大肠癌患者血清基质金属蛋白酶-7含量的临床意义

目的：评估大肠癌患者血清MMP-7含量及其临床意义.方法：术前应用免疫酶联反应技术对50例大肠癌患者以及36例健康对照者的血清MMP-7含量进行检测,同时也检测这些患者血清CEA、CA19-9以及CA24-2含量.将大肠癌患者的血清MMP-7及其它肿瘤标志物的含量与健康对照者进行了比较.对不同临床病理分期的大肠癌患者血清MMP-7含量进行评估.结果：研究发现多数大肠癌患者的血清MMP-7含量升高.大肠癌患者的血清MMP-7含量,分布范围0.72-28.69ng/ml（平均4.41ng/ml;中位4.19ng/ml）,显著高于健康对照者,分布范围0.69-3.97ng/ml（平均1.62ng/ml;中位1.36ng/ml）（P〈0.01）.大肠癌患者的血清MMP-7平均阳性率（46%）与CEA（30%）,CA19-9（26%）及CA24-2（24%）相比均升高（P〈0.05）.进展期肿瘤患者血清MMP-7含量显著高于早期肿瘤患者（P〈0.05）.结论：血清MMP-7有可能成为大肠癌患者临床监测标志物.     

联合检测血清CEA、CA125、CA19-9和CA72-4对大肠癌临床价值的探讨

目的:探讨血清CEA、CA125、CA19-9和CA72-4联合检测对大肠癌的临床价值.方法:采用电化学发光法对44例大肠癌患者手术前后、28例大肠息肉患者、30例健康体检者血清CEA、CA125、CA19-9和CA72-4水平进行检测.结果:大肠癌患者血清中四种肿瘤标志物水平明显高于大肠息肉患者和健康体健者(P＜0.05).大肠癌Dukes C-D期患者血清中四种肿瘤标志物水平明显高于Dukes A-B期患者(P＜0.05).同时大肠癌高、中分化患者血清中四种肿瘤标志物水平和低分化患者血清中四种肿瘤标志物水平相比较,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).四种肿瘤标志物联合检查结肠癌的诊断敏感性和准确性明显高于单一标志物.大肠癌患者作根治性切除术后1个月血清中四种肿瘤标志物含量较术前明显降低(P＜0.05),而作姑息性切除术后1个月血清中四种肿瘤标志物含量与术前相比,下降不明显(P＞0.05).结论:联合检测血清CEA、CA125、CA19-9和CA72-4水平可作为大肠癌的早期诊断、手术方法的选择、疗效评价及预后监测有意义的参考指标.     

血清标志物CYFRA21-1、NSE、CEA、CA19-9、CA125、SCC联合检测在肺癌诊断中的应用价值

背景与目的:肿瘤标志物检测在肿瘤血清学诊断中被广泛的使用,但单个肿瘤标志物的阳性诊断率不高.本实验探讨肿瘤标志物CYFRA21-1、NSE、CEA、CA19-9、CA125、SCC在肺癌患者血清中的水平,及其在肺癌鉴别诊断中的价值.方法:采用化学发光法对135例肺癌组和30例健康体检组6项肿瘤标志物的含量进行检测及比较.结果:CYFRA21-1、NSE、CEA、CA19-9、CA125、SCC 6项肿瘤标志物肺癌组水平浓度分别为分别为(7±8)ng/ml、(30±29)ng/ml、(65±293)ng/ml、(110±379)U/ml、(122±412)U/ml、(2±7)ng/ml,显著高于正常对照组(P<0.01),其测定水平与病理类型有关.CEA在腺癌、鳞癌、小细胞癌水平浓度分别为(11±25)×10ng/ml、(2±4)×10ng/ml、(2±3)×10ng/ml;CA125在腺癌、鳞癌、小细胞癌水平浓度分别为(21±48)×10U/ml、(5±6)×10U/ml、(5±4)×10U/ml.CA19-9在腺癌、鳞癌、小细胞癌水平浓度分别为(17±44)×10U/ml、(5±12)×10U/ml、(4±4)×10U/ml.CEA、CA125、CA19-9在腺癌中水平显著高于鳞癌和小细胞癌(P<0.05).NSE、CYFRA21-1、SCC以鳞癌最高其水平浓度分别为(31±36)ng/ml、(8±10)ng/ml、(3±10)ng/ml,但与其他肺癌类型相比,差异均无显著性(P>0.05);SCC在腺癌、鳞癌、小细胞癌的阳性率分别为19.23%、29.78%、17.65%.结论:6项肿瘤标志物对肺癌的检测都有一定意义,不同病理类型各有特点,选择合适的组合检测可以有利于肺癌的鉴别诊断.     

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.     

联合检测血清肿瘤标志物对大肠癌辅助诊断及预后研究

目的:探讨联合检测血清肿瘤标志物在大肠癌诊断和预后判断中的应用.方法:收集本院自2007年1月至2010年12月间收治的102例大肠癌患者,以50例同期健康体检者作为对照,分别检测其血清肿瘤标志物CEA、CA125、CA19-9和CA724的水平.观察肿瘤标志物水平与大肠癌患者临床病理特征的关系及联合检测对诊断敏感度和特异性的影响.结果:在大肠癌患者中,各肿瘤标志物的水平均显著高于对照组,且其水平高低与大肠癌的临床分期和肿瘤的分化程度密切相关.联合检测肿瘤标志物的水平可显著提高诊断的特异性和敏感度.结论:联合检测血清肿瘤标志物有助于大肠癌的诊断和判断患者的预后.     

血清CEA、CYFAR21-1、SCC、CA125水平对晚期非小细胞肺癌放疗疗效的评估价值

目的探讨血清肿瘤标志物水平对晚期非小细胞肺癌患者放疗疗效的评估价值。方法将晚期非小细胞肺癌患者共176例,分为观察组(近期放疗有效)和对照组(近期放疗无效),采用电化学发光法检测放疗前、后血清肿瘤CEA、CYFAR21-1、SCC、CA125水平。结果 176例患者放疗有效率为58.0%,观察组放疗前血清CEA、CYFAR21-1、SCC、CA125水平分别为(33.65±5.41)ng/ml、(19.44±3.14)ng/ml、(16.87±2.74)ng/ml、(46.81±5.49)U/ml,放疗后各项标志物水平分别为(25.13±4.65)ng/ml、(12.35±4.18)ng/ml、(11.77±3.04)ng/ml、(39.67±4.63)U/ml,均明显低于放疗前,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);对照组放疗前血清肿瘤标志物CEA、CYFAR21-1、SCC、CA125水平分别为(46.87±5.93)ng/ml、(28.63±10.82)ng/ml、(26.46±8.68)ng/ml、(68.16±7.38)U/ml,放疗后各项标志物水平分别为(52.17±5.49)ng/ml、(46.72±11.75)ng/ml、(38.74±63.48)ng/ml、(87.34±8.16)U/ml,均明显高于放疗前,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);观察组放疗前各项标志物水平均低于对照组,差异显著(P<0.05);对照组放疗后标志物水平降低患者的近期疗效明显好于放疗后血清肿瘤标志物水平升高者,差异有统计学意义(χ2=76.45,P<0.05)。结论肿瘤血清肿瘤标志物CEA、CYFAR21-1、SCC、CA125的水平对晚期非小细胞肺癌患者放疗疗效具有评估价值。     

血清CEA、CA153和CA125联合检测对肺癌的诊断价值

目的:探讨血清肿瘤标志物CEA、CA153和CA125单项和联合检测对肺癌的诊断价值.方法:采用化学发光方法分别检测75例肺癌患者、60例良性肺部疾病患者和70例健康对照者血清中CEA、CA153和CA125水平,并分析上述3项指标在肺癌诊断中的敏感度和特异性.结果:肺癌患者3项肿瘤标志物血清水平均高于良性肺部疾病患者和健康对照者,差异具有统计学意义(P＜0.Ol).3项标志物的联合检测诊断肺癌的敏感度高于单项标志物检测,其敏感度高达88％,特异性为76.2％.结论:3项肿瘤标志物联合检测可提高诊断肺癌的敏感度.     

大肠癌患者血清CEA、CA19-9、CA242联合测定的临床意义

目的探讨大肠癌患者血清CEA、CA19-9、CA242的检测对大肠癌诊断的临床应用价值。方法采用化学发光法对89例大肠癌患者血清CEA、CA19-9、CA242进行了检测。结果CEA、CA199、CA242联合检测阳性率为69.0%,明显高于各单项检测的阳性率(分别为53.6%、30.9%、51.2%,P<0、01),在Dukes A、B、C及D期中,3项肿瘤标志物含量及检测阳性率依次增高(P<0.05~0.01)。结论CEA、CA19-9、CA242可用于大肠癌的诊断、病情判断,联合检测可提高诊断阳性率及判断病情转归。     

新疆大肠癌与肿瘤标志物的相关性研究

目的探讨新疆大肠癌与肿瘤标志物的相关性。方法选取2013年7月至2016年7月间新疆医科大学第四附属医院收治的211例大肠癌患者的血清,采用电化学发光法测定血清中肿瘤标志物,分析不同性别、不同年龄、不同族别和不同部位以及发生肝转移前后肿瘤标志物的变化。分析单项检测和联合检测癌胚抗原(CEA)、CA125、CA724和CA153对大肠癌诊断的阳性率。结果女性患者血清中CA125水平较男性高,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。年龄≥70岁者血清中细胞角蛋白19片段(Cyfra21-1)的水平较<70岁者高,非汉族患者血清中CA153的水平较汉族高,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。大肠癌肝转移组患者血清中CA50、CEA、CA199和Cyfra21-1水平较未发生肝转移者高,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。联合检测多种肿瘤标志物可以提高检出阳性率,增加检测敏感性。结论肿瘤标志物可广泛用于肿瘤患者的早期诊断和预后判断,联合检测多种肿瘤标志物可提高敏感性,为大肠癌早期诊断提供依据。     

血清肿瘤标志物CEA、CA19-9对结直肠癌的诊断价值

目的 分析血清肿瘤标志物CEA、CA19-9单项或联合检测对结直肠癌患者的临床诊断价值,探讨其在病理分期、淋巴结转移等临床特征方面的意义.方法 酶联免疫法检测160例健康人和158例结直肠癌患者术前两天以及术后两周血清中CEA、CA19-9含量.结果 结直肠癌患者2种血清肿瘤标志物含量明显高于健康人(P<0.01),术前与术后2种血清肿瘤标志物水平比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).CEA、CA19-9联合检测敏感度和特异度明显高于各单项检测值.在Dukes A、B、C及D期中,2种肿瘤标志物含量及检测阳性率依次增高,淋巴结转移患者的CA19-9含量高于无淋巴结转移患者(P<0.05).结论 肿瘤标志物CEA、CA19-9联合检测可以提高结直肠癌诊断的敏感度和特异度,并对临床分期、判断淋巴结转移、预测预后及监测复发有一定的指导意义.     

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。     

Carcinoembryonic antigen and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels of peripheral and draining venous blood in colorectal cancer patients. Correlation with histopathologic and immunohistochemical variables

Correlation between carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 levels of peripheral and draining venous blood, and 11 histopathologic and immunohistochemical variables was examined in 83 patients with colorectal cancer. CEA levels of draining blood (mean 34.5 ng/ml and positive rate greater than 5 ng/ml, 60.2%) were significantly higher than those (13.0 ng/ml and 28.9%) of peripheral blood. However, CA19-9 levels (mean 576.1 U/ml and positive rate greater than 37 U/ml, 29.5%) of draining blood were not different from those (568.0 U/ml and 29.5%) of peripheral blood. Immunohistochemically, CEA was observed in all of the 83 specimens and distributed in most of all cancer cells, whereas CA19-9 was found in 52 (62.5%) of the 83 specimens and sporadically distributed in some parts of cancer lesions in general. Elevation of CEA levels in draining and peripheral blood was most highly correlated with venous invasion, although the levels were related to four other histopathologic variables including liver metastasis, invasive layer of colorectal wall, lymphatic invasion, and Dukes' classification. Significant correlation between the CEA localized pattern of cancer cells was not found. Patients with CA19-9 nonlocalized cancer showed no elevation of the antigen levels in both peripheral and draining blood. The elevation of CA19-9 levels in peripheral blood of patients with CA19-9 localized cancer was most highly associated with lymphatic invasion, although the levels were correlated with five other variables consisting of liver metastasis, tumor differentiation, invasive layer of colorectal wall, venous invasion, and Dukes' classification out of 11 histopathologic and immunohistochemical variables. CEA levels of draining blood rose from 18.2 ng/ml and 40.3% to 30.1 ng/ml and 72.6%, respectively, after operative stimuli to cancer lesions, whereas the change of CA19-9 levels in draining blood of patients with CA19-9 localized cancer was not found during the time of operation. These results suggest that CEA may be drained mainly by the hematogenous portal system by the draining vein from the cancer cells in the invasive veins and that CA19-9 may be drained by the thoracic duct of the lymphatic system. It is also suggested that the CEA and CA19-9 elevation-relating variables may secondarily affect the CEA and CA19-9 elevation in the blood in association with the venous and lymphatic invasion of cancer lesions, respectively.     

肿瘤标志物的联合检测在大肠癌诊断中的应用

目的探讨血清CEA、CA50、CA19-9、CA72-4、CA242等5项肿瘤标志物联合检测在大肠癌诊断中的应用价值。方法采用放免技术测定67例大肠癌2、3例大肠良性肿瘤患者和55例体检正常者血清CEA、CA50、CA19-9、CA72-4、CA242水平。结果大肠癌患者血清CEA、CA50、CA19-9、CA72-4、CA242水平及阳性率明显高于正常对照组及大肠良性肿瘤组(P<0.01)。结论CEA、CA50、CA19-9、CA72-4、CA242对大肠癌的诊断有临床意义,联合检测可提高肿瘤标志物对大肠癌的诊断准确性。     

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.     

Measurement of a pancreatic cancer-associated antigen (DU-PAN-2) detected by a monoclonal antibody in sera of patients with digestive cancers

DU-PAN-2 is a high-molecular-weight glycoprotein defined by a murine monoclonal antibody (MAb) against a pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma cell line. In order to evaluate the usefulness of this antigen as a tumor marker, we determined the serum level of the antigen by competitive inhibition radioimmunoassay in sera from 139 patients with various malignant tumors, chiefly digestive cancers, 98 patients with different benign diseases and 11 healthy subjects. Values in the healthy subjects were less than 100 U/ml. Levels above 100 U/ml were frequently observed in sera from benign diseases, but levels above 400 U/ml were found in only 6 of the patients with benign diseases. In contrast, levels exceeding 400 U/ml were detected in 72% of patients with pancreatic cancer, 44% of patients with hepatocellular cancer and 40% of patients with biliary tract cancer. The positivity was low in other cancers such as gastric cancer (19%) and colorectal cancer (7%). Serum levels of CEA and CA 19-9 were also determined in cancer patients. Among the pancreatic cancer patients studied, values above 400 U/ml were found in 5 of the 8 CEA-negative patients (less than 5 ng/ml) and 2 of the 3 CA 19-9 negative patients (less than 37 U/ml). These results indicate that determination of the serum DU-PAN-2 can aid in serological diagnosis of cancer of the digestive tract, more particularly of the pancreas.     

The prognostic significance of gastric juice CA 19-9 and CEA levels in gastric carcinoma patients

AIM: The usefulness of gastric juice CA 19-9 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels in the diagnosis of gastric carcinoma is controversial. There is only one study related with their prognostic value. In this study the clinical significance of gastric juice CA 19-9 and CEA levels in patients with gastric carcinoma was investigated. METHODS: Preoperative serum and gastric juice CA 19-9 and CEA concentrations were measured in 139 patients with gastric carcinoma, 54 patients with benign gastroduodenal disease and as the 'healthy' control group 46 patients with inguinal hernia and with no other pathology. RESULTS: In all groups the mean gastric juice levels of CA 19-9 and CEA were significantly higher than the serum levels. The gastric juice CA 19-9 levels were not different between groups. Gastric juice CEA levels of the gastric carcinoma group were significantly higher than those of the benign gastroduodenal disease group (P=0.007) and had a tendency to increase when compared to those of the control group (P=0.064) whereas there was no significant difference between the benign gastroduodenal disease and the control group. The cut-off values of gastric juice CA 19-9 and CEA were 440U/ml and 320ng/ml and the positivity ratios of these markers in gastric carcinoma patients were 16.5 and 27.3%, respectively. There was no significant relationship between the histopathological features and the gastric juice CA 19-9 or CEA positivities. Neither univariate analysis nor the multivariate Cox proportional hazards model analysis showed prognostic value for gastric juice CA 19-9 and CEA positivities. CONCLUSIONS: The gastric juice CA 19-9 and CEA levels have no diagnostic and prognostic significance in gastric carcinoma patients.     

Prognostic study of preoperative serum levels of CEA and CA 19-9 in colorectal cancer

PURPOSE: Carcinoembrionic Antigen (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9) are the most frequently used tumor markers in the clinical setting of colorectal cancer. The aim of this study is to evaluate the prognostic value of preoperative serum levels of CEA and CA 19-9 in colorectal cancer patients. METHODS: Serum levels of CEA and CA 19-9 were examined in 586 patients with colorectal cancer. Cut-off levels were calculated at reference value:<2.5 ng/mL (group A) versus >2.5 ng/mL (group B) for CEA and, <37 U/mL (group A) versus >37 U/mL (group B) for CA 19-9. RESULTS: According to tumor progression, each marker tended to show a higher level. Group A showed a significantly better prognosis than group B in both CEA and CA 19-9. In Dukes classification A, B and C, only CEA showed a better prognosis in group A than group B. At the time of recurrence compared to the pre-operative point, the CEA and CA 19-9 levels were significantly higher in both group A and B, however. In relation to the necessity of adjuvant chemotherapy (5-FU containing regimen) in Dukes A, the cases without adjuvant chemotherapy in group B of CEA showed a poor prognosis. CONCLUSION: The measurement of preoperative serum CEA and CA 19-9 is useful for prognostic prediction in colorectal cancer. Cut-off levels calculated at the reference value reflect the prognosis in this study. Especially, preoperative CEA reveals a potential high risk group in Dukes A which should be carefully treated by adjuvant chemotherapy to avoid recurrence.     

A clinical evaluation of carbohydrate antigen 19-9 and carcinoembryonic antigen in patients with pancreatic carcinoma

We have studied serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9) and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in 221 persons to assess their usefulness in the diagnosis of pancreatic carcinoma. Although serum CA 19-9 and CEA in all healthy controls were within normal limits, the positive ratings of serum CA 19-9 and CEA in all benign disease were 9.8% and 18.1%, respectively. Sensitivity of serum CA 19-9 for pancreatic carcinoma was 70.5%, which was higher than that found in healthy controls, benign disease, and other malignant disease except biliary carcinoma; but sensitivity of serum CEA levels (67.7%) was not different from that seen in malignant disease. Three of 34 patients (8.8%) with pancreatic carcinoma who had a above-normal levels of serum CA 19-9 but not serum CEA were resectable. Although there was no correlation between serum CA 19-9 and CEA, advanced stages of pancreatic, gastric, and colorectal carcinoma tend to show high serum CA 19-9 and CEA, but no statistical differences were observed in relation to the stages of these carcinomas. Comparative studies of serum CA 19-9 and CEA for sensitivity and the predictive value of true positive and negative results for detecting pancreatic, gastric, and colorectal carcinoma showed that serum CA 19-9 has significantly higher sensitivity and predictive value of true positive results for pancreatic carcinoma than for gastric and colorectal carcinoma (P less than 0.05). However, serum CEA measurements did not show any difference between these carcinomas, and the highest predictive value of a true negative result for excluding pancreatic carcinoma was also observed in serum CA 19-9. These results indicate that although the CA 19-9 assay is not specific for pancreatic carcinoma, it is more useful adjunct method for diagnosing pancreatic carcinoma, possibly in resectable stages.     

大肠癌患者血清糖链抗原CA50水平及其临床意义

目的研究大肠癌患者血清糖链抗原C A50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/m l)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。