血清CA15-3、CA125、CEA检测在乳腺癌诊断中的临床意义

目的探讨血清中CA15-3、CA125、CEA浓度在乳腺癌诊断中的临床意义。方法以乳腺癌患者76例、乳腺良性疾病患者58例、健康对照60例样本为试验材料,采用电化学发光免疫分析法检测血清中CA15-3、CA125、CEA浓度。结果乳腺癌组中血清CA15-3、CA125、CEA浓度均显著高于乳腺良性疾病患者和健康对照组（P〈0.05）,而在乳腺良性疾病患者和健康对照组间无显著差异。单项指标检测时CA125Youden指数最高（0.678）,相应的敏感度和特异性为73.7%和94.1%。将CA15-3/CA125/CEA三个指标联合检测时,对乳腺癌诊断的敏感性、特异性和Youden指数分别达到81.6%、90.7%和0.723。结论血清中CA15-3、CA125、CEA浓度可以作为乳腺癌临床诊断的分子标志物,且联合检测比使用单一指标能显著提高检测效能。     

乳腺癌手术前后血清CA15-3和CEA水平与病理参数的相关性研究

目的探讨乳腺癌患者手术前后血清中CA15-3和CEA水平与病理参数的相关性。方法随机选择2012年6月至2014年7月南通市第四人民医院外科和南通市肿瘤医院肿瘤科共计267例乳腺癌患者为研究对象,采用电化学发光免疫分析法检测所有患者术前一周、术后1月血清中CA15-3和CEA水平,并分析CA15-3和CEA水平与乳腺癌患者临床病理参数的相关性。结果 267例乳腺癌患者术前一周血清中CA15-3和CEA水平分别为35.6±11.41U/ml和8.9±3.4ng/ml,术后1月分别为20.1±9.23U/ml和4.1±1.7ng/ml,P0.05,差异具有统计学意义;Ⅲ和Ⅳ期癌症患者的CA15-3和CEA阳性表达率均明显高于Ⅰ和Ⅱ期,肿瘤有多处转移的CA15-3和CEA阳性表达率明显高于1处转移的,术后复发患者的CA15-3和CEA阳性表达率高于没有复发患者,P0.05,差异均具有统计学意义;采用不同手术类型患者术后CA15-3和CEA阳性表达率无显著性差异,P0.05。结论乳腺癌患者血清中CA15-3和CEA水平与癌症TNM分期、转移、术后复发具有相关性,便于及时诊断术后癌症转移复发。     

血清CA15-3、CA125、CEA联检在乳腺癌诊断中的价值

乳腺癌是严重威胁妇女身心和生命健康的主要杀手之一,且其发病率逐年增高,在我国已居女性恶性肿瘤的第一位[1].女性定期检查乳腺,发现肿块及时检测血液中乳腺癌相关的肿瘤标志物,是及早发现恶性病变的重要措施之一.癌抗原15-3(cancer antigen 15-3, CA15-3)被认为是诊断乳腺癌较为灵敏的肿瘤标志物,但单一检测CA15-3往往有一定的局限性.本组联合检测了血清CA15-3、癌抗原125(cancer antigen 125,CA125)、癌胚抗原(carcinoembryonic antigen,CEA),探讨其联检在乳腺癌诊断中的价值.     

血清CEA和CA15-3水平对乳腺癌化疗疗效及预后评估的价值分析

目的探讨血清CEA和CA15-3水平对乳腺癌化疗疗效及预后评估的价值。方法回顾性分析2011年5月至2012年6月荆州市第一人民医院肿瘤科收治的63例乳腺癌晚期患者作为乳腺癌组,根据存活情况将其分为存活组(n=42例)和死亡组(n=21例),采用荧光免疫法检测血清CEA和CA15-3水平,随访4年,统计分析所有患者生存预后情况。结果Ⅳ期乳腺癌患者血清CEA和CA15-3水平明显高于Ⅲ期,差异有统计学意义(P0.05);CEA、CA15-3、CEA和CA15-3表达阴性组化疗有效率明显高于阳性组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05);所有患者随访1~4年,平均随访时间3.63年,最终有42例存活4年以上,CEA阳性组患者4年生存率(55.26%)明显低于阴性组(84.00%),差异有统计学意义(P0.05),CA15-3阳性组患者4年生存率(52.78%)明显低于阴性组(85.19%),差异有统计学意义(P0.05),CEA和CA15-3阳性组患者4年生存率(52.38%)明显低于阴性组(95.24%),差异有统计学意义(P0.05);存活组化疗前血清CEA和CA15-3水平明显低于死亡组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论检测乳腺癌患者化疗前血清CEA和CA15-3水平可为化疗疗效及预后评估提供可参考数据。     

CA15-3与TSGF及CEA联合检测对乳腺癌的诊断价值

目的探讨血清肿瘤相关抗原15-3（CA15-3）、癌胚抗原（CEA）和血清恶性肿瘤特异性生长因子（TS-GF）联合检测对乳腺癌诊断的临床价值。方法采用2005年8月至2008年8月本院住院收治的乳腺癌患者150例,做为乳腺癌组;正常对照组148例进行上述指标检测并比较。结果乳腺癌组与正常对照组上述指标检测值经统计学方法比较,有显著差异性（P〈0．05）。各项单独检测率与3项联合检测经统计学方法比较,有显著差异性（P〈0．05）。结论各单项检测敏感性较低,3项联合检测大大提高了对乳腺癌的早期诊断率,对乳腺癌诊断具有重要意义。     

CA15-3、CEA在乳腺癌中应用价值探讨

目的　探讨CA15 3、CEA在乳腺癌中应用价值。方法　应用电化学发光技术对 6 2例乳腺癌患者、2 2例乳腺良性疾病及2 0例正常对照血清CA15 3、CEA水平进行了检测。结果　CA15 3、CEA水平在乳腺癌Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ期与乳腺良性疾病组及正常对照组无显著性差异 (P >0 .0 5 ) ,但有逐渐升高趋势 ,在Ⅳ期乳腺癌中表达明显增高 (P <0 .0 5 ;P <0 .0 1) ,在远处转移患者表达明显高于单纯淋巴结转移患者 ,有淋巴结转移患者表达明显高于无淋巴结转移患者 (均P <0 .0 1) ,在不同组织来源乳腺癌患者中表达无明显差异 (P >0 .0 5 )。结论　CA15 3、CEA并非乳腺癌早期诊断的理想标志物 ,但其表达与肿瘤临床分期、淋巴结转移及远处转移密切相关 ,在预测乳腺癌转移、复发及监测疗效、判断预后等方面具有重要临床应用价值 ,其在乳腺癌中表达无组织细胞特异性。     

CA15—3、CA125、CEA联合检测在乳腺癌诊断中的临床意义

目的探讨CA15-3、CA125、CEA三项肿瘤标志物联合检测对乳腺癌早期诊断和鉴别诊断的意义。方法采用电化学发光免疫分析技术（ECLIA）检测68例乳腺癌患者血清中CA15-3、CA125、CEA等肿瘤标志物的含量,并分析各项指标的阳性检出率和敏感性、特异性。结果乳腺癌患者血清CA15-3、CA125、CEA的含量分别为78．75±51．28U／ml、55．49±23．65U／ml、30．17±12．15μG／L．阳性率分别为77．94％、38．23％、41．17％,敏感性和特异性分别为77．94％、95．63％、38．23％和89．57％、41．17％、70．51％。三项指标联合检测的敏感性和特异性为90．76％和84．12％。结论CA15-3、CA125、CEA等肿瘤标志物联合检测能提高乳腺癌早期诊断的敏感性．同时又有较好的特异性．具有一定的临床应用价值。     

联合检测CA15-3、CEA、GPDA、ADA对胸腔积液性质诊断价值

目的 探讨联合检测CA15-3、CEA．GPDA、ADA四项生化和免疫指标在胸腔积液性质中鉴别诊断中的意义。方法收集100例胸腔积液分三组，非结核性胸腔积液16例，结核性胸腔积液48例，恶性胸腔积液36例。采用相应的方法测定CA15-3、CEA、GPDA、ADA的含量。结果恶性胸腔积液CA15-3、CEA含量均高于非结核性良性组及结核组胸腔积液（P〈0.001）恶性胸腔积液及结核性胸腔积液组其GPDA的含量均显著高于非结核性良性组胸腔积液（P〈0.01），结核性胸腔积液组其ADA含量显著高于非结核性良性及恶性组（P〈0.01）。结论联合检测胸腔积液中CA15-3、CEA、GPDA、ADA对胸腔积液性质的鉴定有一定的意义。     

乳腺癌患者血清CA15-3检测的临床价值

目的探讨血清CA15-3测定在乳腺癌诊断、监测及术后复发转移中的临床应用价值。方法采用酶联免疫吸附法检测182例乳腺癌、85例乳腺良性疾病与100例正常健康体检女性的血清CA15-3水平。结果CA15-3在诊断乳腺良性疾病与乳腺癌Ⅰ,Ⅱ期时,差异无显著性(P>0.05),而在乳腺癌晚期及复发或转移乳腺癌患者中CA15-3水平显著高于无复发或无转移乳腺癌患者(P<0.05)。结论血清CA15-3监测乳腺癌的术后复发或转移、预测复发转移具有重要的意义。     

CA15-3、CEA、CA125和COX-2联合检测在乳腺癌诊断中的价值

目的 研究糖类抗原15-3（CA15-3）、癌胚抗原（CEA）、糖类抗原125（CA125）、环氧化酶（COX-2）联合检测在乳腺癌诊断中的价值。方法 选取2019年5月至2021年5月安徽省淮南市九龙岗东方医院集团肿瘤医院接收的53例乳腺癌患者作为乳腺癌组,另选择同期61例良性乳腺病患者为良性乳腺病组,68例健康查体者为健康组。比较三组CA15-3、CEA、CA125、COX-2水平,并探讨上述标志物联合检测在乳腺癌诊断中的价值。结果 乳腺癌组血清CA15-3、CEA、CA125、COX-2水平均显著高于良性乳腺病组和健康组,差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）;良性乳腺病组血清CA15-3、CEA、CA125、COX-2水平与健康组比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。乳腺癌组血清CA15-3、CEA、CA125、COX-2单项检测与联合检测血清阳性率均高于良性乳腺病组和健康组,且乳腺癌组中四项联合检测血清阳性率高于单项检测,差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）。CA15-3、CEA、CA125、COX-2四项联合检测敏感度、特异度依次为92.45%、93.44%。受...     

Current immunoassay methods and their applications to clinically used biomarkers of breast cancer

Breast cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide, with a higher incidence in developed countries. The biomarkers for breast cancer such as estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, CA (cancer antigen) 15-3, CA 27.29, and carcinoembryonic antigen have been recommended for use in the laboratory based on the guidelines of American and European societies. Immunoassays have been frequently and consistently used to detect these clinically established biomarkers of breast cancer. Despite the higher accessibility of serum biomarkers, including CA 15-3, CA 27.29, and CEA, compared to tissue markers, variations in immunoassays affect their standardization and clinical utility. When reviewing the immunoassays used to detect these serum markers, we found that the most frequently used immunoassay was enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, followed by electrochemiluminescent immunoassay, and then chemiluminescence immunoassay for CA 15-3 and CEA. Meanwhile, the chemiluminescence immunoassay was the most common technique for CA27.29. The electrochemiluminescent immunoassay and monoclonal fluorometric assay have become the preferred methods in 2010–2019 compared to 2000–2009. Analytical and clinical performance factors such as sensitivity, specificity, detection limit, hazard risk to laboratory personnel, speed, and economic feasibility influenced these changes in user preference. When using the immunoassays, there should be a comprehensive understanding of the principles, advantages, vulnerability, and precautions for interpretation. In the future, a combination of immunological biomarkers and genetic platforms will benefit patients with breast cancer by facilitating prognosis prediction and guiding therapeutic intervention.     

Evaluation of serum laminin as a tumor marker in breast cancer

Laminin is a noncollagenous constituent of the extracellular matrix (basement membrane). Increased serum concentrations were recorded in patients with a variety of cancers. The clinical usefulness of serum laminin as a marker for breast cancer was investigated in 60 female patients with malignant breast tumors (30 metastatic, 30 non-metastatic). Subjectively healthy age-matched women (n = 30) served as a control group. Laminin was significantly higher in breast cancer patients than in normal controls. Serum laminin levels were also significantly higher in patients with metastasis than in those without metastasis. A positive correlation was observed between serum laminin and the breast cancer-associated antigen CA 15-3 in the tumor patients. The sensitivity and specificity values of laminin for cancer detection at the optimum decision level [mean + 2 SD (1.4 U/ml)] were 75% and 97% respectively, with a 98% positive predictive value, 66% negative predictive value, and 82% diagnostic efficiency. For the detection of metastasis, serum laminin exhibited 77% sensitivity and 100% specificity [best decision level: mean + 2 SD (1.9 U/ml)], with a 100% positive predictive value, 81% negative predictive value, and 88% diagnostic efficiency. The latter specificity and positive predictive value were superior to those obtained with serum CA 15-3. These results suggest that serum determination of laminin could be a useful diagnostic tool in breast cancer and a valuable parameter in the prediction of metastasis.     

CA 15-3 and carcinoembryonic antigen in the clinical evaluation of breast cancer

The individual and combined value of CA 15-3 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) as breast cancer tumor markers was investigated in longitudinal studies. Patients included women at high risk for recurrence after primary therapy or undergoing treatment for metastatic disease. During follow-up, recurrent disease was documented in 33 of 39 (85%) patients including 11 with local recurrence and 22 with distant metastases. At the time recurrence was first documented by objective criteria 23 of 33 (70%) of the patients presented with abnormal CA 15-3 levels (>36.7 U/ml) compared with 19/33 (58%) with abnormal CEA levels (5 ng/ml). Tumor marker elevations predominated in patients with advanced disease indicating that CA 15-3 and CEA are not reliable for the detection of early breast cancer. Both markers were helpful in monitoring therapeutic response since antigen levels correlated closely with disease status.     

血清肿瘤标志物CA15-3对Her-2阳性乳腺癌术后化疗疗效的评估价值

目的探讨糖类抗原CA15—3在Her-2过表达乳腺癌患者术后化疗疗效监测的评估价值。方法回顾性分析66例Her-2阳性乳腺癌患者术后以蒽环类及紫杉类（44例采用Herceptin生物化疗）为基础化疗过程中血清CA15-3的变化。根据2000年RECIST标准分有效组（OR组）及无效组（NR组）,通过分析两组治疗前后血清CA15-3变化及治疗前后CA15-3下降比率绘制ROC曲线特征评估其对化疗疗效的价值。结果与治疗前相比,所有患者治疗后CA15-3血清水平显著下降（P〈0．05）,治疗前有效组及无效组间CA15-3血清水平无明显差异（P〉0．05）,有效组治疗前后CA15-3血清水平与化疗相关,治疗前后有显著差异（P〈0．05）,而无效组治疗前后与化疗无相关,治疗前后无显著差异（P〉0．05）,治疗前后CA15—3下降比率绘制ROC曲线,其曲线下面积为O．527。采用Herceptin的生物化疗患者,与治疗前相比治疗后CA15—3血清水平亦显著下降（P〈0．05）,治疗前有效组及无效组间CA15-3血清水平亦无明显差异（P〉0．05）,有效组治疗前后CA15—3血清水平与化疗相关,治疗前后有显著性差异（P〈0．05）,而无效组治疗前后血清CA15-3水平与化疗相关（P〈0．05）,但无显著性差异（P〉0．05）。采用治疗前后CA15-3下降比率绘制ROC曲线,其曲线下面积为O．618。结论CAl5-3在Her-2阳性乳腺癌患者术后化疗疗效有一定预测作用,在Herceptin为基础的生物化疗中有一定的敏感性及特异性。     

乳腺肿块患者血清CA15-3及CEA检测的临床意义

目的 探讨电化学发光法检测血清糖类抗原15-3(CA15-3)及癌胚抗原(CEA)在乳腺疾病诊断以及术后监测中的临床应用价值.方法 分析2005年5月至2006年12月间住院患者血清CA15-3及CEA检测结果,结合临床病历资料进行统计学分析.结果 乳腺良性肿块组与乳腺癌组CA15-3及CEA检测结果差异显著,血清CA15-3及CEA用于诊断乳腺癌的特异性较高(97.6%及96%),但敏感性较低(30.5%及13.9%);血清CA15-3异常的乳腺癌患者,术后CA15-3明显下降;CA15-3与CEA之间存在一定的相关性,但相关系数不高.结论 CA15-3及CEA在诊断早期乳腺癌时虽然特异性很高,但由于敏感性太低导致其临床应用价值有限,二者联合应用对提高诊断效率意义不大,当乳腺癌患者血清CA15-3较高时,可以用于评价治疗效果.对于乳腺癌的早期诊断,尚需寻找更敏感的标志物.     

血清肿瘤标志物CEA、CA19-9及CA724联合检测在胃癌诊断中的价值分析

目的分析血清肿瘤标志物癌胚抗原(CEA)、糖类抗原(CA) 19-9及CA724联合检测在胃癌诊断中的价值。方法采用回顾性研究方法,选取2016年1月至2018年12月辽宁省健康产业集团阜新矿总医院收治的500例胃癌患者(胃癌组)、632例胃部良性疾病患者(良性组)及体检中心的671例健康人群(对照组),比较三组研究对象的血清CEA、CA19-9、CA724表达情况,采用Pearson法进行相关性分析,组间比较进行单因素分析,再以Logistic多元回归方程分析影响胃癌发生的危险因素,采用受试者操作特征(ROC)曲线及ROC下面积(AUC)分析各指标诊断胃癌的价值。结果胃癌组患者血清CEA、CA19-9、CA724水平明显高于良性组和对照组,差异有显著性(P <0. 05)。CEA、CA19-9、CA724均与分化程度呈负相关(r=-0. 417、-0. 393、-0. 404,P <0. 001),均与临床分期呈正相关(r=0. 531、0. 528、0. 530,P <0. 001);喜饮烫茶、喜食腌制菜、喜食熏制食物、幽门螺杆菌感染及血清CEA、CA19-9、CA724高表达是胃癌发生的相关危险因素(P <0. 05);诊断胃癌的AUC:CEA+CA19-9+CA724> CEA> CA724> CA19-9。结论血清肿瘤标志物CEA、CA19-9、CA724均与胃癌分化程度呈负相关,均与临床分期呈正相关,三者联合检测可提高对胃癌的诊断价值。     

血清CEA、CA15.3监测乳腺癌患者病情变化

目的　建立监测乳腺癌患者病情变化的有效指标 ,探讨影响患者血清CEA、CA15 3浓度的机制。方法　用IRMA和酶免疫法检测 2 0 0例未处置乳腺癌患者血清CEA、CA15 3含量。结果　乳癌患者血清CEA、CA15 3异常含量分别为 14 %和 2 0 % ,两种肿瘤标志物与肿瘤的大小及淋巴结的浸润有关 ,大肿瘤和淋巴结浸润患者的CEA、CA15 3浓度明显增高 ,CEA还与组织型别有关。单变量预后评价显示 :肿瘤的大小、淋巴结浸润、组织型别、CEA、CA15 3等是无病存活的预后要素。结论　肿瘤标志物CEA、CA15 3是评估乳癌患者预后的有效指标     

CA153和MCA检测在乳腺癌诊治中的应用价值

目的探讨CA153和黏蛋白样癌相关抗原（MCA）在乳腺癌诊治中的应用价值。方法用ELISA和电化学发光法检测145例对照患者和81例乳腺癌患者的血清CA153和MCA的水平,并进行比较。结果145例对照患者CA153和MCA的检测阳性率分别为15．86％、6．89％,81例乳腺癌患者的CA153和MCA的检测阳性率为46．91％,33．33％,联检阳性率为55．56％。结论MCA特异性大于CA153,但灵敏度不及CA153,MCA主要用于乳腺癌患者的术后监测和复发转移。MCA和CA153联合应用可增加诊断的敏感性,优于单一检测,有一定应用价值。