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.     

Markers in breast cancer: Does CEA add to the detection by CA 15.3?

211 patients with various stages of breast cancer were studied by both the CA 15.3 and CEA markers to assess whether the latter may increase the screening sensitivity of the former. While both markers were equally specific, CA 15.3 was seen to be much more sensitive than CEA (p<0.0001). Also, the addition of the CEA did not add appreciably (7%) to positive detection by CA 15.3. There appears to be no advantage to including CEA in a marker panel to follow the course of breast carcinoma.     

端粒酶与癌胚抗原联合测定鉴别良恶性胸腔积液

目的:探讨联合检测肿瘤标记物端粒酶、癌胚抗原(CEA)对良恶性胸腔积液的诊断价值。方法:用聚合酶联免疫吸附分析法(PCR-ELISA)检测胸液端粒酶活性,用放射免疫分析法(EIA)测定胸液CEA水平,共检测了26例恶性胸腔积液和32例非恶性胸腔积液。结果:恶性胸腔积液组的胸液端粒酶和CEA的阳性率分别为88%和69%。非恶性胸腔积液的端粒酶和CEA的假阳性率分别为6%和13%。端粒酶活性测定诊断恶性胸腔积液的灵敏度为89%,特异度94%,CEA诊断的灵敏度69%,特异度为88%。结论:检测胸液端粒酶和CEA对鉴别良恶性胸腔积液的诊断均有一定的价值,端粒酶检测恶性胸腔积液的灵敏度和特异度较CEA均高,联合检测综合诊断更能提高诊断准确率。     

端粒酶与癌胚抗原联合测定鉴别良恶性胸腔积液

目的：探讨联合检测肿瘤标记物端粒酶、癌胚抗原（CEA）对良恶性胸腔积液的诊断价值。方法：用聚合酶联免疫吸附分析法（PCR-ELISA）检测胸液端粒酶活性,用放射免疫分析法（EIA）测定胸液CEA水平,共检测了26例恶性胸腔积液和32例非恶性胸腔积液。结果：恶性胸腔积液组的胸液端粒酶和CEA的阳性率分别为88%和69%。非恶性胸腔积液的端粒酶和CEA的假阳性率分别为6%和13%。端粒酶活性测定诊断恶性胸腔积液的灵敏度为89%,特异度94%,CEA诊断的灵敏度69%,特异度为88%。结论：检测胸液端粒酶和CEA对鉴别良恶性胸腔积液的诊断均有一定的价值,端粒酶检测恶性胸腔积液的灵敏度和特异度较CEA均高,联合检测综合诊断更能提高诊断准确率。     

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.     

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.     

肿瘤标志物联合检测在良恶性胸腔积液鉴别诊断中的价值

 目的　探讨胸腔积液4种肿瘤标志物联合检测在良恶性胸腔积液鉴别诊断中的价值。方法　采用电化学发光免疫法检测126例胸腔积液患者（其中恶性组52例,良性组74例）癌胚抗原（CEA）、糖类抗原125（CA125）、糖类抗原15-3（CA15-3）和细胞角蛋白片段19（CYFRA21-1）水平, 并计算上述指标单独和与CEA联合检测在诊断中的敏感度、特异度、准确度和约登指数（YI）。结果　恶性组4种肿瘤标志物水平均明显高于良性组（P＜0.01）。单项检测各种肿瘤标志物的敏感度以CA125最高（90.4 %）,特异度以CYFRA21-1最高（79.7 %）,诊断准确度以CEA和CYFRA21-1最高（71.4 %）,YI以CEA最高（0.41）。联合检测较单项检测敏感度、准确度和YI明显提高,其中CEA、CYFRA21-1和CA15-3三项联合效果最好,敏感度为92.3 %,特异度为78.4 %,准确度为84.1 %,YI值最高为0.71。四项联合敏感度为94.2 %,特异度为75.7 %,准确度为83.3 %,YI值为0.70,与三项联合结果相比差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论　单项检测的诊断价值有限,CEA、CYFRA21-1和CA15-3三项联合效果最好、最经济,可指导患者恰当选择进一步的侵入性检查手段。     

血清CA199与CEA检测对结直肠癌的诊断价值

目的:研究肿瘤相关糖类抗原199(CA199)与癌胚抗原(CEA)检测对结直肠癌的诊断价值.方法:采用电化学发光方法检测44例结直肠癌患者与19例正常人血清中CA199与CEA的水平并进行统计学分析.结果:结直肠癌患者血清中CA199和CEA水平明显高于正常对照组良性对照组(P＜0.05);治疗后CA199与CEA含量与治疗前相比显著降低(P＜0.05).结论:CA199与CEA检测结对结直肠癌临床诊断与疗效评价有一定的意义.     

检测糖链抗原CA242对恶性胸液的诊断价值

目的 评价新型肿瘤标记物糖链抗原(CA242),以及联合检测CA242、组织多肽抗原（TPA）、神经元特异性烯醇化酶（NSE）和癌胚抗原（CEA）对诊断肺癌合并胸腔积液的临床价值。方法 应用ELISA法对57例肺癌合并胸腔积液及30例结核性胸膜炎患者血清及胸液进行检测。结果 肺癌患者血清及胸液四项肿瘤标志物平均浓度均高于结核性胸膜炎（P＜0．01）。血清及胸液CA242对诊断肺癌胸腔积液敏感性分别为53．6％（31／57）、61．4％（35／57），肺腺癌为65．7％（23／36）、66．7％（24／36）、特异性90．0％（27／30）。联合检测二项及二项以上阳性者。血清及胸液诊断肺癌特异性分别为96．7％（29／30）、100．0％（30／30），敏感性分别为75．4％（43／57）、77．2％（44／57）。结论 检测血清及胸液CA242有助于诊断肺癌合并胸腔积液，四项标志物联合检测可以显著提高肺癌合并胸腔积液诊断的敏感性和特异性。     

肿瘤标志物CEA、CA153、SCC、Cy211联合检测对胸腔积液鉴别诊断的意义

目的　探讨肿瘤标志物联合检测在良、恶性胸腔积液鉴别诊断中的临床意义。方法　采集有胸腔积液患者的血清及胸水样本各 79例 ,其中恶性胸腔积液患者 35例 ,良性胸腔积液患者 4 4例 ,用免疫放射法检测其血清及胸水CEA、CA15 3、SCC和CY2 11的含量。结果　恶性胸水组血清CEA、CA15 3、SCC和CY2 11的阳性率分别为 5 8.82 %、70 .5 9%、9.0 9%和 5 4 .2 0 % ,胸水CEA、CA15 3、SCC和CY2 11的阳性率分别为 75 .76 %、70 .6 7%、2 5 .93%和 96 .6 7% ,其中 ,肿瘤标志物CEA、CA15 3和CY2 11血清及胸水的阳性率明显高于良性胸腔积液组 (P <0 .0 2 ) ;两组含量的检测亦得出相似的结果。联合检测血清CA15 3 CY2 11,其诊断恶性胸腔积液的敏感度为 94 .2 8% ,特异度为 76 .93%。结论　肿瘤标志物CEA、CA15 3和CY2 11的联合检测 ,对胸腔积液的鉴别诊断有较好的临床价值 ,联合方式以CA15 3 CY2 11为佳。     

CEA,AFP, CA125, CA153 and CA199 in Malignant Pleural Effusions Predict the Cause

Determination of the cause of malignant pleural effusions is important for treatment and management,especially in cases of unknown primaries. There are limited biomarkers available for prediction of the cause ofmalignant pleural effusion in clinical practice. Hence, we evaluated pleural levels of five tumor biomarkers (CEA,AFP, CA125, CA153 and CA199) in predicting the cause of malignant pleural effusion in a retrospective study.Kruskal-Wallis or Mann-Whitney U tests were carried out to compare levels of tumor markers in pleural effusionamong different forms of neoplasia - lung squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, or small cell carcinoma,mesothelioma, breast cancer, lymphoma/leukemia and miscellaneous. Receiver operator characteristic analysiswas performed to evaluate sensitivity and specificity of biomarkers. The Kruskal-Wallis test showed significantdifferences in levels of pleural effusion CEA (P<0.01), AFP (P<0.01), CA153 (P<0.01) and CA199 (P<0.01), butnot CA125 (P>0.05), among the seven groups. Receiver operator characteristic analysis showed that, comparedwith other four tumor markers, CA153 was the best biomarker in diagnosing malignant pleural effusions of lungadenocarcinoma (area under curve (AUC): 0.838 (95%confidence interval: 0.787, 0.888); cut-off value: 10.2U/ml; sensitivity: 73.2% (64.4-80.8)%, specificity: 85.2% (77.8-90.8)%), lung squamous cell carcinoma (AUC:0.716 (0.652, 0.780); cut-off value: 14.2U/ml; sensitivity: 57.6% (50.7-64.3)%, specificity: 91.2% (76.3-98.0)%),and small-cell lung cancer (AUC: 0.812 (0.740, 0.884); cut-off value: 9.7U/ml; sensitivity: 61.5% (55.0-67.8)%,specificity: 94.1% (71.2-99.0)%); CEA was the best biomarker in diagnosing MPEs of mesothelioma (AUC:0.726 (0.593, 0.858); cut-off value: 1.43ng/ml; sensitivity: 83.7% (78.3-88.2)%, specificity: 61.1% (35.8-82.6)%)and lymphoma/leukemia (AUC: 0.923 (0.872, 0.974); cut-off value: 1.71ng/ml; sensitivity: 82.8% (77.4-87.3)%,specificity: 92.3% (63.9-98.7)%). Thus CA153 and CEA appear to be good biomarkers in diagnosing differentcauses of malignant pleural effusion. Our findings implied that the two tumor markers may improve the diagnosisand treatment for effusions of unknown primaries.     

血清CA199与CEA检测对结直肠癌的诊断价值

目的：研究肿瘤相关糖类抗原199（CA199）与癌胚抗原（CEA）检测对结直肠癌的诊断价值。方法：采用电化学发光方法检测44例结直肠癌患者与19例正常人血清中CA199与CEA的水平并进行统计学分析。结果：结直肠癌患者血清中CA199和CEA水平明显高于正常对照组良性对照组（P〈0．05）;治疗后CA199与CEA含量与治疗前相比显著降低（P〈0．05）。结论：CA199与CEA检测结对结直肠癌临床诊断与疗效评价有一定的意义。     

CEA,CA19—9,CA50联合检测对胃肠道肿瘤的诊断价值

采用放射免疫法检测４１例胃肠恶性肿瘤和２０名健康人血清癌胚抗原（ＣＥＡ），糖链抗原（ＣＡ１９－９、ＣＡ５０）含量，并与癌组织学分类、有无淋巴结转移对比分析。结果显示：胃肠肿瘤ＣＥＡ、ＣＡ１９－９、ＣＡ５０值明显高于对照组（Ｐ〈０．０１）。胃癌伴肝、胰转移时ＣＡ１９－９增高尤其显著，胃癌ＣＡ５０值高于大肠癌（Ｐ〈０．０５）。胃肠肿瘤淋巴结转移者三项指标检出率较无转移者高，但差异无显著性。病理分类中胃     

Diagnostic value of tumor markers for differentiating malignant and benign pleural effusions of Iranian patients

In order to evaluate the diagnostic yield of tumor markers in differentiating malignant and benign pleural effusions, we carried out a prospective study in a group of Iranian people. Pleural and serum levels of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), carbohydrate antigen 15-3 (CA15-3), neuron-specific enolase (NSE) and cancer antigen 125 (CA 125) were assayed prospectively in patients with pleural effusion (40 malignant and 37 benign). The highest sensitivity was obtained with a combination of CA 15-3 in serum, and CA 15-3 and CEA in pleural fluid (80%), also with combination of CA 15-3 in serum, and CA 15-3, NSE and CEA in pleural fluid (80%). The highest specificity was obtained with combination of CA 15-3 in serum, and CA 15-3 and NSE in pleural fluid (100%), and also with combination of CA 15-3 in serum, and CA 15-3, NSE and CEA in pleural fluid (100%).     

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.     

肺腺癌患者胸腔积液中CEA和CA199的表达及意义

目的 :探讨癌胚抗原 (CEA)及癌抗原 199(CA199)对肺腺癌诊断的应用价值。方法 :采用电化学发光法对 5 0例肺腺癌患者的胸腔积液、血清及 5 0例非肺腺癌患者的胸腔积液进行了免疫蛋白定量分析。结果 :肺腺癌组胸腔积液内CEA及CA199水平明显高于非肺腺癌组水平 ,P <0 0 1;肺腺癌组胸腔积液中CEA及CA199水平明显高于血清中水平 ,P <0 0 5 ;CEA与CA199联合检测为最佳组合 ,其敏感性和特异性均高达 96 0 %。结论 :检测肺腺癌胸腔积液中CEA及CA199水平对肺腺癌的诊断具有重要的临床意义     

Use of serial carcinoembryonic antigen and CA 15.3 assays in detecting relapses in breast cancer patients

Summary To evaluate the utility of CEA and CA 15.3 for early diagnosis of recurrence, serial serum determinations of both antigens were performed in 1023 patients (follow-up: 1–10 years, mean 6.2 years) with primary breast cancer (CA 15.3 in 533 cases) and no evidence of residual disease (NED) after radical treatment (radical mastectomy or simple mastectomy and radiotherapy). 246 patients developed metastases during follow-up.Results: CEA and CA 15.3 were elevated (> 10 ng/ml or > 60 U/ml, respectively) prior to diagnosis in 40% (98/246) and 41% (37/91) of the patients with recurrence, with a lead time of 4.9 ± 2.2 and 4.2 ± 2.3 months, respectively. When patients with locoregional recurrences were excluded, sensitivity improved to 46% (CEA) and 54% (CA 15.3), and to 64% with both tumor markers (CEA and/or CA 15.3). Higher levels of both CEA and CA 15.3 at diagnosis of recurrence, higher sensitivity in early diagnosis of relapse, and a higher lead time were found in ER+ (CEA) or PgR+ patients (CA 15.3) than in those that were negative for these receptors in the primary tumor (p < 0.001). Specificity of the tumor markers was 99% for both CEA (777 NED patients) and for CA 15.3 (444 NED patients), respectively. In conclusion, CEA and CA 15.3 are useful tools for early diagnosis of metastases, mainly in those patients with ER+ or PR+ tumors.     

检测胸水中CEA、CA125、CA153及CA199对肺癌的诊断价值

目的　探讨检测胸水中癌胚抗原 (CEA)、癌抗原 12 5 (CA12 5 )、癌抗原 15 3 (CA15 3 )及癌抗原 199(CA199)在肺癌诊断中的应用价值。方法　采用化学发光法对 5 2例肺癌患者的胸水、血清及 5 0例非肺癌患者的胸水进行了免疫蛋白定量分析。结果　肺癌组胸水内 4项标志物水平均明显高于非肺癌组水平 (P <0 .0 1或P <0 .0 5 ) ;肺癌组胸水中 4项标志物水平明显高于血清中水平 (P <0 .0 1或P <0 .0 5 ) ;CEA与CA199联合检测其敏感性和特异性高达 96.2 %和 96.0 %。结论　检测胸水中CEA、CA12 5、CA15 3及CA199对肺癌的诊断具有重要的临床意义 ,其中CEA与CA199联合检测为最佳组合     

Applicative Value of Serum CA19-9, CEA,CA125 and CA242 in Diagnosis and Prognosis for Patients with Pancreatic Cancer Treated by Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy

Objective: To evaluate the application value of serum CA19-9, CEA, CA125 and CA242 in diagnosis andprognosis of pancreatic cancer cases treated with concurrent chemotherapy. Materials and Methods: 52patients with pancreatic cancer, 40 with benign pancreatic diseases and 40 healthy people were selected. Theelectrochemiluminescence immunoassay method was used for detecting levels of CA19-9, CEA and CA125, anda CanAg CA242 enzyme linked immunoassay kit for assessing the level of CA242. The Kaplan-Meier methodwas used for analyzing the prognostic factors of patients with pancreatic cancer. The Cox proportional hazardmodel was applied for analyzing the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidential interval (CI) for survival timeof patients with pancreatic cancer. Results: The levels of serum CA19-9, CEA, CA125 and CA242 in patientswith pancreatic cancer were significantly higher than those in patients with benign pancreatic diseases andhealthy people (P<0.001). The sensitivity of CA19-9 was the highest among these, followed by CA242, CA125and CEA. The specificity of CA242 is the highest, followed by CA125, CEA and CA19-9. The sensitivity andspecificity of joint detection of serum CA19-9, CEA, CA125and CA242 were 90.4% and 93.8%, obviouslyhigher than single detection of those markers in diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. The median survival time of52 patients with pancreatic cancer was 10 months (95% CI7.389~12.611).. Patients with the increasing level ofserum CA19-9, CEA, CA125, CA242 had shorter survival times (P=0.047. 0.043, 0.0041, 0.029). COX regressionanalysis showed that CA19-9 was an independent prognostic factor for patients with pancreatic cancer (P=0.001,95%CI 2.591~38.243). Conclusions: The detection of serum tumor markers (CA19.9, CEA, CA125 and CA242)is conducive to the early diagnosis of pancreatic cancer and joint detection of tumor markers helps improve thediagnostic efficiency. Moreover, CA19-9 is an independent prognostic factor for patients with pancreatic cancer.