Combined Detection of CEA,CA 19-9, CA 242 and CA 50 in the Diagnosis and Prognosis of Resectable Gastric Cancer

Our aim was to investigate the value of combined detection of serum  carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9, CA 242 and CA 50 in diagnosis and assessment of prognosis in consecutive gastric cancer patients. Clinical data including preoperative serum CEA, CA 19-9, CA 242, and CA 50 values and information on clinical pathological factors were collected and analyzed retrospectively. Univariate and multivariate survival analyses were used to explore the relationship between tumor markers and survival. Positive rates of tumor markers CEA, CA 19-9, CA 242 and CA 50 in the diagnosis of gastric cancer were 17.7, 17.1, 20.4 and 13.8%, respectively, and the positive rate for all four markers combined was 36.6%. Patients with elevated preoperative serum concentrations of CEA, CA 19-9, CA 242 and CA 50, had late clinical tumor stageand significantly poorer overall survival. Five-year survival rates in patients with elevated CEA, CA 19-9, CA 242 and CA 50 were 28.1, 25.8, 27.0 and 24.1%, respectively, compared with 55.0, 55.4, 56.4 and 54.5% in patients with these markers at normal levels (p<0.01). In multivariate Cox proportional hazards analyses, an elevated CA 242 level was determined to be an independent prognostic marker in gastric cancer patients. Combined detection of four tumor markers increased the positive rate for gastric cancer diagnosis. CA 242 showed higher diagnostic value and CA 50 showed lower diagnostic value. In resectable gastric carcinoma, preoperative CA 242 level was associated with disease stage, and was found to be a significant independent prognostic marker in gastric cancer patients.     

Serum HCG beta and CA 72-4 are stronger prognostic factors than CEA, CA 19-9 and CA 242 in pancreatic cancer

OBJECTIVE: In pancreatic cancer, the extent of the spread of the disease is considered to be the strongest prognostic factor. In addition, tumor markers, particularly CA 19-9, may also provide prognostic information. In this study, we evaluated the prognostic value of serum tumor markers CEA, CA 19-9, CA 242, CA 72-4 and hCG beta in pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Preoperative serum samples were obtained from 160 patients with pancreatic cancer, including 10 with stage I, 25 with stage II, 24 with stage III and 101 patients with stage IV cancer. Quantitation of CEA, CA 19-9, CA 242, and CA 72-4 in serum was performed with commercial assays. HCG beta was measured with an in-house immunofluorometric assay based on monoclonal antibodies specific for the free beta-subunit of hCG. Survival analysis was performed with univariate Kaplan-Meier life-tables and log-rank test, and with multivariate Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the tumor markers studied, CA 19-9 was most frequently elevated. Overall 2-year survival was 10%. Stage, tumor location and size, curative resection, and CEA, CA 72-4 and hCG beta were all found to be prognostic factors (p < 0.026) in univariate analysis. In multivariate analysis, each marker had independent prognostic value (p < 0.011) when analyzed individually but adjusting for stage. When all the covariates were included in the same model, the strongest prognostic factor was hCG beta followed by CA 72-4 and stage. The other clinical characteristics and serum tumor markers contributed insignificant prognostic information. CONCLUSIONS: All the tumor markers studied (CEA, CA 19-9, CA 242, CA 72-4, and hCG beta) had prognostic value in pancreatic cancer, and hCG beta, CA 72-4, and stage were the strongest independent prognostic factors in this study.     

Serum HCG beta,CA 72-4 and CEA are independent prognostic factors in colorectal cancer

In colorectal cancer, stage is considered to be the strongest prognostic factor, but also serum tumour markers have been reported to be of prognostic value. The aim of our study was to investigate the prognostic value of serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), CA 19-9, CA 242, CA 72-4 and free beta subunit of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG beta) in colorectal cancer. Preoperative serum samples were obtained from 204 colorectal cancer patients, including 31 patients with Dukes' A, 70 with Dukes' B, 49 with Dukes' C and 54 with Dukes' D cancer. The serum levels of CEA, CA 19-9, CA 242 and CA 72-4 were measured with commercial kits with cut-off values of 5 microg/L for CEA, 37 kU/L for CA 19-9, 20 kU/L for CA 242 and 6 kU/L for CA 72-4. The serum hCG beta was quantitated by an immunofluorometric assay (IFMA) with 2 pmol/L as a cut-off value. Survival analyses were performed with Kaplan-Meier life tables, log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards model. The sensitivity was 44% for CEA, 26% for CA 19-9, 36% for CA 242, 27% for CA 72-4 and 16% for hCG beta. The overall 5-year survival was 55%, and in Dukes' A, B, C and D cancers the survival was 89%, 77%, 52% and 3%, respectively. Elevated serum values of all markers correlated with worse survival (p < 0.001). In Cox multivariate analysis, the strongest prognostic factor was Dukes' stage (p < 0.001), followed by tumour location (p = 0.002) and preoperative serum markers hCG beta (p = 0.002), CA 72-4 (p = 0.003) and CEA (p = 0.005). In conclusion, elevated CEA, CA 19-9, CA 242, CA 72-4 and hCG beta relate to poor outcome in colorectal cancer. In multivariate analysis, independent prognostic significance was observed with hCG beta, CA 72-4 and CEA.     

The clinical value of serum CEA, CA19-9, and CA242 in the diagnosis and prognosis of pancreatic cancer.

AIM: Serum tumour markers carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) and CA242 were investigated to evaluate the values of single and combined test in the diagnosis and prognosis of pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Pre-operative serum CEA, CA19-9 and CA242 were measured in 105 pancreatic cancers, 70 non-pancreatic malignancies and 30 benign pancreatic diseases. RESULTS: The sensitivity of CA19-9 alone was the highest in pancreatic cancer patients (80%), but the specificity was significantly lower than that of CEA and CA242 (P<0.01). The combination of CEA and CA242 could increase the specificity to 92%. In serum CA242 positive patients, the survival time was remarkably shorter than that of patients with negative result (P<0.01). The survival time in patients with more than two markers positive expression of CEA, CA19-9 and CA242 was obviously shorter than that of only one or no marker positive expression (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: The diagnostic rate of CA19-9 in pancreatic cancer is better than that of CEA and CA242. Combined detection of CEA and CA242 can improve the diagnostic specificity obviously. High levels of serum markers are associated with advanced stage of the disease. Patients with two or three markers positive expression of CEA, CA19-9, and CA242 simultaneously had a shorter survival time.     

Preoperative hCGbeta and CA 72-4 are prognostic factors in gastric cancer

In gastric cancer, the role of tumour markers in assessment of prognosis is unconfirmed. In our study, we evaluated the prognostic significance of serum tumour markers carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), CA 19-9, CA 72-4, CA 242 and free beta subunit of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCGbeta) in gastric cancer. Preoperative serum samples were obtained from 146 patients with gastric cancer, including 29 with stage I, 11 with stage II, 42 with stage III and 64 patients with stage IV cancer. Quantitation of CEA, CA 19-9, CA 72-4 and CA 242 in serum was performed with commercial assays. HCGbeta was measured with an in-house immunofluorometric assay based on monoclonal antibodies specific for the free beta-subunit of hCG. Survival analysis was performed with Kaplan-Meier life-tables and log-rank test, and with multivariate Cox regression analysis. Disease-specific cumulative 2-year survival rate was 40%. Serum levels of CEA, CA 72-4, CA 242 and hCGbeta showed significant correlation with stage (p<0.027); for CA 19-9 the association was of borderline significance (p=0.056). Of the studied markers, CA 19-9, CA 72-4, CA 242 and hCGbeta were found to be prognostic factors in univariate analysis (p< 0.022). In multivariate analysis, stage had the statistically most significant association with prognosis followed by hCGbeta, tumour histology according to the Laurén classification and by CA 72-4. In gastric cancer, tumour markers hCGbeta and CA 72-4 are independent prognostic factors in addition to stage and histological type of the tumour.     

CEA, CA 242, CA 19-9, CA 72-4 and hCGbeta in the diagnosis of recurrent colorectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the utility of serum CEA, CA 19-9, CA 242, CA 72-4 and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG)beta in the follow-up of 102 surgically treated colorectal cancer patients, out of which 40 patients developed clinical recurrence. METHODS: In patients with recurrent disease, serum samples were obtained at the time of clinical recurrence, and in the disease-free group, they were obtained postoperatively. The combined use of the markers was evaluated with logistic regression analysis. The sensitivities of the different tumour markers at various specificity levels were compared by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. RESULTS: When the five tumour markers, Dukes stage and location of the primary tumour were evaluated together in the same model, only CEA provided significant diagnostic information (p < 0.0005) in addition to the location of the primary tumour (p = 0.003). The diagnostic information provided by the other serum tumour markers was insignificant, although CA 72-4 approached borderline significance (p = 0.053). ROC curves were constructed and the difference in the values of the area under the curve (AUC) between the different serum tumour markers was determined at the time of clinical recurrence. Of the individual markers, the highest AUC was observed for CEA (AUC = 0.931). The difference in AUC values between CEA and the other tumour markers was highly significant (p < or = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: CEA had the highest diagnostic accuracy in detecting recurrent colorectal cancer. Inclusion of CA 19-9, CA 242, CA 72-4 or hCGbeta in the model did not improve the accuracy, although CA 72-4 approached borderline significance (p = 0.053). Thus, CEA seems to retain its position as the surveillance marker of choice for patients surgically treated for colorectal cancer.     

Comparison of a new tumour marker CA 242 with CA 19-9, CA 50 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in digestive tract diseases

The levels of CA 242, a new tumour marker of carbohydrate nature, were measured in sera of 185 patients with malignancies of the digestive tract and of 123 patients with benign digestive tract diseases. High percentages of elevated CA 242 levels (greater than 20 U ml-1) were recorded in patients with pancreatic and biliary cancers (68%). The sensitivity was somewhat lower than that of CA 19-9 (76%) and CA 50 (73%). On the other hand, in benign pancreatic and biliary tract diseases the CA 242 level was less frequently elevated than the CA 19-9 and CA 50 levels. The serum CA 242 concentration was increased in 55% of patients with colorectal cancer. CA 242 detected more Dukes A-B carcinomas (47%) than CEA (32%), whereas CEA was more often elevated (71% vs 59%) in Dukes C-D carcinomas. CA 242 was slightly elevated (ad 41 U ml-1) in 10% of patients with benign colorectal diseases. CA 50 and CA 19-9 had lower sensitivities than CA 242 using the recommended cut-off values. When cut-off levels based on relevant benign colorectal diseases were used, the sensitivities of these markers were similar and somewhat higher than that of CEA. Less than half of patients with gastric cancer (44%) had an elevated CA 242 serum level. CA 242 is a promising new tumour marker, that may be of additional value in the diagnosis of pancreatic and biliary, as well as colorectal cancer, and may be useful in monitoring cancer patients after radical surgery.     

CA 242, a new tumour marker for pancreatic cancer: a comparison with CA 19-9, CA 50 and CEA.

The serum expression of a novel tumour marker, CA 242, defined by monoclonal antibody C 242, was studied in 179 patients with pancreatic cancer. The results were compared with CA 19-9, CA 50 and CEA. CA 242 is a carbohydrate closely related, but not identical, to CA 19-9 and CA 50. The overall sensitivity of the CA 242 assay was 74%: 55% in stage I, 83% in stage II-III and 78% in stage IV disease. The specificity calculated from 112 patients with benign diseases was 91%. CA 19-9 had a higher sensitivity of 83%, but the specificity was only 81%. When comparing the markers by receiver operating characteristic analysis, the sensitivities were almost identical at all specificity levels. The CA 242 level was elevated in 7%, 15% and 7% of patients with benign pancreatic, biliary and liver disease respectively. The corresponding figures for CA 19-9 were 19%, 28% and 15% respectively. The sensitivity of CA 242 was higher than that of CA 50 and CEA at all specificity levels. In conclusion, tumour marker CA 242 seems to be a useful diagnostic tool for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer, and is an alternative to CA 19-9. The advantage of CA 242 over CA 19-9 is its higher specificity when using the recommended cut-off levels of the assays.     

Applicative Value of Serum CA19-9, CEA,CA125 and CA242 in Diagnosis and Prognosis for Patients with Pancreatic Cancer Treated by Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy

Objective: To evaluate the application value of serum CA19-9, CEA, CA125 and CA242 in diagnosis andprognosis of pancreatic cancer cases treated with concurrent chemotherapy. Materials and Methods: 52patients with pancreatic cancer, 40 with benign pancreatic diseases and 40 healthy people were selected. Theelectrochemiluminescence immunoassay method was used for detecting levels of CA19-9, CEA and CA125, anda CanAg CA242 enzyme linked immunoassay kit for assessing the level of CA242. The Kaplan-Meier methodwas used for analyzing the prognostic factors of patients with pancreatic cancer. The Cox proportional hazardmodel was applied for analyzing the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidential interval (CI) for survival timeof patients with pancreatic cancer. Results: The levels of serum CA19-9, CEA, CA125 and CA242 in patientswith pancreatic cancer were significantly higher than those in patients with benign pancreatic diseases andhealthy people (P<0.001). The sensitivity of CA19-9 was the highest among these, followed by CA242, CA125and CEA. The specificity of CA242 is the highest, followed by CA125, CEA and CA19-9. The sensitivity andspecificity of joint detection of serum CA19-9, CEA, CA125and CA242 were 90.4% and 93.8%, obviouslyhigher than single detection of those markers in diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. The median survival time of52 patients with pancreatic cancer was 10 months (95% CI7.389~12.611).. Patients with the increasing level ofserum CA19-9, CEA, CA125, CA242 had shorter survival times (P=0.047. 0.043, 0.0041, 0.029). COX regressionanalysis showed that CA19-9 was an independent prognostic factor for patients with pancreatic cancer (P=0.001,95%CI 2.591~38.243). Conclusions: The detection of serum tumor markers (CA19.9, CEA, CA125 and CA242)is conducive to the early diagnosis of pancreatic cancer and joint detection of tumor markers helps improve thediagnostic efficiency. Moreover, CA19-9 is an independent prognostic factor for patients with pancreatic cancer.     

Combination of HCGbeta,CA 19-9 and CEA with logistic regression improves accuracy in gastrointestinal malignancies

BACKGROUND: Earlier studies suggest that the free beta-subunit of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCGbeta) may be a useful tumour marker for gastrointestinal cancers. Our aim was to investigate hCGbeta in serum in gastrointestinal diseases in comparison with CA 19-9 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The serum concentrations of hCGbeta, CA 19-9 and CEA were measured from 142 patients with malignant and 178 with benign gastrointestinal diseases. The diagnostic accuracies of the markers were compared and a diagnostic algorithm was established with logistic regression (LR) analysis. RESULTS: The hCGbeta serum level was elevated most frequently in bile duct (56%), pancreatic (45%) and gastric cancer (41%). In benign diseases, hCGbeta concentration was elevated in 10% of the patients. In an LR model each marker provided independent diagnostic information and the probability of cancer was calculated. It was applied as a diagnostic algorithm providing better accuracy than the markers alone. In receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis the area under the curve (AUC) value of the algorithm was significantly higher than the AUC values of CA 19-9, CEA, or hCGbeta (p=0.009-0.049). CONCLUSION: Serum hCGbeta, CA 19-9 and CEA provide additive diagnostic information in gastrointestinal malignancies and the use of an algorithm established by LR analysis improves diagnostic accuracy.     

CA19-9和CA242对消化道肿瘤的诊断价值

目的研究肿瘤标志物CA19-9与CA242对消化道肿瘤的诊断价值。方法对87例消化道恶性肿瘤及90例消化道良性疾病患者进行血清CA19-9与CA242检测。结果CA19-9和CA242对胰腺癌、胆系癌有较高的阳性率,其诊断的灵敏度、特异度如下CA19-9对胰腺癌分别为84.7%和74.5%,对胆系癌分别为80%和74.5%;CA242对胰腺癌分别为66.7%和80%,对胆系癌分别为60%和80%。其它恶性肿瘤,除结肠癌外,CA19-9的阳性率均高于CA242。原发性肝癌患者血清CA19-9和CA242阳性率具有显著差异,分别为66.7%和37%,而良性肝病患者血清CA19-9和CA242阳性率分别为50%和26.8%,CA242较少受慢性肝病的影响。结论CA19-9和CA242可用于胰腺癌、胆系癌的诊断,CA242对良恶性肝病具有一定的鉴别诊断作用,并对结直肠具有一定的诊断价值。     

血清胆汁CA19-9、CEA、CA242联合检测诊断胆道良恶性肿瘤的可行性分析

目的:探讨血清、胆汁CA19-9、CEA、CA242联合诊断胆道良恶性肿瘤的临床价值。方法:对象为2013年10月-2015年2月来我院诊治的疑似恶性胆道肿瘤的患者202例,均行手术探查。所有患者均通过穿刺的方式取胆汁进行CA19-9、CEA、CA242检测,比较不同疾病类型患者血清、胆汁中的CA19-9、CEA、CA242检测水平,分析血清胆汁联合检测在胆道良恶性肿瘤中的诊断价值。结果:202例手术探查患者中,98例经病理证实为恶性胆道肿瘤患者、22例为良性胆道肿瘤患者,82例为其他胆道疾病。恶性胆道肿瘤与良性胆道肿瘤患者胆汁中CA242、CA19-9和CEA的表达水平要显著性的高于在血清中的表达水平（P＜0.05）;恶性肿瘤组患者的胆汁中CA242、CA19-9和CEA检测水平均显著性高于良性肿瘤患者（P＜0.05);胆汁CA242、CA19-9和CEA联合诊断胆道恶性肿瘤的敏感率为33.66%,准确率为88.98%,特异性为91.16%,阳性率为35.24%。结论:利用胆汁中肿瘤标记物对胆道肿瘤的检测水平要高于血清中的水平,采用CA19-9、CEA、CA242的联合检测是诊断胆道肿瘤比较理想的组合。上述肿瘤标志物的组合能够提高胆道肿瘤良恶性的预判准确度,对于早期胆道良恶性肿瘤的发现、治疗具有十分重要的意义。     

大肠癌血清CEA,CA19-9和CA242联合检测及其临床意义

目的评价CEA，CA19-9及CA242联合检测对大肠癌患者的临床诊断价值。方法应用酶联免疫法对150例术前大肠癌患者及其中70例术后患者和200名健康人血清CEA，CA19-9及CA242含量进行测定。结果大肠癌患者血清3项标志物含量明显高于健康人（均P〈0．01）；单项和联合检测的阳性率及特异性总体比较差异均有统计学意义（均P〈0．01）；其中CEA、CA242检测的阳性率显著高于CA19-9；CEA＋CA242与3项联合检测的阳性率均显著高于单项或其他两项联合检测的阳性率；CEA特异性高于CA242；3项联合检测的特异性明显低于单项检测。3个年龄段大肠癌患者CEA血清水平差异显著，年龄越大CEA水平越高（P〈0．05）。在Dukes分期中，3项标志物含量及检测的阳性率依次增高（P〈0．05～0．01）。淋巴结转移患者的3项标志物含量及CA19-9，CA242的阳性率均高于无淋巴结转移的患者。3项标志物含量随肿瘤侵袭程度的增加显著增高，但在组织病理分类和肿瘤大体形态中均差异无统计学意义。Dukes A＋B期大肠癌术后3项标志物含量显著降低（P〈0．01），而C＋D期改变不明显。结论3项标志物的检测有助于大肠癌的临床辅助诊断，联合检测可以提高诊断的阳性率；3项标志物检测对大肠癌临床分期、淋巴结转移及肿瘤侵犯程度评估，尤其CA19-9和CA242比用于术前诊断更有意义，对指导临床医师合理手术有一定的帮助；术后检测有助于观察疗效，评价治疗效果。     

血清肿瘤标志物CEA、CA19-9和CA72-4在胃癌术后监测中的意义

目的研究血清肿瘤标志物CEA、CA19—9和CA72—4在胃癌术后复发、转移监测中的意义。方法采用电化学发光法检测228例手术后胃癌患者血清CEA、CA19—9和CA72—4含量;并结合临床及随访资料进行分析。结果胃癌术后复发、转移患者CEA、CA19—9和CA72—4的含量和阳性率均显著高于未发生复发、转移患者。术后复发、转移的胃癌患者血清CEA、CA19—9和CA72—4检测灵敏度和特异度分别为46．2％和94．7％,52．3％和97．4％,47．1％和90．6％。结论血清CEA、CA19—9和CA72-4升高与胃癌复发、转移密切相关,在术后随访过程中检测血清肿瘤标志物有助于早期诊断胃癌复发、转移。     

Value of Combined Detection of Serum CEA,CA72-4, CA19-9 and TSGF in the Diagnosis of Gastric Cancer

Background: To explore whether combined detection of serum tumor markers (CEA, CA72-4, CA19-9 andTSGF) improve the sensitivity and accuracy in the diagnosis of gastric cancer (GC). Materials and Methods: Anautomatic chemiluminescence immune analyzer with matched kits were used to determine the levels of serumCEA, CA72-4, CA19-9 and TSGF in 45 patients with gastric cancer (GC group), 40 patients with gastric benigndiseases (GBD group) hospitalized in the same period and 30 healthy people undergoing a physical examination.The values of those 4 tumor markers in the diagnosis of gastric cancer was analyzed. Results: The levels ofserum CEA, CA72-4, CA19-9 and TSGF of the GC group were higher than those of the GBD group and healthyexamined people and the differences were significant (P<0.001). The area under receiver operating characteristic(ROC) curves for single detection of CEA, CA72-4, CA19-9 and TSGF in the diagnosis of GC was 0.833, 0.805,0.810 and 0.839, respectively. The optimal cutoff values for these 4 indices were 2.36 ng/mL, 3.06 U/mL, 5.72 U/mL and 60.7 U/mL, respectively. With combined detection of tumor markers, the diagnostic power of those 4indices was best, with an area under the ROC curve of 0.913 (95%CI 0.866~0.985), a sensitivity of 88.9% anda diagnostic accuracy of 90.4%. Conclusions: Combined detection of serum CEA, CA72-4, CA19-9 and TSGFincreases the sensitivity and accuracy in diagnosis of GC, so it can be regarded as the important means for earlydiagnosis.     

血清肿瘤标志物CEA、CA19-9和CA72-4在胃癌术后监测中的意义

目的 研究血清肿瘤标志物CEA、CA19-9和CA72-4在胃癌术后复发、转移监测中的意义.方法 采用电化学发光法检测228例手术后胃癌患者血清CEA、CA19-9和CA72-4含量;并结合临床及随访资料进行分析.结果 胃癌术后复发、转移患者CEA、CA19-9和CA72-4的含量和阳性率均显著高于未发生复发、转移患者.术后复发、转移的胃癌患者血清CEA、CA19-9和CA72-4检测灵敏度和特异度分别为46.2%和94.7%,52.3%和97.4%,47.1%和90.6%.结论 血清CEA、CA19-9和CA72-4升高与胃癌复发、转移密切相关,在术后随访过程中检测血清肿瘤标志物有助于早期诊断胃癌复发、转移.     

Comparison of Serum Assays for TAG-72, CA19-9 and CEA in Gastrointestinal Carcinoma Patients

Tumor-associated glycoprotein (TAG-72) has been shown to beexpressed in a wide variety of epithelial malignant tissues.We have investigated serum levles of TAG-72 antigen in patientswith gastrointestinal cancer with a solid phase radioimmunometricassay (RIA), CA72-4, utiliz ing murine monoclonal antibodiesCC49 and B72.3 which recognize the TAG-72 antigen. Elevatedlevels of serum TAG-72 antigen were found in 48% of 56 gastriccarcinoma patients and 67% of 45 colorectal carcinoma patients.The serum concentrations of TAG-72 were compared to those ofCA19-9 and CEA. The positive rates of CA19-9 in gastric carcinomaand colorectal carcinoma patients were 29% and 54%, and thoseof CEA were 52% and 60%, respectively. Elevated serum levelsof TAG-72, CA19-9 and CEA were observed in 7%, 14% and 24%,respectively, of patients with benign disease, thus indicatinga preferential expression of TAG-72, compared to CA19-9 andCEA, in gastrointestinal carcinoma patients versus in patientswith benign disorder. A cocktail of CA72-4, CA19-9 and CEA RIAsincreased positive rates to 68% in sera of gastric cancer patientsand 84% in sera of colorectal cancer patients. Combination assays using CA72-4, CEA and CA19-9 RIM for patients with benigngastrointestinal disorder, however, also increased the positiverate to 31%. These results indicate that CA72-4, CA19-9 andCEA RIA may be complementary in detecting circulating tumor-associatedantigens. It must be emphasized, however, that interpretationof the data provided by the combination serum as says requirescareful consideration.     

Sensitivity and specificity of CA242 in gastro-intestinal cancer. A comparison with CEA, CA50 and CA 19-9.

A serological assay for the quantitative determination of the novel tumour-associated epitope CA242 was developed and used for determination of sensitivity and specificity of CA242 in gastrointestinal cancer. The CA242 assay showed a better tumour specificity than CA50 (and CA 19-9). This was most noticeable in benign hepatobiliary disease. The sensitivity at 90% specificity cut-off level was approximately three times higher for CA242 compared to CA50 in colo-rectal cancer Dukes A, B and C, while in pancreatic cancer the sensitivity of CA242 and CA50 was similar. CA242 was expressed independently of CEA, and the combination of CEA and CA242 gave in colo-rectal cancer considerably higher sensitivity than the use of only one of the markers. This was most pronounced in Dukes A and Dukes B patients. CA242 is a novel tumour marker of potential clinical use, particularly in colo-rectal cancer.     

血清CEA、CA125及CA72-4在胃癌腹膜转移中的临床意义

背景与目的:胃癌腹膜转移多处于疾病终末期,但每种肿瘤标志物在胃癌腹膜转移中的临床意义仍不是很明确.该研究探讨血清肿瘤标志物CEA、CA125及CA72-4在胃癌腹膜转移中的诊断价值及其临床意义.方法:收集延边大学附属医院肿瘤科2008年1月—2013年12月间经影像学、手术和病理学等检查确诊、并接受静脉及腹腔灌注化疗的108例胃癌腹膜转移患者为研究对象,分别于确诊时、每次化疗前检测血清CEA、CA125及CA72-4,分析单独、2或3种肿瘤标志物同时检测在胃癌腹膜转移的诊断敏感性,并分析其与临床病理因素、化疗疗效及生存期之间的相关性.结果:在胃癌腹膜转移患者CEA、CA125和CA72-4的阳性率各为20.4%、46.3%和45.4%,联合CEA/CA125、CEA/CA72-4、CA125/CA72-4及CEA/CA125/CA72-4的阳性率分别为54.7%、52.8%、69.5%和79.6%,3种标志物联合检测明显优于单独检测(P<0.05).CEA、CA125和CA72-4水平均与ECOG分级存在相关性(P<0.05).CA125阳性与腹水有关(P<0.001).CA72-4阳性与卵巢转移相关(P<0.05).确诊时血清CEA、CA125和CA72-4阳性患者中位生存期短于CEA、CA125和CA72-4阴性的患者(P<0.05).在3周期化疗后3种肿瘤标志物较治疗前均下降,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).化疗后CA125下降与腹水量的减少有明显相关性(P<0.05).确诊时肿瘤标志物阳性患者经化疗3个周期后转为阴性的患者生存期明显延长(P<0.001).结论:联合检测血清CEA、CA125和CA72-4可明显提高胃癌腹膜转移的诊断率.     

大肠癌血清CEA，CA19-9和CA242联合检测及其临床应用

 目的 评价CEA，CA19-9及CA242联合检测对大肠癌患者的临床诊断价值。方法 应用酶联免疫法对术前150例，其中术后70例大肠癌患者和200名健康人血清CEA，CA19-9及CA242含量进行测定。结果 大肠癌患者血清3项标志物含量明显高于健康人（均P＜0.01）；单项和联合检测的阳性率及特异性总体比较差异均有统计学意义（均P＜0.01）；其中CEA、CA242 检测的阳性率显著高于CA19-9， CEA+CA242与3项联合检测的阳性率均显著高于单项或其他两项联合检测的阳性率；CEA特异性高于CA242；3项联合检测的特异性明显低于单项检测。3个年龄段大肠癌患者CEA血清水平差异显著，年龄越大CEA水平越高（P＜0.05）。在Dukes 分期中，3项标志物含量及检测的阳性率依次增高（P＜0.05～0.01）。淋巴结转移患者的3项标志物含量及CA19-9，CA242的阳性率均高于无淋巴结转移的患者。3项标志物含量随肿瘤侵袭程度的加深显著增高，但在组织病理分类和肿瘤大体形态中均无明显的差异。Dukes A+B期大肠癌术后3项标志物含量显著降低（P＜0.01），而C+D期改变不明显。结论 3项标志物的检测有助于大肠癌的临床辅助诊断，联合检测可以提高诊断的阳性率；3项标志物检测对大肠癌临床分期、淋巴结转移及肿瘤侵犯程度评估，尤其CA19-9和CA242比用于术前诊断更有意义，对指导临床医师合理手术有一定的帮助；术后检测有助于观察疗效，评价治疗效果。