血清CA125、CA15-3以及CEA表达水平及阳性率均显著低于骨转移灶数目＞2的患者,差异均具有统计学意义（P＜0．05）。且随着骨转移分级程度的升高,患者乳腺癌相关肿瘤标记物CA125、CA15-3及CEA表达水平及阳性率均呈升高趋势,各分级间差异有统计学意义（ P＜0．05）。结论核素骨显像联合肿瘤标记物检测可提高诊断敏感性,对于乳腺癌骨转移的诊断具有重要的参考价值。     

Elevated levels of serum tumor markers CA 15-3 and CEA are prognostic factors for diagnosis of metastatic breast cancers

To investigate the prognostic value of tumor markers, cancer antigen 15-3 (CA 15-3) and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels at diagnosis of systemic recurrence. After primary treatments of locoregional breast cancers, serum CA 15-3 and/or CEA concentrations were regularly measured, and systemic recurrences were identified in 351 patients between January 1999 and December 2009. The association between tumor marker levels at systemic recurrence and survival were investigated by univariate and multivariate analyses. Elevated CA 15-3 and CEA levels were identified in 194 of 349 (55.6 %) and 111 of 308 (36.0 %) patients, respectively, at diagnosis of systemic recurrence. Elevated levels of CA 15-3 and CEA were correlated with visceral or multiple recurrences and elevated preoperative levels. Elevation of CA 15-3 was more prominent in younger patients and in primary node-positive tumors, while CEA was elevated in older patients at diagnosis and in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive tumors. Elevated tumor markers as well as ER negativity, short disease-free interval, and advanced stage at initial diagnosis showed independent prognostic significance on multivariate analysis. Among 306 patients for whom levels of both tumor markers at recurrence were available, 106 patients without elevation of either marker showed significantly better overall survival than those with elevated levels of either one or both markers, and the significance persisted in multivariate analysis. Elevated serum CA 15-3 and CEA levels at recurrence suggest increased tumor burden and may be prognostic for survival for metastatic breast cancer patients.     

Comparison of a novel assay for breast cancer mucin to CA15-3 and carcinoembryonic antigen.

PURPOSE: To compare the sensitivity and specificity of an automated microparticle enzyme immunoassay (MEIA) for breast cancer mucin (IMx BCM; Abbott Laboratories, North Chicago, IL) to that of CA15-3 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) for detecting and monitoring breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: IMxBCM was compared to assays of CA15-3 and CEA in 630 serum specimens from healthy women, and from women with breast cancer, other malignancies, benign breast conditions, or other benign diseases. RESULTS: Analysis of the log-transforms for the three markers in all specimens showed a high correlation of IMxBCM with CA15-3 (r = .78), but not with CEA (r = .25). Based on a receiver-operating-characteristics (ROC)-curve analysis for any given specificity, IMxBCM was found to be a more sensitive marker than either CA15-3 or CEA for distinguishing 105 women with advanced or metastatic breast cancer from 89 healthy women (P = .003 and P = .04, respectively), from 98 women with benign breast conditions (P = .02 and P = .002), or from 191 women with benign diseases (P = .03 and P less than .0001). At 95% specificity, the sensitivities of IMxBCM, CA15-3, and CEA for detecting advanced or metastatic breast cancer were 69%, 51%, and 30%, respectively. Serial serum samples (n = 177) were analyzed in 20 additional metastatic breast cancer patients with measurable disease. Serial IMxBCM levels corresponded with the clinical course of disease in 80%, CA15-3 in 65%, and CEA in 60% of the 20 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Increased sensitivity of IMxBCM, despite a high correlation with CA15-3, suggests that IMxBCM and CA15-3 may recognize distinct epitopes on the same molecule. Although further research is indicated, IMxBCM may provide a promising marker in the clinical management of breast cancer patients.     

Midkine in plasma as a novel breast cancer marker

Midkine, a heparin-binding growth factor, is up-regulated in many types of cancer. The aim of this study was to measure plasma midkine levels in patients with breast cancer and to assess its clinical significance. We examined plasma midkine levels in 95 healthy volunteers, 11 patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), 111 patients with primary invasive breast cancer without distant metastasis (PIBC), and 25 patients with distant metastatic breast cancer (MBC), using an automatic immunoasssay analyzer (TOSOH AIA system). In PIBC, we studied the correlation between plasma midkine levels and clinicopathological factors. Immunoreactive midkine was detectable in the plasma of healthy volunteers, and a cut-off level of 750 pg/mL was established. In breast cancer patients, plasma midkine levels were increased above normal values. These elevated levels of midkine were seen in one (9.1%) of 11 patients with DCIS, 36 (32.4%) of 111 patients with PIBC, and 16 (64.0%) of 25 patients with MBC. Increased levels of midkine were correlated with menopausal status ( P  = 0.0497) and nuclear grade ( P  = 0.0343) in PIBC. Cancer detection rates based on midkine levels were higher than those based on three conventional markers including CA15-3 ( P  < 0.0001), CEA ( P  = 0.0077), and NCCST-439 ( P  < 0.0001). Detection rates of breast cancer using a combination of two conventional tumor markers (CA15-3/CEA, CA15-3/NCCST-439, or CEA/NCCST-439) with midkine is significantly higher than those using combination of three conventional tumor markers. Midkine may be a useful novel tumor marker for detection of breast cancer, superior to conventional tumor markers. ( Cancer Sci 2009; 100: 1735–1739)     

The objective measurement of remission and progression in metastatic breast cancer by use of serum tumour markers. European Group for Serum Tumour Markers in Breast Cancer

An established biochemical index for monitoring therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer was tested prospectively in a multicentre study. The index uses two serum tumour markers--carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen 15-3 (CA15-3) along with erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). 67 patients treated by either endocrine or chemotherapy had CA15-3, CEA and ESR measured at diagnosis of metastases and sequentially during therapy. Two markers, CA15-3 and CEA, were measured on a further 16 patients giving a total of 83 patients who were assessable for CA15-3 and CEA. Of the patients with CA15-3, CEA and ESR measured at diagnosis of metastases 84% (56/67) had elevation of 1 or more markers. During therapy the number with elevated marker(s) rose to 96% (64/67). Changes in the markers were in line with and often pre-dated therapeutic outcome as assessed by the International Union Against Cancer (UICC) criteria both for remission and progression. Patients without elevation of markers on diagnosis subsequently showed a rise in the marker(s) at or before documented disease progression by UICC. The 3 women in whom markers were at no time significantly elevated remain in remission. The results using CA15-3 and CEA were similar but 12% less patients were assessable. CA15-3 and CEA (with and without ESR) provide an objective method to guide therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer.     

Preoperative CA 15-3 and CEA serum levels as predictor for breast cancer outcomes.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the association between tumor markers [cancer antigen 15-3 (CA 15-3) and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA)] and clinicopathological parameters and patient outcomes in breast cancer. Materials and methods: A total of 740 patients with stages I-III breast cancer had preoperative CA 15-3 and CEA concentrations measured. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to investigate associations between marker concentration and clinicopathological parameters and patient outcomes. RESULTS: Among 740 patients, elevated preoperative levels of CA 15-3 and CEA were identified in 92 (12.4%) and 79 (10.7%) patients, respectively. Tumor size (>5 cm), node metastases (> or =4), and advanced stage (> or =III) were associated with higher preoperative levels. Elevated CA 15-3 and CEA levels were associated with poor disease-free survival (DFS, P = 0.0014, P = 0.0001, respectively) and overall survival (OS, P = 0.018, P = 0.015) even in stage-matched analysis. Patients with normal levels of both CA 15-3 and CEA showed better DFS and OS than those with elevated group. In multivariate analysis, age (<35 years), tumor size (>2 cm), node metastases, estrogen receptor expression, and elevated CA 15-3 and CEA preoperative values were independent prognostic factors for DFS. CONCLUSION: High preoperative CA 15-3 and CEA levels may reflect tumor burden and are associated with advanced disease and poor outcome. Measuring preoperative levels of CA 15-3 and CEA can be helpful for predicting outcomes.     

Estimates of circulating breast cancer-associated antigen CA 15-3 as a monitoring marker in patients with breast cancer

CA 15-3 is a newly developed tumor marker detected by breast tumor-associated antigen 115D8/DF3 and is being studied as a monitoring marker in breast cancer patients (pts), even though its sensitivity as a screening marker is not so high. The cut off value of CA 15-3 was set at 27 U/ml. We assayed the plasma CA 15-3 levels of breast cancer pts from June 1985 for the purpose of estimating it as a monitoring marker in comparison with CEA. In the monitoring of over 2,000 postoperative pts, 23 were discovered to have metastatic lesions. For prediction of recurrence, CA 15-3 was useful for 11 pts (48%), while CEA was useful for 8 pts (35%), and CA 15-3 or CEA were useful for 14 pts (61%). Although it was little useful for local recurrence, CA 15-3 was highly useful for the prediction of organ & bone recurrence in 7/11 pts (64%). With regard to monitoring of the clinical course of metastatic carcinoma of the breast, the levels of CA 15-3 were positive in 47/68 pts (69%), while in contrast CEA was positive in 42/68 pts (62%). The trend of CA 15-3 was also highly correlated with the clinical course. CA 15-3 thus appears to be a better marker, especially as a monitoring marker, than CEA for breast cancer. Additional research will be required on this marker, but it seems likely that CA 15-3 combined with CEA would provide better information for the monitoring of breast cancer patients.     

The value of the tumor marker CA 15-3 in diagnosing and monitoring breast cancer. A comparative study with carcinoembryonic antigen

To estimate the utility of the tumor-associated antigen CA 15-3 in the diagnosis of patients with breast cancer, this tumor marker was measured preoperatively in 1342 patients. This group included 509 patients with malignant disease (134 breast cancer patients and 375 patients with other malignancies not involving the breast) and 833 patients with benign surgical diseases (95 patients with fibroadenoma of the breast and 738 patients with other benign diseases). The results were compared with those obtained for carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in the diagnosis of breast cancer. The CA 15-3 level was above normal (25 U/ml) in 31% of the patients with breast cancer, in 22% of patients with other malignancies, and in 9% of patients with benign diseases. The CEA level was elevated in 26% of patients with breast cancer (more than 3 ng/ml). There was a good correlation of CA 15-3 levels with the tumor stage of breast cancer. Both CA 15-3 and CEA also were determined in 671 patients who had received initial curative surgery of breast cancer and who regularly attended our follow-up clinic. The CA 15-3 was found to be more sensitive than CEA in detecting recurrences of breast cancer. In the postcare period, carcinoma recurred in 205 patients. Of these, 73% had CA 15-3 concentrations above 25 U/ml; only 50% had CEA values above 3 ng/ml (P less than 0.0001). Although neither CA 15-3 nor CEA were sensitive enough for the screening and diagnosis of early breast cancer, CA 15-3 was significantly better than CEA in the detection of breast cancer metastases.     

Evaluation of serum KL-6, a mucin-like glycoprotein, as a tumor marker for breast cancer.

The utility of serum KL-6 as a tumor marker for breast cancer was evaluated in this study. The sera from 146 patients with breast cancer, 13 with benign breast disease, and 108 healthy individuals were measured for KL-6 titer using a sandwich enzyme immunoassay method. Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen 15-3 (CA15-3) titers were also tested in the same sera from the patients. The mean KL-6 titer of patients with primary breast cancer was 673 units/ml, which was significantly higher than that of benign and healthy individuals (P = 0.037 and P < 0.0001, respectively). The titer of patients with relapsed breast cancer was 1964 units/ml, which was also higher than that of primary cancer (P = 0.013). KL-6 titer was related to tumor stage, distant metastasis, and relapse site (P = 0.0053, P < 0.0001, and P = 0.0251, respectively). Using the cutoff value of 467 units/ml, the sensitivity of KL-6 was 31% for primary breast cancer (16% for stage I and 29% for stage II) and 73% for relapsed breast cancer (50% for local relapse and 89% for distant relapse). The specificity was 92%. The sensitivity of KL-6 was higher than that of CA15-3 and CEA. Combination of the three markers, followed by KL-6 and CEA, raised the sensitivity for primary breast cancer. Single use of KL-6 demonstrated a higher sensitivity than in each combination for relapsed breast cancer. In conclusion, serum KL-6 may be helpful for clinical use as a tumor marker for breast cancer, and it may play an important role, especially in the surveillance of disease relapse.     

Evaluation of CA M26, CA M29, CA 15-3 and CEA as circulating tumor markers in breast cancer patients

The clinical utility of CA M26 and CA M29 was studied in 116 breast cancer patients and compared with results for CA 15-3 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA). The highest sensitivities for breast cancer detection were achieved with CA 15-3 (0.60) and CEA (0.56), but this was compromised by a relative lack of specificity (0.87 and 0.88 for CA 15-3 and CEA, respectively). Sensitivities attained with CA M26 (0.47) and CA M29 (0.53) were lower, but there was an excellent specificity (1.00) for each assay in this series of benign patients. Tumor marker elevations were appreciable with advanced disease such that 82 of 91 patients (90%) with active metastatic breast cancer exhibited at least one abnormal test value. Longitudinal studies demonstrated that CA M26, CA M29, CA 15-3 and CEA complement each other and combinations of these markers reflect disease status better than individual tests.     

Clinical evaluation of potential usefulness of CEA, CA 15-3, and MCA in follow-up of breast cancer patients

The potential usefulness of MCA, CA 15-3 and CEA in monitoring of breast cancer patients was evaluated in 135 female patients with histologically confirmed breast cancer. The patients were classified into two groups as follows: group of patients with no evidence of disease, NED; and group of patients with progressive disease, PD. In total, 2106 measurements of CEA, CA 15-3, and MCA were performed using an enzyme immunoassay. Serum levels of all three markers in the NED group differed significantly from those of patients with PD. The observed differences in the sensitivity and specificity of CEA, CA 15-3, and MCA tests were not significant. The serum concentrations of a particular marker correlated well with the concentrations of the other two markers, except when CEA was correlated with MCA or CA 15-3 in NED group patients. The elevation of tumor markers preceded by some 7 months the clinical evidence of dissemination, and marker levels reflected at a high percentage the response to therapy in PD patients. Therefore, this clinical study confirmed that MCA, CA 15-3 and also CEA are suited to discriminate between disease and disease-free periods, and also validated the usefulness of markers for treatment response monitoring.