联合检测血清 CEA、CA50、CA19-9、CA125水平在胃癌诊断中的价值

目的：探讨联合检测血清癌胚抗原（CEA）、糖类抗原125（CA125）、糖类抗原50（CA50）、糖类抗原19-9（CA19-9）水平在胃癌诊断中的临床价值。方法采用放射免疫分析法检测56例经病理学确诊的胃癌患者和48例胃部良性疾病患者血清 CEA、CA50、CA19-9、CA125水平,并收集30例正常健康体检者作比较作为正常对照。结果胃癌患者术前血清 CEA、CA50、CA19-9、CA125水平明显高于胃部良性疾病患者及正常健康体检者（P 均＜005）;胃部良性疾病患者及正常健康体检者血清 EA、CA50、CA19-9、CA125水平比较差异均无统计学意义（P 均＞005）。胃癌患者术后3个月血清 CEA、CA50、CA19-9、CA125水平明显低于术前（P 均＜005）。联合检测 CEA、CA50、CA19-9、CA125的敏感性为875%,明显高于任一单项检测（P 均＜005）。复发胃癌患者血清CEA、CA50、CA19-9、CA125水平明显高于未复发患者（P 均＜005）。结论联合检测血清CEA、CA50、CA19-9、CA125水平可以提高胃癌患者诊断的敏感性,有助于胃癌的诊断、治疗方案选择及预后评估。     

血清糖类抗原19-9、糖类抗原125和人附睾蛋白4水平检测对老年卵巢癌患者的诊断和鉴别诊断价值

目的 分析血清糖类抗原19-9(CA19-9)、糖类抗原125(CA125)和人附睾蛋白4(HE4)水平检测对老年卵巢癌患者的诊断和鉴别诊断价值.方法 纳入51例老年卵巢癌患者(卵巢癌组)、33例卵巢良性病变患者(良性病变组)、30例健康体检女性(对照组).比较3组研究对象血清CA19-9、CA125和HE4水平,并比...     

消化道肿瘤相关抗原CA72-4、CA19-9的临床应用研究

 目的　探讨糖类抗原CA72 4及CA19 9联合检测对消化道肿瘤诊断临床价值及预后意义。方法　用放免分析法检测 5 0例健康者 ,2 2 9例消化道疾病患者血清CA72 4、CA19 9浓度。结果　放免分析法测得新疆乌鲁木齐地区成年个体 5 0例血清中CA72 4抗原参比值 x±s为 (0 .78± 0 .98)U/ml,阳性界值为 3.8U/ml,CA19 9抗原参比值 x±s为 (8.8± 5 .3)U/ml,阳性界值为 37U/ml。结论　 2 2 9例消化道疾病患者的临床观察分析认为 ,CA72 4、CA19 9对胃癌、结直肠癌、胰腺癌的诊断是一项有参考价值的肿瘤标志物 ,尤其对术后疗效判断及预后监测具有重要的参考价值。在恶性肿瘤的鉴别诊断中也具有较重要的意义。     

结直肠癌患者血清CEA和CA19-9水平与肝转移的关系

目的探讨结直肠癌(CRC)患者血清癌胚抗原(CEA)和糖类抗原19-9(CA19-9)水平与肝转移的关系。方法应用电化学发光免疫分析法检测127例CRC患者的血清CEA和CA19-9水平,分析CRC肝转移与血清CEA和CA19-9阳性率的关系,比较不同临床特征CRC患者的血清CEA和CA19-9阳性率,分析CEA和CA19-9阳性表达与CRC肝转移患者预后的关系。结果127例患者中,有肝转移71例,无肝转移56例;CEA阳性67例,CA19-9阳性53例。有肝转移CRC患者的血清CEA和CA19-9阳性率分别为60.6%(43/71)和57.7%(41/71),均高于无肝转移患者的42.9%(24/56)和21.4%(12/56),差异均有统计学意义(P﹤0.05)。CEA和CA19-9均为阳性的CRC患者的肝转移率(90.3%)高于其中一项阳性患者的肝转移率(70.7%),差异有统计学意义(P﹤0.05)。不同性别、年龄、肿瘤直径、肿瘤部位、乙肝情况的CRC患者的血清CEA和CA19-9阳性率比较,差异均无统计学意义(P﹥0.05);低分化和Ⅲ~Ⅳ期CRC患者的血清CEA和CA19-9阳性率均明显高于中高分化和Ⅰ~Ⅱ期患者,差异均有统计学意义(P﹤0.01)。CEA和CA19-9均为阳性的CRC肝转移患者的3年生存情况优于CEA或CA19-9一项阳性的CRC肝转移患者,差异有统计学意义(P﹤0.05)。结论血清CEA和CA19-9水平有助于判断CRC患者是否存在肝转移,联合检测血清CEA和CA19-9水平对预测CRC肝转移及预后具有重要意义。     

Scc-Ag、CA19-9、CEA联合测定对肺癌临床诊断的价值

目的评价血清鳞癌抗原(Scc-Ag)、癌糖类抗原(CA19-9)和癌胚抗原(CEA)水平的测定对肺癌临床诊断的价值.方法采用微粒子酶免疫法测定78例肺癌、45例良性肺病患者的血清Scc-Ag、CA19-9和CEA水平,评价3项指标联合应用的诊断价值.结果肺癌组患者血清Scc-Ag、CA19-9和CEA水平明显高于健康对照组和良性肺病组(P＜0.01),联合应用敏感性达70.5%.临床分期越晚,Scc-Ag、CA19-9和CEA水平和阳性率越高.Scc-Ag检测的阳性率以鳞癌最高(64.3%);CA19-9+CEA检测的阳性率以腺癌最高(71.1%).结论该3项肿瘤标志物联合检测可提高肺癌的诊断率,并对判断病情及病理类型有较大帮助,但对早期诊断帮助不大.     

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。     

联合检测血清CA125、CA19—9对消化系统恶性肿瘤的诊断价值

目的探讨联合检测血清CA125、CA19—9对消化系统恶性肿瘤的诊断价值。方法收集2007年5月至12月在我院消化内科所有住院病例的病历资料,回顾性分析恶性肿瘤患者治疗前的血清CA125和血清CA19-9浓度,并与消化系统良性疾病患者进行比较。结果根据最终诊断将住院患者分为消化系统恶性肿瘤组及消化系统良性疾病组。消化系统恶性肿瘤组血清CA125浓度水平及阳性率均显著高于良性疾病组（P=0．000）;恶性肿瘤组血清CA19—9浓度水平及阳性率亦均显著高于良性疾病组（P=0．000）。单独使用血清CA125和血清CA19-9诊断消化系恶性肿瘤的敏感性、特异性相似;若以二者中任一阳性即判断阳性,则敏感性有较明显提高,而特异性明显下降;若以二者同时阳性作为诊断,则敏感性明显下降,特异性明显提高。结论单独使用血清CA125或血清CA19-9诊断消化系统恶性疾病敏感性较高,但特异性不高;联合使用血清CA125或血清CA19-9,则可明显提高其特异性。     

超声造影联合血清CEA、CA72-4对卵巢良恶性肿瘤鉴别诊断的价值

目的:探讨超声造影联合血清癌胚抗原（CEA）、糖类抗原72-4（CA72-4）对卵巢良恶性肿瘤鉴别诊断的价值。方法:选取2017年1月至2018年6月本院肿瘤科收治的128例卵巢肿瘤患者进行研究,进行超声造影和血清CEA、CA72-4水平检测,观察超声造影、CEA、CA72-4及联合检测对卵巢良恶性肿瘤鉴别诊断的价值。结果:在良性肿瘤组中超声造影符合率为72.92%,恶性肿瘤组中超声造影符合率为75.00%,两组比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）;恶性肿瘤组患者血清CEA、CA72-4水平高于良性肿瘤组,两组比较差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）;恶性肿瘤组超声造影、CA72-4检测阳性率均高于良性肿瘤组（P<0.05）,两组血清CEA检测阳性率比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）,三者联合检测阳性率高于单项指标检测（P<0.05）;通过ROC曲线分析显示,CEA的AUC为0.644,诊断灵敏度为31.25%,特异性为82.29%,CA72-4的AUC为0.702,诊断灵敏度为40.63%,特异性为79.17%,二者联合检测的AUC为0.785,诊断敏感性为56.25%,特异性为73.96%;三项指标单独检测,超声造影检测的灵敏度、阳性预测率、阴性预测率、诊断准确度及误诊率最高,CEA检测的特异性、漏诊率最高,三者联合检测的灵敏度、特异性、阳性预测率、阴性预测率、诊断准确度最高,漏诊率、误诊率最低。结论:超声造影联合血清CEA、CA72-4检测较单独检测诊断效能高,对卵巢良恶性肿瘤鉴别诊断有较高参考价值。     

微小RNA-143、糖类抗原19-9在胰腺癌诊断和预后预测中的应用价值

目的 探讨微小RNA(miRNA)-143、糖类抗原19-9(CA19-9)在胰腺癌诊断和预后预测中的应用价值。方法 选取100例胰腺癌患者、30例胰腺良性病变患者及30例健康体检者,分别作为胰腺癌组、胰腺良性病变组及健康组。比较3组研究对象的血清miRNA-143、CA19-9水平,绘制受试者工作特征（ROC）曲线,分析血清miRNA-143、CA19-9单独及联合检测对胰腺癌的诊断价值,采用Spearman相关分析法分析血清miRNA-143与CA19-9表达的相关性。对胰腺癌患者进行3年随访,分析血清miRNA-143、CA19-9表达与胰腺癌患者预后的关系。结果 胰腺癌组患者的血清miRNA-143水平低于胰腺良性病变组和健康组,CA19-9水平高于胰腺良性病变组和健康组,差异均有统计学意义（P﹤0.05）;胰腺良性病变组和健康组的血清miRNA-143水平比较,差异无统计学意义（P﹥0.05）;胰腺良性病变组患者的血清CA19-9水平高于健康组,差异有统计学意义（P﹤0.05）。血清miRNA-143联合CA19-9检测对胰腺癌的诊断价值最高,其次是血清miRNA-143、血...     

肿瘤标记物CA19-9、CA242对胰腺癌转移和预后预测价值的分析

目的:探讨肿瘤标记物糖类抗原19-9(CA19-9)、糖类抗原242(CA242)对胰腺癌转移和预后的预测价值.方法:选取80例胰腺癌患者和20例健康人群的血清样本,测定血清中CA19-9、CA242水平.探讨两者与胰腺癌临床分期、分型、肿瘤大小、淋巴转移情况和预后的关系.结果:胰腺癌患者血清CA19-9、CA242水平显著高于健康人群(P＜0.01).胰腺癌患者中Ⅲ+ Ⅳ期患者血清CA19-9、CA242水平显著高于Ⅰ+Ⅱ期患者(P＜0.05),淋巴转移患者血清CA19-9、CA242水平显著高于无转移患者(P＜0.05),生存期小于8个月患者血清CA19-9、CA242水平显著高于大于8个月患者(P＜0.05).以CA19-9 37.0U/ml、CA242 20.0U/ml为阳性阈值,以CA19-9阳性且CA242阳性组的正确指数最高.结论:胰腺癌患者血清CA19-9、CA242水平对胰腺癌患者术前诊断和预后分析具有一定参考价值.     

CA 19-9 enzyme immunoassay

The carbohydrate antigenic determinant (CA 19-9) EIA kit (FUJIREVIO INC) was examined both experimentally and clinically. In the basic study, the standard curve showed linearity from to 240 U/ml, and the intra-and interassay reproducibility was good. Serum levels of CA 19-9 were determined by EIA in 246 cancer patients and 180 patients with benign diseases, and CA 19-9 levels by EIA were compared with those by RIA in concurrent measurement. There was an excellent correlation between the two. The positive of CA 19-9 EIA was almost the same as that of CA 19-9 RIA in cancer patients. False-positive cases by CA 19-9 EIA were somewhat more numerous than those by CA 19-9 RIA in patients with benign diseases, especially liver diseases. However, CA 19-9 assay by EIA is simple and has an excellent reproducibility and accuracy, as does that by RIA. Thus, the CA 19-9 EIA is a very useful assay.     

CA125、CA19.9、CA15-3联合测定对卵巢良恶性肿瘤的诊断价值

目的 评价肿瘤标志物CA125、CA19.9、CA15-3在卵巢良恶性肿瘤的诊断价值,以提高CA125单独测定的敏感性与特异性。方法应用放射免疫方法测定了21例卵巢良性肿瘤及21例卵巢恶性肿瘤的血清CA125、CA19.9、CA15-3值并进行比较分析。结果 卵巢恶性肿瘤患者血清CA125、CA15-3含量显著高于良性肿瘤组(P<0.001),单独应用CA125诊断卵巢恶性肿瘤的准确性为78.57％,优于CA15-3和CA19.9。而以三项肿瘤标记物中的任意两项阳性为标记物诊断阳性时,准确性为85.71％,较CA125单独测定诊断卵巢良恶性肿瘤有较高的准确性。结论 CA125、CA15-3、CA19.9三项肿瘤标记物联合检测,以其中任意两项同时增高作为阳性标准,对提高卵巢良、恶性肿瘤诊断及鉴别诊断的准确性有一定意义。     

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.     

CEA,CA 19-9 and CA 72-4 improve the diagnostic accuracy in gastrointestinal cancers

BACKGROUND: CEA, CA 19-9, CA 242 and CA 72-4 are commonly used tumour markers for gastrointestinal malignancies. The advantage of the concomitant use of these markers is under debate. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Serum concentrations of the markers were measured at the time of diagnosis in 161 patients with benign and 125 with malignant gastrointestinal diseases. Concomitant use of the markers was evaluated in a logistic regression model. RESULTS: CA 19-9, CA 242 or CA 72-4 showed similar sensitivity of 44% for gastric cancer, whereas CEA was elevated in 25% of the cases. In patients with colorectal cancer, CEA was most frequently elevated (54%), followed by CA 242 (46%), CA 19-9 (36%) and CA 72-4 (25%). High CA 19-9 and CA 242 serum levels were frequent in patients with cholangiocarcinoma (86% and 68%, respectively) and pancreatic cancer (80% and 63%, respectively). In the benign disease group, serum CA 19-9 was most frequently elevated, i.e. in 24%, 25% and 38% of patients with pancreatic, biliary and liver disorders, respectively. The overall accuracy of CEA, CA 19-9, CA 242 and CA 72-4 was 66%, 71%, 71% and 66%, respectively (p > 0.18). When combined in a logistic regression model, CA 72-4, CA 19-9 and CEA provided independent diagnostic information, whereas CA 242 contributed with independent diagnostic information only on excluding CA 19-9. The probability of cancer for each patient, calculated with the model, was applied as a diagnostic test and was compared with the single markers by ROC-curve analysis. The AUC value of the probability index was significantly higher than the values of the different tumour markers. CONCLUSION: An algorithm based on the combination of CEA, CA 19-9 and CA 72-4 improved the diagnostic accuracy in gastrointestinal tract malignancies compared with these markers alone.     

CA 19-9 and pancreatic adenocarcinoma

The diagnostic place value of CA 19-9, a tumor-associated antigen, was tested in 611 patients. This group of patients included 273 patients who suffered from a malignant disease (48 patients with pancreatic carcinomas and 225 patients with extrapancreatic malignant growths) and 338 patients with benign diseases (66 patients with chronic pancreatitis, 36 patients with acute pancreatitis, and 236 patients with general surgical diseases). In 93% of the patients with pancreatic carcinoma (media value, 528 U/ml), in 37% and 19% of the patients with carcinoma of the stomach and colorectal carcinomas (median value 8 U/ml), respectively, the CA 19-9 value was estimated as being above the normal limits of 6 to 37 U/ml. A sensitivity of 93% and a specificity of 85%, as well as a total accuracy of 82%, were established in pancreatic carcinoma during preoperative observation. The preoperatively raised CA 19-9 concentration in patients with pancreatic carcinomas dropped after curative resection of the carcinoma to within normal limits. However, a serum concentration of less than 37 U/ml was not recorded in any CA 19-9 estimation after a palliative surgical intervention, or in any case of inoperable carcinomas.     

Evaluation of CA 15-3 radioimmunoassay

The CA 15-3 RIA kit (Centocor Co.) based on a solid-phase radioimmunoassay was evaluated both experimentally and clinically. The results of a basic study of the reproducibility, recovery and dilution were very satisfactory. Serum levels of CA 15-3 were determined in 211 patients with malignancies including 13 breast cancers, 81 patients with benign diseases and 13 controls. Elevated levels of this antigen (greater than 25 U/ml) were observed in 16.7% of esophageal cancers, 9.7% of gastric cancers, 7.9% of colon cancers, 10% of hepatocellular cancers, 10% of biliary tract cancers, 10% of pancreatic cancers, 33% of lung cancers, and 75% of recurrent breast cancers. Thus, in malignant diseases the positivity was low except for recurrent breast cancer. On the other hand, the false-positive rate in benign diseases was only 3.7% and the false-positive cases had a level of 40 U/ml or less. These results indicate that the serum levels of CA 15-3 may have diagnostic value in patients with recurrent breast cancer.     

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.     

CA125联合 CA19－9、CEA、CA72－4检测在上皮性卵巢癌诊断中的意义

目的：阐明联合检测糖类抗原（CA125、CA19－9、CA72－4）与癌胚抗原（CEA）在上皮性卵巢癌中的诊断意义。方法：对81例上皮性卵巢癌患者,81例良性卵巢肿瘤患者以及作为对照的80例健康体检者血清中的 CA125、CA19－9、CA72－4与 CEA 进行检测。采用 ROC 曲线及 AUC、Logistic 回归分析评估上述血清标记物对上皮性卵巢癌的诊断意义。结果：卵巢癌患者血清肿瘤标记物 CA125、CA19－9、CA72－4的水平与阳性率明显高于良性卵巢肿瘤以及对照组健康体检者（P ＜0．05）。ROC 曲线显示 CA125、CA19－9、CEA 与CA72－4曲线下面积分别为0．904±0．025、0．670±0．042、0．497±0．046 and 0．821±0．033。联合检测上述肿瘤标记物显示最高的敏感性（91．4％）与较好的特异性（83．9％）。与其他单一肿瘤标记物相比,CA125显示最高的敏感性与较好的特异性。结论：联合检测 CA125、CA19－9、CEA 与 CA72－4可以提高上皮性卵巢癌早期诊断的敏感性与准确性。     

胃癌联合检测CA72-4 CA242 CA19-9和CEA的临床意义与诊断价值

目的:检测胃癌患者血清CA72-4、CA242、CA19-9和CEA,结合其临床病理特征,评价联合检测对胃癌的诊断价值和意义.方法:将203例胃癌患者的4项检测值和临床指标转化为等级型变量,对多个指标的等级变量形式求和构建新的等级变量,分析联合检测值与胃癌临床特征的相关性.结果:CA242和CEA组合值≥2者肿瘤分期较晚.CA72-4和CA242组合值≥2者肿瘤体积较大.TNM分期中,CA72-4指标值≥1者肿瘤T分期较晚,CA242和CEA组合值≥2者N分期较晚,CA72-4和CA19-9组合值≥1者M分期较晚的比例更高.病理组织学类型和肿瘤标志物各检测指标均无显著关联.针对这4项指标.联合检测CA72-4和CEA的检测功效与4项或3项联合的功效相当.结论:上述4项肿瘤标志物联合检测并不增加检测功效,但能为预测胃癌的病期、转归和预后提供更多信息.