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.     

大肠癌患血清糖链抗原CA50水平及其临床意义

目的研究大肠癌患者血清糖链抗原CA50表达水平及其临床意义。方法采用免疫放射分析法(IRMA)对73名正常人,33例大肠良性疾病及136例大肠癌患者进行了血清CA50水平测定,同时用ELISA法测定了大肠癌患者血清CEA水平。结果大肠癌患者血清CA50水平(41.6±30.9u/ml)显著高于正常人(8.9±5.5u/ml,P<0.01)及良性疾病组(11.2±7.6u/ml,P<0.01)。以20u/ml为阳性界值,CA50对诊断大肠癌的灵敏度为72.1%,特异性为91.5%,有效率82.8%。血清CA50水平升高与大肠癌临床分期、复发和转移等因素密切相关。大肠癌患者血清CA50与CEA水平呈正相关(r=0.58,P<0.01)。结论CA50可作为大肠癌诊断和临床分期的辅助指标之一,有助于鉴别大肠疾病的良恶性,对病情变化、预后及疗效的判定有一定参考价值。     

血清 CA72-4、CA19-9在消化系统癌的表达

[目的]评价血清肿瘤标志物CA72-4、CA19-9在消化系统癌中的临床意义.[方法]采用免疫放射量度分析法测定129例消化系统癌及35例消化系统良性病变患者血清CA72-4、CA19-9水平.[结果]CA72-4、CA19-9在129例消化系统癌的阳性表达率分别为56.59%和43.41%,共有34例二者表达阳性,其阳性率26.36%.而消化系统良性病变阳性表达率均为5.71%,而且无一例交叉阳性,差异有显著性.CA72-4,CA19-9水平与消化系统癌有无转移有关,而且行根治术后CA72-4、CA19-9明显下降,而非根治手术者则手术前后差异无显著性.[结论]血清CA72-4、CA19-9对鉴别消化系统上皮肿瘤的良恶性有较好的鉴别诊断价值,联合检测比单项检测检测率高,而且对于预测消化系统癌有无转移及判断手术疗效也有一定参考价值.     

消化道恶性肿瘤TSGF、CA19-9、CA242联合检测的临床评价

目的　探讨用恶性肿瘤特异性生长因子 (TSGF)、糖抗原 19 9(CA19 9)与糖抗原 2 42 (CA2 42 )联合检测对消化道恶性肿瘤的临床评价。方法　采用酶免疫测定 140例消化道肿瘤及 30例正常人血清。结果　以单一指标阳性作为诊断标准CA2 42、CA19 9、TSGF对消化道恶性肿瘤的灵敏度分别为 42 9%、5 5 7%、80 7% ,准确度分别为 5 2 9%、6 2 4%、81 8% ,联合检测结果二项或二项以上阳性作为标准则本组患者的诊断的灵敏度为 84 3% ,准确度为 87 6 %。结论　联合检测血清TSGF、CA19 9与CA2 42对消化道恶性肿瘤的辅助诊断有较高的临床应用价值。     

CA19-9/CA50比值在不典型胰腺癌诊断及预后判断中的临床意义

目的 探讨肿瘤标志物CA19-9/CA50比值在不典型胰腺癌(PC)的诊断及预后判断中的作用.方法 对疑似PC的55例患者进行CA19-9及CA50检测,对最后确诊PC患者进行长期随访,使用ROC法评价CA19-9、CA50及其比值在诊断PC中的敏感性及特异性;分析PC患者的生存期及其与肿瘤标志物比值的相关性.结果 36例患者被确诊为PC(65.45％);PC组CA19-9水平及CA19-9/CA50比值显著高于非PC组(P =0.021、0.016);CA19-9水平及CA19-9/CA50比值与PC的诊断存在显著相关性(P=0.001、＜0.001),2组的AUC分别为0.936、0.958.当CA19-9=8.5 ku·L-1时,诊断PC的敏感性为86.19％,特异性为88.73％;当CA19-9/CA50比值=1.42时,敏感性为90.35％,特异性为89.26％.36例PC患者的中位生存时间为38.6周,第60周的累积生存率为19.7％;CA19-9水平及CA19-9/CA50比值与生存期存在显著负相关性(P=0.039、0.016).结论 CA19-9/CA50比值在诊断不典型PC中的敏感性及特异性均优于单独检测CA19-9或CA50,且该比值越大,患者的生存期越短.     

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。     

CA19-9的检测对胰腺癌早期诊断及术后预后判断的临床意义

目的　探讨CA 19 9的检测对胰腺癌早期诊断及术后预后判断的临床意义。方法　采用放射免疫法动态检测胰腺癌患者术后CA 19 9水平 ,以判断其与肿瘤局部复发或远处转移的关系。结果　早期胰腺癌患者CA19 9值为 (85 .3± 6.7)U /ml ,慢性胰腺炎患者为 (15 .7± 1.9)U /ml ,两者比较有显著性差异 ;胰腺癌患者术后CA 19 9水平均降至正常 ,但术后动态检测发现 ,CA19 9升高者提示有局部复发或远处转移 ,3个月后影像学 (CT )检查才发现变化。结论　CA19 9的检测可作为胰腺癌早期诊断及术后判断预后的 1个重要指标     

妇科肿瘤患者血清CA125水平测定及其临床价值

目的　探讨CA12 5对妇科肿瘤诊断及疗效监测的临床应用价值。方法　应用放射免疫法 (IR MA)测定 131例妇科恶性肿瘤、90例妇科良性肿瘤患者、82例健康妇女血清CA12 5水平。结果　 131例妇科恶性肿瘤患者血清CA12 5水平为 182 .5± 16 1.2U ml,检测阳性率为 80 .2 % ,90例良性肿瘤患者血清CA12 5水平为 2 8.2± 2 6 .0U ml,检测阳性率为 2 1.1% ,两者相比差异有显著性 (P <0 .0 1)。 82例健康妇女血清CA12 5水平为 18.5± 8.3U ml,随访 19例妇科恶性肿瘤患者治疗前CA12 5水平为 380 .2± 16 0 .5U ml,治疗后CA12 5水平为 2 4 .0± 2 0 .5U ml,两者相比亦有显著性差异 (P <0 .0 1)。结论　CA12 5可作为妇科肿瘤诊断及良恶性肿瘤鉴别的指标 ,并可进行疗效观察及监测复发。     

消化道恶性肿瘤TSGF、CA19—9、CA242联合检测的临床评价

目的 探讨用恶性肿瘤特异性生长因子（TSGF）、糖抗原19－9（CA19－9）与糖抗原242（CA242）联合检测对消化道恶性肿瘤的临床评价。方法 采用酶免疫测定140例消化道肿瘤及30例正常人血清。结果 以单一指标阳性作为诊断标准CA242、CA19－9、TSGF对消化道恶性肿瘤的灵敏度分别为42．9％、55．7％、80．7％，准确度分别为52．9％、62．4％、81．8％，联合检测结果二项或二项以上阳性作为标准则本组患者的诊断的灵敏度为84．3％，准确度为87．6％。结论 联合检测血清TSGF、CA19－9与CA242对消化道恶性肿瘤的辅助诊断有较高的临床应用价值。     

癌胚抗原、糖类抗原125、糖类抗原19-9和糖类抗原72-4在胃肠道间质瘤临床诊断中的应用价值分析

目的 探讨癌胚抗原(CEA)、糖类抗原125(CA125)、糖类抗原19-9(CA19-9)和糖类抗原72-4(CA72-4)在胃肠道间质瘤(GIST)诊断中的应用价值。方法 将2019年1月至2021年6月安阳市肿瘤医院收治的初诊未治的40例GIST患者和同期体检的40例健康志愿者,分别作为GIST组和对照组。比较2组研究对象血清CEA、CA125、CA19-9和CA72-4水平,并分析其单独或联合检测的诊断效能。结果 与对照组比较,GIST组患者血清中CEA、CA125、CA19-9和CA72-4水平显著升高(t=24.177,P<0.001;t=8.921,P=0.032;t=14.215,P=0.008;t=5.663,P=0.041)。与对照组比较,GIST组患者血清CEA、CA125、CA19-9和CA72-4阳性率也显著升高(χ²=28.256,P<0.001;χ²=26.332,P<0.001;χ²=29.034,P<0.001;χ²=24.511,P<...     

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。     

Preliminary Evaluation of Clinical Utility of CYFRA 21-1, CA 72-4, NSE,CA19-9 and CEA in Stomach Cancer

Background: Although various tumor markers have been utilized in management of stomach cancer (SC), only a few reports have described relevance of examples such as CYFRA 21-1 and neuron-specific enolase (NSE). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the potential diagnostic performance of  carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), CA 19-9, CA72-4, CYFRA 21-1 and NSE in patients with SC. Materials and Methods: Ninety-six SC patients with pathologic confirmation between 2012 and 2013 were enrolled. Serum levels of five tumor markers were analyzed using a solid-phase immunoradiometric assay. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted for the five tumor markers to investigate their diagnostic powers and adjusted cutoff values derived from analysis of ROC curves were evaluated to calculate the sensitivity of each for SC with recommended cutoff values. Results: Based on two different cutoff values (recommended and adjusted), CYFRA 21-1 (≥2.0 and 1.2 ng/ml) had a respective sensitivity of 50% and 78.1%, compared with 8.3% and 18.8% for CEA (≥7.0 and 3.9ng/ml), 15.6% and 18.8% for CA 19-9 (≥37 and 26.7 ng/ml), 28.1% and 9.6% for CA 72-4 (≥4.0 and 13 ng/ml) and 7.3% and 7.3% for NSE (≥14.7 and 15.0 ng/ml) in the initial staging of primary SC. The area under the curve (AUC) for CYFRA 21-1, with a value of 0.978 (95% confidence interval, 0.964-0.991) was comparativelythe highest. Univariate analysis revealed significant relationships between tumor marker level and lymph node involvement, metastasis and staging with CYFRA 21-1, CA 72-4 and NSE. Conclusions: CYFRA 21-1 was the most sensitive tumor marker and showed the most powerful diagnostic performance among the five SC tumor markers. NSE and CA 72-4 are significantly related to lymph node involvement, metastasis or stage. Further evaluations are warranted to clarify the clinical usefulness and prognostic prediction of these markers in SC.     

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。     

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.     

血清CA19—9的酶免测定及临床应用

本文用生物素—链霉亲和素酶联免疫吸附试验（BSA）对203例血清CA19－9水平进行定量测定。结果显示，在32例胰腺癌组为826±411U／ml，40例肝癌组为107±46．5U／ml，与76例正常人对照组21．2±9．24U／ml比较均有明显差异（P＜0．05），以胰腺癌组升高最显著。在39例胃癌组为25．4±11．0U／ml，与正常对照组比较均无明显差异（P＞0．05）。27例胰腺癌病人术前为910±452U／ml，术后为187±89．0U／ml，血清CA19－9水平明显下降（P＜0．05）。血清CA19－9水平分析对胰腺癌的鉴别诊断、疗效观察及预后评估有较高价值。     

Significance of CA19-9 in Predicting the Prognosis of Urothelial Carcinoma: A Hospital Based Study from Nepal

Background: The present study was undertaken to establish any correlation of elevated levels of CA19-9 withtumor stage or grade of urothelial carcinoma. Materials and Methods: This hospital based study was carriedout in the Department of Biochemistry of Nepalese Army Institute of Health Sciences between 1st July 2012 and31st December 2012. Approval for the study was obtained from the institutional research ethical committee.CA19-9 was assayed with an ELISA reader for all cases and expressed in U/ml with 37U/ml taken as the cut-offupper value for normal. Results: Out of 20 cases enrolled, 15 were of urothelial carcinoma and the remaining5 were controls. There was marked difference between the mean values of CA19-9 in cases 40.2±19.3U/ml ofurothelial carcinoma and controls 7.98±7.34U/ml. The number of cases in Ta, TI, T2, T3, T4 stages of urothelialcarcinoma were 2, 6, 3, 3, 1 respectively. The percentage rise in CA19-9 was less with low grade tumors (22.2%)when compared with high grade tumors (66.6%) (p value 0.001*). The percentage of rise in CA19-9 for muscleinvasive tumors was very high when compared to superficial tumors. Similarly, the percentage of rise in CA19-9 for metastatic disease was very high when compared to non-metastatic disease and it was found statisticallysignificant (p value 0.001*). Conclusion: Serum CA19-9 levels predicts the prognosis of urothelial carcinoma asit is almost invariably raised in tumors having metastatic spread.     

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.     

炎性介质ＣＲＰ和ＳＡＡ与肿瘤标记物ＣＥＡ、ＣＡ１９-９和ＣＡ７２-４术前联合评估结直肠癌

目的：探讨运用炎性介质Ｃ反应蛋白（ＣＲＰ）、血清淀粉样蛋白Ａ（ＳＡＡ）与肿瘤标记物ＣＥＡ、ＣＡ１９-９、ＣＡ７２-４术前联合评估结直肠肿瘤分期的价值。方法：纳入１３０例结直肠癌患者,于术前３天测定血清ＣＥＡ、ＣＡ１９-９、ＣＡ７２-４、ＣＲＰ和ＳＡＡ的水平,并与术后病理分期进行比较。结果：术前ＳＡＡ与ＣＲＰ、ＣＥＡ有相关性,相关系数分别为ｒ＝０.６４７（Ｐ＝０.０００）和ｒ＝０.２９５（Ｐ＝０.００１）;ＣＲＰ（Ｐ＝０.０２１）、ＳＡＡ（Ｐ＝０.０３６）、ＣＡ１９-９（Ｐ＝０.０１７）在不同的ＴＮＭ分期之间差异有统计学意义;建立ＣＲＰ、ＳＡＡ和ＣＡ１９. ９诊断Ⅱ ～Ⅳ期结直肠癌的ＲＯＣ曲线,ＳＡＡ的曲线下面积（ＡＵＣ）为０.６７４（Ｐ＝０００５）,ＣＡ１９.９的ＡＵＣ为０.６６４（Ｐ＝０００８）,ＣＲＰ的ＡＵＣ没有统计学意义;以血清ＳＡＡ值≥２.６６５ｍｇ／Ｌ为阳性,或ＣＡ１９-９值≥８.７０５Ｕ／ｍｌ为阳性联合诊断Ⅱ ～Ⅳ期结直肠癌的准确度为７５.６％,敏感度为８８.３％,特异度为３４.５％。结论：炎性介质和肿瘤标记物具有相关性,联合检测ＳＡＡ和ＣＡ１９-９筛选Ⅱ ～Ⅳ期结直肠癌患者具有较高价值。     

血清CA125、CA19-9、CEA的检测在大肠癌诊断及治疗中的意义

目的探讨血清CA125、CA199、CEA的检测在大肠癌诊断及治疗中的价值。方法82例大肠癌病人均于2004年6月～2005年6月收治并手术,同时选取41例正常人做为对照组。以蛋白芯片法测定两组血清中CA125、CA199、CEA含量。结果三项指标定量检测大肠癌组明显高于对照组。其阳性率与部位、大体类型、组织类型无明显相关。三项指标阳性率Duke'sC+D期明显高于Duke'sA+B期。CA125、CA199、CEA三项指标敏感度分别为34.1%、34.1%、30.5%,特异度均为97.6%,三项联检敏感度为58.5%,特异度为92.7%,而在Duke'sC+D期,三项联检敏感度为86.8%,特异度为92.7%。结论血清CA125、CA199、CEA的检测对于大肠癌的诊断价值较低,但三项联检在Duke'sC、D期大肠癌病人诊断价值较高,有助于判断大肠癌病理分期并指导手术范围。