血清肿瘤标志物在肺癌诊断中的应用价值*

目的:探讨SCC 、NSE、CEA 、CYFRA21-1 四项肿瘤标志物联合检测对肺癌的诊断价值。方法:采用化学发光法对肺癌组132 例、肺良性疾病组48例和正常对照组92例的血清SCC 、NSE 、CEA 、CYFRA21-1 四项肿瘤标志物进行检测及统计学分析。结果:NSE 、CEA 、CYFRA21-1 在肺癌组显著高于肺良性疾病组和正常对照组,SCC 肺癌组高于正常对照组,CEA 和CYFRA21-1肺良性疾病组显著高于正常对照组。CEA 在肺腺癌中的水平较高,NSE 在小细胞肺癌中的水平较高,而SCC 、CYFRA21-1 在肺鳞癌中的水平较高。单项肿瘤标志物在肺癌诊断中敏感性:NSE>CEA>CYFRA 21-1>SCC;在腺癌中CEA 敏感性最高（58.8%）,鳞癌中CYFRA21-1 敏感性最高（71.4%）,小细胞肺癌中NSE 敏感性最高（50.0%）。 NSE 、CEA 、CYFRA21-1 的ROC 曲线下面积分别为0.928 ± 0.034、0.957 ± 0.026、0.964 ± 0.023,显示诊断准确性较高。SCC 曲线下面积虽然大于0.5,但差异无统计学意义。肿瘤标志物联合检测,可以提高诊断试验的敏感性,在肺癌诊断中NSE 、CEA 、CYFRA21-1 组合敏感性最高（75.6%）,特异性也较好（90.7%）;腺癌诊断中SCC 、NSE 、CEA 组合敏感性最高（73.5%）,鳞癌诊断中NSE 、CEA 、CYFRA21-1 组合敏感性最高（75.8%）,小细胞肺癌中SCC 、NSE 、CYFRA21-1 组合敏感性最高（75.0%）。 结论:SCC 、NSE 、CEA 、CYFRA21-1 对肺癌的诊断均有一定意义,不同病理类型各有特点,选择合适的组合有利于对肺癌的鉴别诊断。      

原发性肺癌患者外周血肿瘤标记物联合检测的临床意义

目的探讨外周血CEA、CYFRA21-1、NSE联合检测对原发性肺癌的诊断、病理分型、分期和疗效判断的临床应用价值。方法采用放射免疫技术,检测72例原发性肺癌患者化学治疗前后、38例良性肺部疾病患者及30例健康人血清CEA、CYFRA21-1、NSE水平。结果肺癌组治疗前CEA、CYFRA21-1、NSE水平显著高于良性肺部疾病组及正常对照组(P均<0.01),且不同病理类型肺癌3种肿瘤标记物的水平有显著性差异。3种肿瘤标记物联合检测与各单项指标检测比较,对肺癌诊断的敏感性显著增高(P<0.01),肺癌NSE检出阳性率最高(63.9%),但特异性有所下降。肺癌组化疗有效者3种肿瘤标记物水平显著下降,病情稳定和进展者三者水平无变化或升高。结论血清CEA、CYFRA21-1、NSE联合检测用于肺癌的诊断有较好的临床参考价值,并有助于肺癌病理类型的评估,亦可作为肺癌病情监测和疗效判断方面有价值的指标。     

Cross-Sectional Study to Establish the Utility of Serum Tumor Markers in the Diagnosis of Lung Cancer

Background: Reliable blood markers for aiding lung cancer (LC) diagnosis and differentiating LC from tuberculosis are lacking in India. Methodology: In this single-centre, cross-sectional, real-world study, serum levels of 5 TMs (CEA, CYFRA 21-1, SCC, ProGRP, NSE) were measured from consented patients with suspicious lung nodules who were candidates for biopsy, and also from healthy controls. TM level measurement was done through electrochemiluminescent immunoassay, followed by histological diagnosis on the biopsied specimen. Using package insert cut-offs, sensitivity and specificity of the 5 TMs were evaluated individually and in combination. Using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of individual TMs, the ability of CEA, CYFRA 21-1, and ProGRP taken together was evaluated for its ability to differentiate LC from no-LC. Results: Out of 178 subjects, 160 had LC (147 NSCLC; 13 SCLC). NSCLC patients had higher median values of CYFRA 21-1 and SCC; SCLC patients had higher median values of CEA, NSE, and ProGRP. Adenocarcinoma-NSCLC patients had higher median values of CEA, CYFRA 21-1, NSE, and ProGRP; squamous-NSCLC patients had higher median value of SCC. For differentiating LC from no-LC, the combination of all 5 TMs (sensitivity:97.5%, specificity:33.3%) and combination of CEA, CYFRA 21-1 and ProGRP (sensitivity:91.3%, specificity:88.9%) were found suitable. Conclusion: Combination of all 5 TMs, and combination of CEA, CYFRA 21-1, and ProGRP represents an easy and non-invasive method for aid in LC diagnosis that does not require technical expertise. TM evaluation can also supplement histological diagnosis of LC.     

血清肿瘤标志物检测在肺癌中的临床价值

目的研究肺癌患者血清癌胚抗原(carcinoembryonic antigen,CEA)、神经元特异性烯醇化酶(neuron-spe-cific enolase,NSE)、细胞角蛋白19片段(cytokeratin 19 fragments,CYFRA21-1)水平与肺癌分期、近期疗效的关系。方法5例确诊为肺癌的患者均完成4个周期化疗,化疗前后常规检查血清CEA、NSE、CYFRA21-1,评估其变化。结果 5例患者中血清肿瘤标志物表达阳性者占61.8%,其中小细胞肺癌(SCLC)为69.2%,非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)为59.5%;血清CEA、NSE、CYFRA21-1表达阳性率:SCLC分别为30.8%、69.2%及7.7%;NSCLC分别为52.4%、14.3%及54.8%。CEA、NSE、CYFRA21-1表达阳性率SCLC广泛期高于局限期,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);NSCLCⅢB期与Ⅳ期各组间比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。化疗后血清肿瘤标志物表达水平变化与近期疗效相关。结论血清肿瘤标志物CEA、NSE及CYFRA21-1与肺癌分期、近期疗效有关。肺癌晚期肿瘤标志物表达水平增高,化疗有效率明显下降。     

常用血清肿瘤标志物在可手术肺癌患者预后中的价值

目的 探讨血清CEA、CA125、CA199、NSE、CYFRA21-1和SCC-Ag水平在评估非小细胞肺癌根治手术后的预后价值,以期合理选择术前的检验指标。方法 收集1 851例行肺癌根治手术的患者术前血清肿瘤标志物的检验值、临床病理和随访信息,进行差异及生存分析。结果 CEA、CA125、CA199、CYFRA21-1和SCC-Ag的阳性率在不同病理分期中差异有统计学意义（P<0.001）,Ⅱ和Ⅲ期的患者阳性率明显高于Ⅰ期患者,而NSE差异无统计学意义（P=0.743）。CEA、CA125、CA199、CYFRA21-1阴性组患者的生存率显著高于阳性组（P<0.05）。NSE阴性的患者远期生存率劣于阳性组患者（P=0.033）。SCC-Ag阳性与阴性患者的远期生存率差异无统计学意义（P=0.072）。Cox回归比例风险模型分析发现CEA（HR=1.572, 95%CI: 1.117~2.214, P=0.010）、CA125（HR=2.464, 95%CI:1.610~3.772, P<0.001）和CYFRA21-1（HR=1.445, 95%CI: 1.044~2.000, P=0.027）是评价非小细胞肺癌手术预后的独立危险因素。结论 CEA、CA125和CYFRA21-1在评价非小细胞肺癌手术预后方面有良好的应用价值,而CA199、NSE和SCC-Ag等指标价值有限。     

CEA、CYFRA21-1和NSE在肺癌化疗中的临床意义

[目的]评价癌胚抗原(CEA)、细胞角蛋白19片段(CYFRA21-1)、神经元特异性烯醇化酶(NSE)3项肿瘤标志物在肺癌不同病理类型及治疗前后的表达意义。[方法]用电化学发光法分别测定246例肺癌,其中腺癌108例、鳞癌70例以及68例小细胞未分化肺癌(SCLC)患者化疗前后血清CEA、CYFRA21-1和NSE的水平。[结果]3项肿瘤标志物在肺癌不同病理类型中比较均有差异,其中腺癌CEA水平均高于其他类型(P<0.01),鳞癌CYFRA21-1水平高于其他类型(P<0.01),小细胞肺癌NSE水平高于其他类型(P<0.01)。治疗有效的肺癌患者治疗后3项标志物水平均明显下降,而治疗无效者治疗前后均无明显变化或升高。[结论]3项肿瘤标志物水平在腺癌、鳞癌及小细胞肺癌检测中均明显升高,在治疗有效组化疗后显著下降,提示此三种指标的测定有助于肺癌预后评估和疗效判定。     

Clinical Utility of Haptoglobin in Combination with CEA,NSE and CYFRA21-1 for Diagnosis of Lung Cancer

Purpose: To investigate the clinical value in lung cancer of a combination of four serum tumor markers,haptoglobin (Hp), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), neuron specific enolase (NSE) as well as the cytokeratin 19fragment (CYFRA21-1). Materials and Methods: Serum Hp (with immune-turbidimetric method), CEA, NSE,CYFRA21-1 (with chemiluminescence method) level were assessed in 193 patients with lung cancer, 87 patientswith benign lung disease and 150 healthy controls. Differences of expression were compared among groups,and joint effects of these tumor markers for the diagnosis of lung cancer were analyzed. Results: Serum tumormarker levels in patients with lung cancer were obviously higher than those with benign lung disease and normalcontrols (p<0.01). The sensitivities of Hp, CEA, NSE and CYFRA21-1 were 43.5%, 40.9%, 23.3% and 41.5%,with specificities of 90.7%, 99.2%, 97.9% and 97.9%. Four tumor markers combined together could produce apositive detection rate of 85.0%, significantly higher than that of any single test. With squamous carcinomas, thepositive detection rates with Hp and CYFRA21-1 were higher than that of other markers. In the adenocarcinomacase , the positive detection rate of CEA was higher than that of other markers. For small cell carcinomas, thepositive detection rate of NSE was highest. The area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCROC) ofHp in squamous carcinoma (0.805) was higher than in adenocarcinoma (0.664) and small cell carcinoma (0.665).Conclusions: Hp can be used as a new serum tumor marker for lung cancer. Combination detection of Hp, CEA,NSE and CYFRA21-1 could significantly improve the sensitivity and specificity in diagnosis of lung cancer, andcould be useful for pathological typing.     

The Application Value of Serum HE4 in the Diagnosis of Lung Cancer

Background: To investigate the clinical value of HE4 detection in the diagnosis of lung cancer and the clinicalsignificance of combined detection with CEA, NSE and CYFRA21-1. Methods: 90 cases of lung cancer, 30 cases ofpulmonary tuberculosis, 30 cases of pneumonia and 30 cases of health physical examination were selected. The levelsof serum HE4, CYFRA21-1, CEA and NSE were detected by electrochemiluminescence method. Statistical analysis wasperformed to observe the sensitivity and specificity. Results: The levels of serum HE4, CEA, NSE and CYFRA21-1 inlung cancer group were significantly higher than those in tuberculosis group and health physical examination group.There was no significant difference in the levels of HE4, CEA and NSE between the lung cancer group and the pneumoniagroup, the difference of CYFRA21-1 level was statistically significant (p<0.05).With health physical examinationgroup as normal controls, the sensitivity and specificity of combined detection of HE4, CEA, NSE and CYFRA21-1 inthe diagnosis of lung cancer were 82.2% and 90.0%,and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.907, followed by HE4(0.867), CYFRA21-1 (0.787), CEA (0.752) and NSE (0.747). Conclusion: HE4 can be used as a serological marker forthe diagnosis of lung cancer. The combined detection of HE4, CEA, NSE and CYFRA21-1 can improve the diagnosis oflung cancer. Serum HE4 levels are highly specific in distinguishing between lung cancer patients and normal population,and are equivalent to CYFRA21-1; but they are less specific than CYFRA21-1 in distinguishing lung cancer patientsfrom pneumonia patients.     

肺癌患者胸水中肿瘤标志物检测的临床意义

[目的]探讨肺癌患者胸水中肿瘤标志物的检测在临床上的应用价值。[方法]应用酶联免疫吸附实验（ELISA）检测170例肺癌患者和58例肺部良性疾病患者胸水中神经元特异性烯醇化酶（NSE）、胃泌素释放肽前体（pro-GRP）、细胞角蛋白19（CYFRA21-1）、鳞癌抗原（SCC）、p53抗体和CA199的水平含量。[结果]肺癌患者胸水的6种肿瘤标志物水平均明显高于肺部良性疾病组,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.01）。NSE、pro-GRP在小细胞肺癌中的水平明显高于其他类型的肺癌（P〈0.01）;CYFRA21-1、鳞癌抗原（SCC）在鳞癌中的水平明显高于其他类型的肺癌（P〈0.01）。[结论]胸水中6种肿瘤标志物对于肺癌的辅助诊断有一定的临床意义。     

血清NSE、CYFRA21-1、CEA联合检测对肺癌临床诊断的价值

[目的]探讨血清神经元特异性烯醇化酶(NSE)、细胞角蛋白19片(CYFRA21-1)、癌胚抗原(CEA)水平在各种病理类型肺癌诊断中的价值.[方法]测定68例肺癌(腺癌24例、鳞癌34例、小细胞癌10例)患者NSE、CYFRA21-1、CEA水平,并与16例肺结核、22例肺部感染患者比较.[结果] NSE、CYFRA21-1、CEA分别在小细胞肺癌组(SCLC)、鳞癌组、腺癌组中最高,NSE和CEA与其他组均有显著性差异(P＜0.01);CYFRA21-1在腺癌组其次,鳞癌组与腺癌组之间有差异((P＜0.05),与其他组相比有显著差异(P＜0.01),但腺癌组与其他组无差异(P＞0.05);单项检测中CYFRA21-1、CEA的敏感度及准确度均高于NSE(P＜0.01).三项联合检测敏感度最高,而两两联合、CYFRA21-1与CEA之间均无差异.三项联合和CYFRA21-1 CEA两两联合的准确度高于其他,NSE CYFRA21-1、NSE CEA两两联合、CYFRA21-1和CEA之间均无差异.不论单项还是联合检测特异度均无差异(P＜0.05).[结论]血清NSE、CYFRA21-1、CEA对肺癌诊断有较高的临床参考价值,并有助于肺癌的病理类型评估.三项联合检测可提高检测肺癌的敏感度和准确度,并不降低特异度,特别为临床无法做病理学检查的患者的诊断提供依据.     

NSE、CYFRA21-1、CA125、CA19-9、CEA联合检测在抑郁症伴肺癌诊断中的价值

目的 探讨NSE、CYFRA21-1、CA125、CA19-9和CEA在抑郁症伴肺癌患者诊断中的价值.方法 选择2010年12月至2015年12月收治的抑郁症伴肺癌的患者46例纳入A组,收集同期单纯肺癌患者50例纳入B组和健康体检者50例纳入C组.检测入选者血清NSE、CYFRA21-1、CA125、CA19-9和CEA浓度.采用17项汉密顿抑郁量表(HAMD)对抑郁症患者进行评定.结果 A组和B组患者血清NSE、CYFRA21-1、CA125、CA19-9和CEA浓度均显著高于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).A组与B组比较,血清NSE、CYFRA21-1、CA125、CA19-9和CEA浓度无统计学差异(P＞0.05).小细胞肺癌患者中血清NSE的浓度显著升高(P＜0.05);鳞癌患者中血清CYFRA21-1浓度显著升高(P＜0.05);腺癌患者中血清CA125浓度显著升高(P＜0.05).5种肿瘤标志物诊断抑郁症伴肺癌敏感度由高到低依次为NSE (0.652)、CA125 (0.598)、CYFRA21-1(0.549)、CEA (0.530)和CA19-9(0.437);特异度由高到低依次为CY-FRA21-1 (0.838)、NSE (0.820)、CA19-9 (0.819)、CA125 (0.718)和CEA(0.659).联合检测的曲线下面积(AUC)为0.826,显著高于任何一种单一标志物(P＜0.05).结论 抑郁症伴肺癌患者血清NSE的浓度与抑郁症的严重程度正相关,联合NSE、CYFRA21-1、CA125、CA19-9和CEA能显著提高抑郁症伴肺癌患者的检出率.     

CEA、CYFRA21-1及NSE在肺癌化疗前后的表达意义

目的 探讨CEA、CYFRA21-1及NSE在肺癌化疗前后的表达水平.方法 选取146例肺癌患者作为研究对象,检测不同组织学分型患者CEA、CYFRA21-1、NSE的表达水平及阳性率,并对其化疗前后的变化规律进行分析.结果 腺癌、鳞癌、小细胞未分化癌组织间3项指标均存在显著性差异(P＜0.05);其中腺癌组CEA水平高于鳞癌、小细胞未分化癌组,鳞癌组CYFRA21-1含量最高,小细胞未分化癌组NSE水平显著高于其他两组,差异均具有统计学意义(P＜0.05).腺癌组CEA阳性率为49.3％,显著高于其他两组(P＜0.05);鳞癌组CYFRA21-1阳性率为68.8％,与其他两组相比存在显著性差异(P＜0.05);小细胞未分化癌组NSE阳性率为84.6％,高于其他两组,差异具有统计学意义(P＜0.05).腺癌PR+ CR组化疗后CEA水平较化疗前显著降低(P＜0.05);鳞癌PR+ CR组化疗后CYFRA21-1水平较化疗前显著下降(P＜0.05);小细胞未分化癌PR+ CR组化疗后NSE水平显著下降(P＜0.05);各病理类型NC+ PD组3项肿瘤标志物水平化疗前后均未见显著变化(P＞0.05).结论 CEA、CYFRA21-1、NSE在肺癌不同组织学类型组织中表达具有显著差异,3种肿瘤标志物可作为评价疗效、判断预后的重要指标.     

血清肿瘤标志物联合检测对肺癌的诊断价值

目的：探讨血清中神经元特异性烯醇化酶（NSE）、细胞角蛋白19片段（CYFRA21-1）和糖类抗原19-9（CA19-9）的水平变化对肺癌的诊断价值。方法：采用化学发光法对125例肺癌患者、80例肺良性疾病患者和80例健康人血清中的NSE、CYFRA21-1和CA19-9含量进行检测及比较。结果：肺癌组的三种血清肿瘤标志物水平均明显高于肺良性疾病患者组和正常对照组,差异均有统计学意义（P〈0.05）,其中NSE在小细胞肺癌中呈高表达,明显高于鳞癌与腺癌（P〈0.01）,CYFRA21-1在鳞癌中水平明显高于腺癌与小细胞肺癌（P〈0.01）,CA19-9在腺癌中水平明显高于其他类型肺癌（P〈0.01）。三种肿瘤标志物联合检测阳性率高达84.8%,高于单项检测。结论：三项肿瘤标志物联合检测可提高肺癌诊断的灵敏度和准确度,同时为肺癌病理分型的鉴别诊断提供依据。     

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NSE TSGF CA125 CYFRA21-1联合检测对肺癌的诊断价值

目的探讨血清NSE，CYFRA21-1，CA125，和TSGF联合检测对肺癌的诊断价值。方法应用ELISA技术，测定74例肺癌患者、40例肺良性疾病患者和20例体检正常者血清NSE、CYFRA21-1、CA125、TSGF的水平。结果肺癌组的4种标志物NSE、CYFRA21-1、CA125、TSGF的水平及检测阳性率均明显高于良性肺病及正常对照组（P〈0．01）。鳞癌、腺癌和小细胞肺癌分别以NSE、CYFRA21-1、CA125、TSGF升幅较为明显。NSE、CYFRA21-1、CA125、TSGF的灵敏度分别为47．3％、54．0％、59．46％、55．4％。但4种联合检测的灵敏度为91．89％，明显优于1种血清肿瘤标志物的单项测定。结论血清NSE、CYFRA21-1、CA125、TSGF联合检测提高肺癌的阳性检出率和检测特异性，对肺癌的早期诊断、疗效监测、预后判断有重要意义。     

结直肠癌患者血清肿瘤标志物水平与临床病理学特征的关系

目的: 探讨结直肠癌患者手术前血清中肿瘤标志物CEA、CA199、CA242与临床生理病理特征的关系。 方法: ELISA法检测602例结直肠癌患者血清中CEA、CA199、CA242水平。 结果: 1)结直肠癌患者血清中CEA、CA199、CA242水平与性别、年龄、病理类型之间均无密切关系。2)结肠癌患者血清中CEA水平(23.29±7.64)μg/ml、CA199水平(43.11±6.85)U/ml和CA242水平(40.27±6.13)U/ml明显高于直肠癌患者(11.13±1.99)μg/ml、(34.43±3.36)U/ml、(26.06±2.29)U/ml,均P<0.001。3)淋巴结转移的结直肠癌患者CA199水平(47.10±5.04)U/ml和CA242水平(37.70±3.89)U/ml高于无淋巴结转移者(22.38±2.57)U/ml、(18.99±2.15)U/ml均P<0.001。4)远隔脏器转移的结直肠癌患者CEA水平(30.72±3.61)μg/ml、CA199水平(92.22±12.20)U/ml、CA242水平(68.08±7.85)U/ml高于无转移者(9.83±1.62)μg/ml、(26.95±2.27)U/ml、(21.80±1.80)U/ml,均P<0.001。5)Duck’s分期不同,结直肠癌患者CEA、CA199、CA242水平也有差异。随着期别的变化,CEA、CA199、CA242水平也明显升高,P<0.005～<;0.001。6)浸润程度不同,CEA、CA199、CA242水平存在差异,浸全层达浆膜外的患者CEA、CA199、CA24水平明显高于浸全层、浸深肌层和浸浅肌层的患者,P<0.05～<0.005;而三者之间无统计学差异。7)CEA与生长类型无密切相关,只有浸润型的患者,血清中CA199、CA242水平明显高于溃疡型、蕈伞型和缩管型,P<0.05～<0.01。8)肿瘤大小与血清中CEA水平无关;随着肿瘤体积的增大,血清中CA199、CA242水平明显升高。P<0.002～<0.001。9)结直肠癌患者血清中CEA与CA199、CA242之间存在正相关(分别为r=0.189,r=0.194),P<0.01;CA199与CA242之间的相关系数r=0.884,P<0.001。 结论: 1)结直肠患者血清中CEA、CA199、CA242水平与肿瘤的部位和远处转移存在密切相关;2)血清中CA199、CA242水平与结直肠癌患者的各种生理及病理特征存在更加密切关系;3)血清中CEA、CA199、CA242存在正相关,是监测结直肠癌患者病情的最佳组合。     

Preliminary Evaluation of the New Tumor Marker, CYFRA 21-1, in Lung Cancer Patients

Serum samples from 137 lung cancer patients were examined byRIA to evaluate the clinical efficacy of the new tumor marker,CYFRA 21-1, which could identify the soluble fragment of cytokeratin19. The cut-off value was determined to be 2.2 ng/ml accordingto the receiver operating characteristic curve. The sensitivity,specificity and accuracy of the RIA for CYFRA 21-1 were 57.7,91.9 and 64.9%, respectively. The serum concentration of CYFRA21-1 and the sensitivity of the assay increased as the diseaseprogressed. Histologically, the sensitivity was highest forsquamous cell carcinomas (SQ) (76.5%) in comparison with adenocarcinomas(47.8%) and small cell lung cancers (42.1%) (P<0.01, P<0.05,respectively). The sensitivities for SQ were 60.0, 83.3, 80.0and 100% at stages I, II, III and IV, respectively. When comparedwith CEA (45.3%) and squamous cell carcinoma related antigen(SCC) (22.6%) in all lung carcinomas, CYFRA 21-1 showed thehighest sensitivity (57.7%), (P<0.05, P<0.01, respectively).In SQ, the sensitivity of the CYFRA 21-1 RIA was significantlyhigher than that of the assay for SCC (47.1%) (P<0.05). Inpatients with adenocarcinomas, the sensitivity of the CYFRA21-1 assay was almost the same as that for CEA (49.3%). In acombination of CYFRA 21-1 and CEA for non-small cell lung cancers(NSCLQ, the sensitivity and accuracy increased to 75.4 and 78.1%,respectively, although the specificity decreased to 86.5%. Itis concluded that CYFRA 21-1 could replace SCC, a less satisfactorytumor marker, for SQ of the lung. The potentiality of the combinationof CYFRA 21-1 and CEA for NSCLC should be estimated using largersamples in the near future     

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.     

肿瘤标志物联检在肺癌诊断中的意义

目的 探讨联合检测血清多项肿瘤标志物在肺癌诊断中的意义.方法 检测96例肺癌,46例良性肺病和58例健康人血清CEA、CA125、NSE和CYFRA21-1的水平.结果 肺癌组血清CEA、CA125、NSE和CYFRA21-1水平显著高于良性肺病组及健康对照组(P<0.01),肺腺癌血清CEA、CA125明显高于肺鳞癌和小细胞肺癌(P<0.05);小细胞肺癌血清NSE明显高于肺腺癌和肺鳞癌(P<0.01);肺鳞癌血清CYFRA21-1明显高于肺腺癌和小细胞肺癌(P<0.05);4项联合检测的灵敏性、准确性均高于单项检测结果.结论 联合检测患者血清CEA、CA1205、NSE和CYFRA21-1有利于肺癌的诊断.     

血清肿瘤标志物联合检测在肺癌临床诊断中的价值

目的 探讨多种血清肿瘤标志物联合检测在肺癌临床诊断中的价值.方法 采用电化学发光法检测肺癌组、肺良性疾病组及正常对照组患者血清肿瘤标志物.结果 肺癌组所有血清肿瘤标志物含量均高于肺良性疾病组和正常对照组;血清中CEA、NSE、CYFRA21-1水平分别在腺癌、小细胞肺癌、鳞癌中最高.结论 多种血清肿瘤标志物联合检测可提...