Utility of C-erbB-2 in tissue and in serum in the early diagnosis of recurrence in breast cancer patients: comparison with carcinoembryonic antigen and CA 15.3.

To evaluate the utility of c-erbB-2, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and CA 15.3 in the early diagnosis of recurrence, serial serum determinations of these antigens were performed in 200 patients (follow-up 1-4 years, mean 2.2 years) with primary breast cancer and no evidence of residual disease (NED) after radical treatment (radical mastectomy or simple mastectomy and radiotherapy). Eighty-nine patients developed metastases during follow-up. C-erbB-2, CEA and CA 15.3 were elevated (> 20 U ml-1, > 10 ng ml-1 or > 60 U ml-1 respectively) before diagnosis in 28%, 30% and 47% of the 89 patients with recurrence, with a lead time of 4.5 +/- 2.4, 4.9 +/- 2.4 and 4.8 +/- 2.4 months respectively. Tumour marker sensitivity was clearly related to the site of recurrence, with the lowest sensitivity found in locoregional relapse and the highest in patients with liver metastases. When patients with locoregional recurrences were excluded, sensitivity improved: 31% (c-erbB-2), 33% (CEA) and 56% (CA 15.3), with 76% having at least one of the three tumour markers. C-erbB-2 sensitivity in early diagnosis was significantly higher in patients with c-erbB-2 overexpression in tissue (8/10, 80%) than in those without overexpression (1/30, 3.3%) (P = 0.0001). Likewise, higher levels of both, c-erbB-2 and CA 15.3 at diagnosis of recurrence, higher sensitivity in early diagnosis of relapse and a higher lead time were found in PR+ patients (CA 15.3, P < 0.0001) or in PR- patients (c-erbB-2, P = 0.009). Specificity of the tumour markers was 100% for all three markers (111 NED patients). In conclusion, c-erbB-2 is a useful tool for early diagnosis of metastases, mainly in those patients with c-erbB-2 overexpression in tissue. Using all three markers simultaneously it is possible to increase the sensitivity in the early diagnosis of recurrence by 11.2%.     

Circulating CA 15-3 levels in the postsurgical follow-up of breast cancer patients and in non-malignant diseases

Summary Circulating CA 15-3 antigen levels were evaluated in patients with benign diseases and breast cancer patients with no clinical evidence of disease after surgery (NED). Patients with breast cancer NED were followed for tumor recurrence or death during a median of 12.9 months (range 1 to 25 months). CA 15-3 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) were compared in the same breast cancer NED patient population. Elevated CA 15-3 levels (>40 U/ml) were observed in 38 of 1220 patients with benign diseases (3.1%) and in 25 of 350 breast cancer NED patients (7.1%). Elevations of CEA (>5ng/ml) were observed in 23 patients with breast cancer NED (6.5%). Benign diseases that produced significant elevations of CA 15-3 were chronic hepatitis (42.9%), liver cirrhosis (13.3%), sarcoidosis (16.7%), tuberculosis (9.7%), and systemic lupus erythematosous (6.7%).In breast cancer NED, initial elevations of CA 15-3 were observed in 12 of the 297 patients that remained free of disease during the follow-up, and in 13 of the 40 patients that relapsed (4.0% vs. 32.5%, p<0.001). Initial CEA levels were elevated in 16 patients that remained NED and in 7 patients that relapsed (5.3% vs. 17.5%, p<0.001). Serial determinations of CA 15-3 in patients continuously NED showed persistent elevations in 4 cases. Three of these exhibited concomitant benign diseases. In relapsing patients, serial tumor marker determinations showed that elevations of CA 15-3 before any other clinical evidence of recurrence occurred significantly more frequently than elevations of CEA (45% vs. 25%, p<0.001). Overall, two or more serial elevated values of CA 15-3 were observed in 7 cases, and 6 of them (85%) eventually relapsed. Median survival from study entry was 18.3 months in patients with breast cancer NED that had initial elevated CA 15-3, compared to 25+ months in those with negative CA 15-3 (p<0.0001).We conclude that circulating levels of CA 15-3 antigen can be elevated in some patients with nonmalignant diseases, and that serial determinations of CA 15-3 may be useful in the postsurgical follow-up of patients with breast cancer when specific types of benign diseases that may cause elevations of the antigen are excluded. Additionally, CA 15-3 is more sensitive than CEA in the early diagnosis of breast cancer recurrences, and the simultaneous assay of CEA does not add information to that of CA 15-3 alone.     

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.     

Evaluation of tumor markers (HER-2/neu oncoprotein,CEA, and CA 15.3) in patients with locoregional breast cancer: prognostic value

Tumor markers were studied in the sera of 883 untreated patients with primary breast cancer diagnosed between 1989 and 2007. Abnormal human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2)/neu levels (>15 ng/mL) were found in 9.5%, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in 15.9%, and cancer antigen (CA) 15.3 in 19.7% of the patients. One or more tumor markers were abnormal in 305 (34.5%) of the 883 studied patients. Significantly higher serum HER-2/neu levels were found in patients with tissue overexpression of this oncoprotein (p < 0.0001). CEA, CA 15.3, and HER-2/neu (only in those patients with tissue overexpression) serum levels were related with tumor stage (tumor size and nodal involvement) and steroid receptors (higher values in estrogen receptor-negative (ER−) tumors). Univariate analysis showed that HER-2/neu serum levels were prognostic factors in disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) only in patients with tissue overexpression. Multivariate analysis in 834 patients show that nodal involvement, tumor size, ER, CEA, and adjuvant treatment were independent prognostic factors in DFS and OS. When only patients with HER-2/neu overexpression in tissue were studied, tumor size, nodal involvement, and tumor markers (one or another positive) were independent prognostic factors for both DFS and OS. HER-2/neu serum levels were also an independent prognostic factor, with CEA, ER, and nodes in 106 patients treated with neoadjuvant treatment. In summary, serum HER-2/neu, CEA, and CA 15.3 are useful tools in the prognostic evaluation of patients with primary breast cancer.     

术前CEA和CA15-3对乳腺癌的临床应用价值

目的:探讨术前CEA和CA15-3对乳腺癌早期诊断的价值及其与临床病理因素的相关性。方法:回顾性分析2000年-2005年1028例乳腺癌患者的CEA、CA15-3水平以及与临床病理因素的关系。结果:CEA、CA15-3联合检测、CA15-3及CEA单独检测对乳腺癌的早期诊断敏感性均低,分别为20.9%、15.3%、9.5%;CA15-3和CEA联合检测在肝、骨和肺转移的阳性率则分别为86.7%、90.9%、45.5%(P=0.030),CA15-3、CEA单独检测对转移病灶的敏感性无差异(P均>0.05)。CEA、CA15-3单独检测及CEA、CA15-3联合检测的阳性率与乳腺癌的临床分期、T分期、N分期呈正相关性,(P均<0.001)。CEA单独检测的阳性率与年龄>45岁、绝经后、ER阴性、PR阴性、Her2阳性有显著相关性(P均<0.05);除CEA、CA15-3联合检测的阳性率与Her2阳性呈正相关,联合检测及CA15-3单独检测与其他因素无相关性。结论:术前CEA和CA15-3对乳腺癌的早期诊断缺乏敏感性,但可作为预测预后的重要指标。     

Evaluation of Tumor Markers in Southern Indian Breast Cancer Patients

Tumor markers are biochemical substances elaborated by tumor cells either due to the cause or effect ofmalignant processes. Here we investigated serum levels of cancer antigen (CA15.3) and carcino embryonicantigen (CEA) in 153 pre and post operated southern Indian breast cancer patients (stage-I- 45, stage-II-55,stage-III- 53 samples) and 37 normal controls.Patients with malignant lesions had high frequencies of abnormalCA15.3 in stage-II (46.3%) and stage-III ( 42.6%) and of CEA in stage-III (64.3%). The mean serum levels ofCA 15.3 in all stagesdropped significantly after 9 days of mastectomy, but this was not the case with CEAevenafter 27 days. At 27 days after mastectomy, values for CA 15.3 had again significantly increased. Tumor size,node metastases (≥4) and stage of disease (≥III), but not patient’s age, were associated with higher preoperativelevels. Evaluation of CA15.3 and CEA values showed sensitivities and specificities of 35.3% and 18.3% and95.6% and 62.7%, respectively. Based on these findings we conclude that correlation with CA 15.3 was superiorto CEA in terms of stage of disease, so that this is the more powerful marker for detecting lesions and determiningresponse to treatment.     

A re-evaluation of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) as a serum marker for breast cancer: a prospective longitudinal study.

PURPOSE: Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is still a widely used test for monitoring breast cancer, although recent reports discourage its routine use because of low sensitivity. This is a prospective study evaluating the efficacy of CEA and CA 15.3 in monitoring breast cancer. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Serum CEA and CA 15.3 were measured in 2191 patients with either benign (n = 738) or malignant (n = 1453) breast diseases. Five hundred and forty-nine patients were monitored during postsurgical follow-up for either a minimum of 5 years or until time of recurrence. Fifty-three patients with metastases were also monitored during chemotherapy. RESULTS: Elevated CEA and CA 15.3 levels were found in 16.7% and 33.0% of patients, respectively. CEA sensitivity rose to 41.3% and CA 15.3 sensitivity rose to 80.8% in metastatic patients. The adjunct of CEA increased the CA 15.3 sensitivity by 6% in the overall population and by only 2.1% for patients with metastases. During postsurgical follow-up, CEA was elevated in 38.0% and CA 15.3 in 70.2% of patients with recurrence. The combination of CEA and CA 15.3 increased the overall sensitivity by only 1.4%. Longitudinal monitoring of 53 metastatic patients undergoing chemotherapy demonstrated that, when positive, both CEA and CA 15.3 paralleled response to treatment, although CA 15.3 was a significantly more powerful marker for determining response to treatment. The cost effectiveness ratio of CEA was clearly less favorable than that of CA 15.3. CONCLUSIONS: CEA monitoring should be considered an expensive and inefficient method of follow-up evaluation for breast cancer patients, and it provides no additional value when used in combination with CA 15.3.     

Value of CA 15.3 in breast cancer and comparison with CEA and TPA: A study of specificity in disease-free follow-up patients and sensitivity in patients at diagnosis of the first metastasis

Summary The specificity and sensitivity of a tumor marker (TM) are important in establishing its potential clinical utility for a specific type of neoplasm. CA 15.3 is a TM specific for breast cancer; it is defined by two monoclonal antibodies (DF3 and 115D8), whose specificity, in disease-free follow-up patients, and sensitivity, in patients at diagnosis of first metastasis, have been evaluated in the present study and compared with those of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and tissue polypeptide antigen (TPA).Serum concentrations of all three TMs were quantified in 618 individuals: 80 healthy controls, 421 patients with local breast cancer who became free of disease following locoregional treatment, and 117 patients with disseminated disease at diagnosis of metastasis. Radioimmunoassay (RIA) was the method employed, and the cut-off values obtained were 30 U/ml for CA 15.3, 5 ng/ml for CEA, and 120 U/I for TPA. The results showed CA 15.3 and CEA specificities to be analogous (95.7 and 95.5%, respectively). TPA specificity (81.9%) was lower (p<0.001). During adjuvant therapy, CA 15.3 serum levels were seen to increase, followed by a normalization of concentration after terminating therapy. On the other hand, CA 15.3 and TPA sensitivities (64.1 and 67.5%, respectively) were greater than for CEA (44.4%, p<0.01).It is concluded that CA 15.3 is a useful TM for breast cancer, as it offers a greater sensitivity than CEA and a higher specificity than TPA. Combining CA 15.3 and CEA fails to increase CA 15.3 sensitivity, while combining CA 15.3 with TPA increases false-positives and so likewise offers no additional benefit.     

Tumor markers in human breast cancer

We described tumor markers which are considered to be useful for the detection of recurrence, index of the efficacy of treatment and assessment for the prognosis of the patients with breast cancer. CEA and CA 15-3 are relatively useful markers among various serological ones. However, although accuracy of the diagnosis with CA 15-3 and CEA is generally thought to be not superior to those of imaging method, CA 15-3 and CEA seems to be clinically useful tools for making diagnosis because of its simplicity and less cost. Estrogen and progesterone receptors shows good responses to endocrine therapy. Response rate was 70 to 80% in both receptor-positive patients. Presence of ER shows higher rate of recurrence and shorter survival of the patients than those with absence of ER. Recent attention has been focused on EGF and proto-oncogene, suggesting relationship of those to prognosis.     

The usefulness of CEA and/or CA19-9 in monitoring for recurrence in gastric cancer patients: a prospective clinical study

Background. Many studies on postoperative carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and/or carbohydrate antigen (CA)19-9 monitoring after operation for gastric cancer have been reported, but most have been retrospective. Methods. A nationwide observational study was implemented in 135 leading institutions in Japan to evaluate the significance of CEA and/or CA19-9 in postoperative monitoring for recurrence in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Three hundred and twenty-one patients examined in this analysis underwent radical gastrectomy at one of Japan's leading institutions between November 1993 and March 1996 and had been followed up for at least 5 years. Serum levels of CEA and CA19-9 were examined preoperatively and every 3 months postoperatively, with diagnostic imagings, such as chest X-ray, computed tomography (CT), and ultrasonography also being performed every 3 months. Results. Recurrence was observed in 120 patients (peritoneum, 48; liver 16; lymph node, 16; multiple sites, 25; and others, 12). Sensitivities of CEA and either CEA or CA19-9, or both, for recurrence were 65.8% and 85.0%, respectively, both of which values were significantly higher than the preoperative positivities (28.3% and 45.0%, respectively). In most patients with high preoperative levels CEA and/or CA19-9, these tumor markers increased again at recurrence. Recurrent diseases were detected between 5 months after detection by diagnostic imagings and 12 months before detection by diagnostic imagings (mean of 3.1 ± 3.6 months before detection by diagnostic imagings) and between 10 months after detection by diagnostic imagings and 13 months before detection by diagnostic imagings (mean of 2.2 ± 3.9 months before detection by diagnostic imagings) by CEA and CA19-9 monitorings, respectively. Conclusion. These results suggest that CEA and/or CA19-9 monitoring after operation was useful to predict the recurrence of gastric cancer, especially in almost all the patients with high preoperative levels of these markers.We reported this study at the poster session of the eighteenth meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.     

Use of serum tumor markers in the differential diagnosis between ovarian and colorectal adenocarcinomas.

In the search for a method to facilitate the preoperative discrimination of ovarian carcinomas from colorectal carcinomas serum levels of 6 tumor markers were measured in 47 patients presenting with ovarian cancer and compared to levels found in 24 female patients with advanced, untreated colorectal cancer. The markers studied were CA 125, CA 15.3, CA 19.9, CEA and two recently developed mucin markers, CA M29 and CA M26. Levels of CA 125, CA 15.3, CEA and CA M29 showed significant differences between both groups. In predicting ovarian cancer, sensitivity was highest for CA 125 at 94% (35 U/ml cutoff level). However, the specificity of CA 125 was at 71% low. Specificity increased significantly by using a combination of a CA 125-positive score (greater than 35 U/ml) and a simultaneous negative CEA score (less than or equal to 5 ng/ml) (specificity 100%, sensitivity 81%). A CA 125/CEA serum ratio greater than 25 resulted in the highest discriminative power with a specificity of 100% and a sensitivity of 91% resulting in an overall test accuracy of 94%. It is concluded that the serum tumor markers used, especially a combination of CA 125 and CEA, are helpful in the preoperative differential diagnosis between adenocarcinomas of ovarian and colorectal origin.     

c-erbB-2 oncoprotein, CEA, and CA 15.3 in patients with breast cancer: prognostic value

The diagnostic value of a new tumor marker, c-erbB-2, was studied in the sera of 50 healthy subjects, 58 patients with benign breast diseases, and 413 patients with breast cancer (186 locoregional, 185 with advanced disease, and 42 with no evidence of disease). Using 15 U/ml as the cut-off, no healthy subjects or patients with benign diseases and only 2.4% of no evidence of disease patients had elevated serum levels. Abnormal c-erbB-2 levels were found in 29% (101/370) of the patients with breast carcinoma (locoregional 9%, metastases 45.4%). CEA (cut-off 5 U/ml) and CA 15.3 (cut-off 35 U/ml) sensitivity was 18% and 16% in patients with locoregional disease and 61% and 70% in those patients with advanced disease, respectively. A trend toward higher serum levels of all three tumor markers in patients with nodal involvement or greater tumor size was found, but was statistically significant only with CEA (p < 0.01). By contrast, c-erbB-2 was related to steroid receptors, in both locoregional and metastatic tumors. When the prognostic value of these markers was evaluated, patients with abnormally high presurgical CEA and c-erbB-2 had a worse prognosis than those patients with normal values, in both node-negative (p < 0.05 and p < 0.001, respectively) and node-positive patients (p < 0.556 and p < 0.001, respectively). By contrast, no relationship was found between CA 15.3 values and prognosis. Multivariate analysis showed that CEA and c-erbB-2 were also prognostic factors. The correlation between serum and tissue levels of c-erbB-2 was studied in the tumors of 161 patients. Significantly higher c-erbB-2 serum levels were found in patients with overexpression in tissue by immunohistochemistry, in both locoregional and advanced disease (p=0.0001). Serum concentrations in patients with advanced disease were related to the site of recurrence, with significantly higher values in patients with metastases (mainly in those with liver metastases) than in those with locoregional recurrence. In summary, c-erbB-2 serum levels seem to be a useful tumor marker in the prognosis of patients with breast cancer. Using all three tumor markers, sensitivity was 35% in patients with locoregional breast cancer and 88% in patients with recurrence.     

Clinical value of CEA and CA125 regarding relapse and metastasis in resectable non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the value of serum Carcinoembryonic Antigen (CEA) and CA125 antigen assay for monitoring the activity of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after curative surgical resection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Serum CEA and CA 125 were determined preoperatively and at every postoperative visit, in 113 patients with NSCLC (TNM stages I, II, IIIA). Both markers were assayed by magnetic particle enzyme immunoassay. RESULTS: Tumor recurrence was more frequent in patients with preoperative CA 125 levels above the cut-off (15 U/ml) (28 out of 47) (59.5%) than in those with low values (18 out of 66) (27.2%) (p < 0.001). The 36-month disease-free survival was lower for patients with elevated CA 125 (37%) than among those with low levels (72%) (p = 0.006). High CA 125 was an independent predictor of the risk of postoperative recurrence (Hazard Ratio: 3.02)(95% CI: 1.41-6.49). No relationship was detected between preoperative serum CEA and risk of recurrence. High preoperative CA125 indicated elevated risk for disseminated recurrence (Hazard Ratio: 7) (95% CI: 2.39-20.51), but not for locoregional failure. No significance was detected for CEA, either in locoregional or disseminated recurrence. Forty-six subjects (40.7%) developed tumor recurrence. At the diagnosis of relapse, serum CEA was elevated in 16 patients (34.7%) and CA125 in 26 (56.5%). Sensitivity was higher in the case of disseminated recurrence (63% for CA125 and 43.3% for CEA) and decreased in locoregional relapse (43.7% for CA125 and 18.7% for CEA). The specificity was 97% for CEA and 59% for CA125. CONCLUSION: Serum CA125 is a useful prognostic marker in NSCLC. The predictive information is especially useful to estimate the risk of disseminated recurrence. Serial determinations of CEA and CA125 during the postoperative follow-up do not show enough sensitivity/specificity to recommend their use for diagnosis of tumor relapse.     

Comparison of TPS with CEA and CA 15.3 in follow-up of Chinese breast cancer patients

Serum levels of serum tissue polypeptide specific antigen (TPS) were compared with levels of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and CA 15.3 with regards to their clinical values in Chinese breast cancer patients. A total of 81 patients were recruited and followed-up prospectively for disease recurrence and death. The median of follow-up was 33.1 months. CEA and CA15.3 correlated with the prognostic factors associated with poor prognosis. CA15.3 was associated with disease-free survival and overall survival. Multivariate analyses showed that the pre-operational serum CA15.3 level was an independent prognostic factor for disease-free survival. However, TPS was associated with neither prognostic factors nor patient survival. In conclusion, TPS is not a good serum tumor marker for breast cancer of Chinese patients, compared with CEA and CA 15.3.     

Diagnostic value of CA 549 in pleural fluid. Comparison with CEA,CA 15.3 and CA 72.4

Several tumor markers have been evaluated in pleural fluid, but their clinical role has not been firmly established. The aim of this study is to determine the diagnostic value of carbohydrate antigen 549 (CA 549) levels in pleural fluid, and to compare it with another previously studied tumor markers: carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), CA 15.3 and CA 72.4. We prospectively studied 252 patients with pleural effusion: 101 malignant (20 mesothelioma) and 151 of several benign diseases. The levels of the tumor markers were measured by immunoradiometric assays (RIA). CA 549 in pleural fluid has an acceptable sensitivity (0.49), with high specificity (0.99). The best combination of tumor markers for differentiating malignant from benign effusions was CA 549+CEA+CA 15.3, with a sensitivity of 0.65, specificity of 0.99 and accuracy of 0.85. The addition of any one tumor marker assay consistently improved the diagnostic value of cytology. In our study, none of the tumor markers was organ-specific. When mesothelioma and hematological malignancy were ruled-out, the combination of CA 549+CEA+CA 15.3, improved the results up to a sensitivity of 0.77, specificity of 1 and accuracy of 0.92. In conclusion, CA 549 assay has an acceptable sensitivity with high specificity. The best combination of tumor markers in this series with a high relative frequency of mesothelioma and low frequency of breast carcinoma was CA 549+CEA+CA 15.3. Individual tumor markers or their combination increased the sensitivity of pleural cytology.     

Clinical value of tumor markers for early detection of recurrence in patients with cervical adenocarcinoma and adenosquamous carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: The clinical value of tumor markers for early detection of recurrence was investigated in 32 patients with cervical adenocarcinoma or adenosquamous carcinoma who had recurrent tumors. METHODS: Serum levels of CA 125, CA 19-9, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), and squamous cell carcinoma antigen (SCC), in addition to clinical status at the time of recurrence were investigated. RESULTS: Among the 32 patients, 26 had no symptoms at the time of recurrence. In 20 patients, elevated serum levels of tumor markers were the first sign of recurrence. In 21 patients with recurrent adenocarcinoma, the positive rates were 14% (CA 125), 62% (CA 19-9), 29% (CEA), and 5% (SCC). There were 71% of cases positive for CA 19-9 and/or CEA. In 11 patients with recurrent adenosquamous carcinoma, the corresponding positive rates were 37% (CA 125), 46% (CA 19-9), 64% (CEA), and 55% (SCC), with 100% positive for CA 19-9, CEA, and/or SCC. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of CA 19-9 and CEA is probably the most promising for detection of recurrent cervical adenocarcinoma. For adenosquamous carcinoma, the additional use of SCC is recommended.     

肿瘤标志物在结直肠癌诊断和监测中的价值和改进策略:130例患者的临床资料分析

背景与目的:肿瘤标志物检测是肿瘤血清学诊断的主要方法之一,但肿瘤标志物的阳性诊断率较低.本研究旨在分析肿瘤蛋白芯片C12在结直肠癌(colorectal cancer,CRC)诊断中的价值.方法:分析总结130例CRC初治患者12种肿瘤标志物的检测结果,找出与CRC相关性最强的肿瘤标志物,计算各标志物组检测对提高诊断率的作用.结果:C12对本组CRC患者的总体诊断率是42.3%,对Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ、Ⅳ期患者的诊断率分别是13.6%、39.5%、38.2%和68.8%;对Ⅳ期患者的诊断率显著高于Ⅰ期患者(P＜0.001);癌胚抗原(carcioembryonicantigen,CEA)的阳性率最高,达35.4%,与之相比,阳性率最高的5种标志物的任何组合方式(2、3、4、5种标志物的组合)均不能提高诊断率,但四项指标联合检测CEA 前列腺特异性抗原(free prostate specific antigen,f-PSA) 肿瘤抗原cancer antigen,CA)125 CA242或CEA CAl9-9 CAl25 f-PSA足以替代12项指标联合检测.结论:C12对诊断中晚期CRC有一定价值,但对早期CRC的灵敏度不高.     

Serum tumor markers in colorectal cancer staging,grading, and follow-up

Early diagnosis of colorectal cancer, a frequent neoplasia in industrialized countries, permits curative surgery. In this study we assessed the clinical role of serum tumor markers determination in diagnosing, staging, and grading colorectal cancer; the role of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), CA 19-9, tissue polypeptide antigen (TPA) and CA 72-4 in colorectal cancer follow-up was also assessed. In 114 patients with colorectal cancer, the oncofetal antigen CEA was compared with the membrane-associated glycoproteins CA 19-9, CA 242, and CA 72-4 and with the cytokeratins TPA, tissue polypeptide-specific antigen (TPS) and tissue polypeptide monoclonal antigen (TPM). Overall, the most sensitive indices were TPA and TPS (67% and 70%, respectively). Tumor stage influenced the levels of CEA, CA 19-9, and TPA, but not those of TPS, while tumor grade influenced CEA and TPS, but not CA 72-4, TPA, and TPM. TPA was the most sensitive index in identifying early or well-differentiated colorectal cancers. The sensitivity was enhanced when this marker was determined in combination with CEA, in diagnosing both advanced and early colorectal tumors. Seventy-seven patients were followed up after therapy for at least 18 months. CEA was the most sensitive index of recurrence (58%); however, this sensitivity is too low to consider tumor markers useful in colorectal cancer follow-up. © 1996 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

CA19-9、CA50、CA242、CEA检测对胰腺癌早期诊断的意义

目的　探讨CA19- 9、CA5 0、CA2 42、CEA肿瘤标志物联合检测对早期诊断胰腺癌 (PCA)的意义。方法　采用放射免疫分析法 ,检测 5 6例PCA患者及 5 4例胰腺良性疾病患者血清CA19- 9、CA5 0、CA2 42、CEA值并进行比较分析。结果　PCA患者血清CA19- 9(10 8± 148)、CA5 0 (45± 80 )、CA2 42 (78± 5 4)、CEA(3 5± 2 7)。与对照组血清CA19- 9(2 9± 3 6) ,CA5 0 (2 0± 3 0 )、CA2 42 (2 0± 14)、CEA(2 5± 12 )比较有非常显著差别(P <0 0 1)。结果　胰腺恶性肿瘤患者中 ,血清CA19- 9、CA5 0、CA2 42、CEA标志物含量明显高于胰腺良性疾病 ,且CA19- 9阳性率较高 (76 8% )。肿瘤越大CA19- 9水平越高 ;当癌肿手术后复发、转移时 ,均有CA19- 9再度明显升高 ,可早期发现以随时调整治疗方案。PCA标志物联合检测阳性率 (92 % ) ,明显高于单检阳性率 (76 8% )。四种标志物之间有相关性及互补性 ,可显著提高PCA的早期诊断 ,并有助于与良性胰腺疾病鉴别     

应用ROC曲线分析评价肿瘤标志物糖类抗原15-3、癌胚抗原在乳腺癌诊断与术后监测中的价值

目的评价肿瘤标志物糖类抗原15-3(carbohydrate antigen,CA15-3)、癌胚抗原(carcino-embryonic antigen,CEA)在乳腺癌诊断与术后复发转移判断中的应用价值。方法采用化学发光免疫分析法测定110例乳腺癌患者、50例乳腺良性疾病患者及40例正常对照者的血清CA15-3、CEA水平。组间比较采用χ2检验。用ROC曲线评价CA15-3、CEA在乳腺癌诊断和术后复发转移判断中的应用价值。结果 110例患者中CA15-3和CEA阳性检出率分别为32.7%(36/110)和12.7%(14/110)。I期、II期乳腺癌患者CA15-3、CEA血清含量无明显变化,与良性组和正常对照组相比差异无统计学意义(P0.050)。以43例Ⅲ期、Ⅳ期乳腺癌患者的CA15-3、CEA测定值绘制ROC曲线,分析显示,CA15-3、CEA的ROC曲线下面积(AUC)分别为82.3%、81.1%,95%可信区间分别为0.719～0.929、0.714～0.906。术后复发转移患者CA15-3、CEA阳性检出率分别为85.7%(18/21)、52.4%(11/21),AUC分别为97.8%、89.1%,95%可信区间分别为0.944～1.011、0.790～0.991。结论通过ROC曲线评价可得出,CA15-3、CEA对Ⅲ期、Ⅳ期乳腺癌诊断有临床参考价值,在术后复发转移诊断中有较高的应用价值,可作为乳腺癌术后监测复发转移的有效指标。