腺苷脱氨酶与癌胚抗原在恶性胸腔积液的诊断价值

测定了３８例恶性胸腔积液及３４例结核性胸水的腺苷脱氨酶（ＡＤＡ）与癌胚抗原（ＣＥＡ）在胸水、血清中水平及胸水／血清值。结果恶性组胸水ＡＤＡ值明显低于结核组（Ｐ＜０．０００５），ＡＤＡ胸水／血清值低于结核组（Ｐ＜０．０００５）；恶性组胸水ＣＥＡ水平明显高于结核组（Ｐ＜０．０００５），ＣＥＡ胸水／血清值恶性组亦明显高于结核组（Ｐ＜０．０５）。胸水ＡＤＡ水平对诊断恶性胸腔积液的敏感性为９６．１５％，符异性９１．６７％；ＣＥＡ的敏感住７０．８３％，特异性为８７．５０％。综合分析胸水的ＡＤＡ、ＣＥＡ水平及胸水／血清值，有助于对恶性胸腔积液的诊断。     

榄香烯乳及顺铂治疗肺癌所致双胸腔积液的临床对比观察

为对比顺铂（ＤＤＰ）与榄香烯乳（Ｌｘ）在治疗肺癌所致恶性胸腔积液的效果。１９９５年１２月至１９９７年１２月收治肺癌所致恶性双侧胸腔积液１７例，左侧注入ＤＤＰ，右侧注入Ｌｘ。结果表明：有效率左侧胸腔５８％，右侧９４％（Ｐ＜０．０５）。右侧胸膜增厚明显高于左侧（Ｐ＜０．０５）。结论是Ｌｘ治疗肺癌所致恶性胸腔积液效果好于ＤＤＰ，胸膜增厚与疗效有关。     

联合检测p53,ras,c—myc癌基因蛋白对恶性胸腔积液诊断价值的研究

目的：为了早期、快速、准确地诊断恶性胸腔积液。方法：用免疫组织化学ＡＢＣ法联合检测了２７例恶性胸腔积液和良性胸腔积液细胞中的ｐ５３、ｒａｓ、ｃ－ｍｙｃ癌基因蛋白的表达水平，恶性胸腔积液同时还与常用的四种诊断方法包括乳酸脱氢酶、癌胚抗原、细胞学、胸膜活检相对照。结果：恶性胸腔积液上述三种癌基因蛋白联合表达的敏感性为８５．３％，特异性为１００％，明显高于常用方法，而良性胸腔积液上述三种癌基因蛋白均为阴性表达。结论：联合检测上述三种癌基因蛋白为诊断恶性胸腔积液提供一条新的可靠途径。     

胸腔镜检查对少见疑难恶性胸腔积液的诊断价值

目的评价胸腔镜检查对少见疑难恶性胸腔积液的诊断价值.方法对5例经常规检查病因未明的可疑恶性胸腔积液者进行胸腔镜检查.结果发现胸膜多处结节或菜花样肿物,于胸膜病变处活检,病理确诊为胸膜转移性滑膜肉瘤、恶性纤维肉瘤、恶性组织细胞病各1例,恶性黑色素瘤2例.结论结果表明胸腔镜检查对少见疑难恶性胸腔积液是一种准确有效的诊断手段.     

MAGE基因mRNA在良、恶性胸腔积液中的表达

背景与目的MAGE基因是肿瘤特异性基因。本研究的目的是探讨检测MAGE基因诊断良、恶性胸腔积液的可能性。方法采用RT-PCR方法，检测MAGE-1、-2、-3、-4基因mRNA在40例良、恶性胸腔积液中的表达。结果18例良性胸腔积液中MAGE表达均为阴性。在22例恶性胸腔积液患者中，8例瘤细胞学检查阳性的胸腔积液标本中MAGE表达均为阳性（8／8）；14例胸腔积液查瘤细胞阴性但胸膜活检为阳性者中，11例胸腔积液和胸膜活检标本中MAGE均表达为阳性，另外3例胸腔积液和胸膜活检标本中MAGE均为阴性。结论检测胸腔积液中MAGE基因mRNA的表达，可成为鉴别诊断良、恶性胸腔积液的有效方法之一。     

胸腔镜检查对少见疑难恶性胸腔积液的诊断价值

目的：评价胞腔镜检查对少见疑难恶性胸腔积液的诊断价值。方法：对５例经常规检查病因未明的可疑恶性胸腔积液者进行胸腔镜检查。结果：发现胸膜多处结节或菜花样肿物,于胸膜病变处活检,病理确诊为胸膜转移性滑膜肉瘤、恶性纤维肉瘤、恶性组织细胞病各１例,恶性黑色素瘤２例。结论：结果表明胸腔镜检查对少见疑难恶性胸腔积液是一种准确有效的诊断手段。     

流式细胞技术在胃镜活检组织诊断中的应用价值

应用流式细胞仪（ＦＣＭ）对６２例临床常规胃镜活检组织进行检测，建立了常规胃锐活检组织的ＦＣＭ检测诊断标准，分为ＦＣＭ检测阳性（＋）、可疑（±）及正常（－）三级。慢性萎缩性胃炎及异型增生组中ＦＣＭ阳性率为２２％（４／１８），可疑为３３％（６／１８）．胃癌组中ＦＣＭ阳性检出率为７０％（１４／２０），２４例基本正常胃粘膜（包括浅表性胃炎）组均为二倍体ＤＮＡ。我们认为，ＦＣＭ可疑及阳性可能为重要的癌变标志，ＦＣＭ检测可用于胃癌前病变的动态观察。     

胸水肿瘤标志物测定的临床诊断价值

［目的］观察胸水中肿瘤标志物测定值对临床诊断的价值。［方法］分别测定４６例胸腔积液患者的血清与胸水肿瘤标志物（ＣＥＡ、ＮＳＥ、 ＣＡ２４２、 ＣＹＦＲＡ２１－１）含量,其中癌性积液２８例,良性积液１８例。［结果］发现胸水中肿瘤标志物含量明显高于血清水平;ＣＥＡ、ＮＥＳ、ＣＡ２４２三者联合应用在胸水中敏感性高达９２．８％,特异性９６．２％,而血清中相应为７５．１％,８７．５％;ＣＹＦＲＡ２１－１在良性组中虽阳性率较高,但数值明显低于癌性积液组（Ｐ＜０．０１）。［结论］测定胸水肿瘤标志物对恶性积液的诊断具有临床应用价值。     

电视胸腔镜诊治恶性胸腔积液18例报告

[目的]评价电视胸腔镜手术（VATS）在恶性胸腔积液诊治中的应用价值,［方法］18例恶性胸腔积液患者行胸腔镜胸膜活检和滑石粉胸膜固定术,术后加低负压胸腔引流。［结果］18例均获病理确诊,其中恶性胸膜间皮瘤2例,乳腺癌胸膜转移6例,肺癌胸膜转移8例,卵巢癌和胃癌胸膜转移各1例。胸膜固定成功16例;失败2例,其原因为肺癌伴有肺不张。［结论］VATS可以大大提高恶性胸腔积液的确诊率和胸膜固定术的效果,术后低负压胸腔引流有利于胸腔粘连形成,缩短引流时间。     

胸膜活检对肺癌恶性胸腔积液的诊断价值

目的 评价经皮穿刺胸膜活检在肺癌恶性胸腔积液中的诊断价值.方法 回顾性分析采用 Cope针胸膜活检的70例肺癌合并恶性胸腔积液患者的资料,了解其诊断阳性率及相应的并发症.结果 70例患者经胸膜活检共确诊肺癌胸膜转移26例,阳性率37.1%.发生胸膜反应2例(2.9%),轻度出血8例(11.4%),少量气胸10例(14.3%).结论 胸膜活检操作方便、安全、有效,对肺癌恶性胸腔积液的诊断具有较高的应用价值.     

Evaluation of pleural CYFRA 21-1 and carcinoembryonic antigen in the diagnosis of malignant pleural effusions.

CYFRA 21-1 assay, measuring cytokeratin 19 fragments, was compared with carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) assay, as an addition to cytological analysis for the diagnosis of malignant effusions. Both markers were determined with commercial enzyme immunoassays in pleural fluid from 196 patients. Cytological analysis and/or pleural biopsy confirmed the malignant origin of the effusion in 99 patients (76 carcinomas, nine pleural mesotheliomas and 14 non-epithelial malignancies). Effusions were confirmed as benign in 97 patients (33 cardiac failures, 39 infectious diseases--including 12 tuberculosis-- and 25 miscellaneous effusions). Both markers were significantly higher in malignant than in benign effusions. All the patients with non-epithelial malignancies presented CYFRA and CEA values lower than the 95% diagnostic specificity thresholds (100 and 6 ng ml(-1) respectively). The diagnostic sensitivity in the group of carcinomas and mesotheliomas was similar for CYFRA (58.8%) and CEA (64.7%). However, CEA had a significantly higher sensitivity in carcinomas (72.4% vs 55.3%), while CYFRA had a clearly higher sensitivity in mesotheliomas (89.9% vs 0%). Interestingly, 12 out of the 16 malignant effusions with a negative cytology were CEA and/or CYFRA positive. Regarding their high diagnostic sensitivity and their complementarity, CEA and CYFRA appear to be very useful for the diagnosis of malignant pleural effusions when cytology is negative.     

胸腔积液中肿瘤坏死因子、癌胚抗原和神经元特异性烯醇化酶的检测及诊断价值研究

目的探讨检测胸水中肿瘤坏死因子（TNF-α）、癌胚抗原（CEA）和神经元特异性烯醇化酶（NSE）对胸腔积液的诊断价值。方法采用电化学发光酶免疫分析法检测59例结核性胸水和48例肺癌性胸水患者胸水中TNF-α、CEA和NSE水平。结果结核性胸水中TNF-α水平显著高于肺癌性胸水（P〈0.05）。肺癌性胸水中CEA和NSE明显高于结核性胸水（P〈0.01）。肺腺癌胸水中CEA升高最明显,非小细胞肺癌胸水中NSE升高最显著。联合检测CEA及NSE,诊断敏感度92.0%,准确度86.3%。结论检测TNF-α、CEA和NSE对结核性胸水和肺癌性胸水的诊断及鉴别诊断有较高的临床价值,联合检测胸水CEA和NSE可提高肺癌诊断敏感度。     

Evaluation of seven tumour markers in pleural fluid for the diagnosis of malignant effusions

Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), carbohydrate antigens 15-3, 19-9 and 72-4 (CA 15-3, CA 19-9 and CA 72-4), cytokeratin 19 fragments (CYFRA 21-1), neuron-specific enolase (NSE) and squamous cell carcinoma antigen (SCC) were evaluated in pleural fluid for the diagnosis of malignant effusions. With a specificity of 99%, determined in a series of 121 benign effusions, the best individual diagnostic sensitivities in the whole series of 215 malignant effusions or in the subgroup of adenocarcinomas were observed with CEA, CA 15-3 and CA 72-4. As expected, a high sensitivity was obtained with SCC in squamous cell carcinomas and with NSE in small-cell lung carcinomas. CYFRA and/or CA 15-3 were frequently increased in mesotheliomas. Discriminant analysis showed that the optimal combination for diagnosis of non-lymphomatous malignant effusions was CEA + CA 15-3 + CYFRA + NSE: sensitivity of 94.4% with an overall specificity of 95%. In malignant effusions with a negative cytology, 83.9% were diagnosed using this association. The association CYFRA + NSE + SCC was able to discriminate adenocarcinomas from small-cell lung cancers. Regarding their sensitivity and their complementarity, CEA, CA 15-3, CYFRA 21-1, NSE and SCC appear to be very useful to improve the diagnosis of malignant pleural effusions.     

肿瘤标志物对癌性胸腔积液诊断的价值

目的探讨肿瘤标志物在癌性胸腔积液诊断中的价值。方法应用免疫放射分析法对108例癌性胸腔积液和90例良性胸腔积液的CYFRA21-1、CEA、NSE和CA153含量进行检测,并对结果进行比较分析。结果癌性胸腔积液中四种肿瘤标志物指标明显高于良性组(P<0.01),四项联检后的敏感性、特异性及准确性明显升高。结论肿瘤标志物CYFRA21-1、CEA、NSE和CA153四项联检在癌性胸腔积液的诊断中具有明确的意义。     

流式细胞仪DNA倍体分析用于良恶性胸腔积液的鉴别诊断

流式细胞术是近年来应用较广泛的一种现代细胞分析技术.研究显示,流式细胞术DNA倍体分析可以在92%的实体肿瘤上检测到DNA异倍体的存在.因此也被用到了恶性胸腔积液的诊断中.本文回顾了现有流式细胞术DNA倍体分析用于恶性胸腔积液诊断的研究,评估其临床可行性.     

DNA倍体联合肿瘤标志物检测在胸腔积液诊断中的应用

目的探讨DNA倍体分析联合肿瘤标志物在良、恶性胸腔积液诊断中的价值。方法将108例胸腔积液分为恶性组（68例）和良性组（40例）。除常规细胞学检查外,以流式细胞术（flowcytometry,FCM）检测患者胸腔积液中的DNA倍体,采用化学发光法测定胸腔积液中CEA、CA199、NSE、CYFRA211、SCC、CA125等肿瘤标志物含量。比较DNA倍体联合肿瘤标志物诊断与细胞学诊断的优劣。结果DNA倍体诊断恶性胸腔积液的敏感性、特异性分别为70．6％、95．0％,Youden’s指数为0．656,敏感度稍高于细胞学诊断的65．1％,差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。除NSE外,其他5种肿瘤标志物在恶性胸腔积液中浓度均高于良性,差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。CYFRA211、CEA、CAl99、CAl25、SCC、NSE的AUC分别为：0．893,0．828,0．759,0．691,0．524及0．490;COV分别为：149．2ng／mL,53．6ng／mL,78．2IU／mL,1559．0IU／mL,48．72ng／mL及78．3ng／mL;敏感性分别为：44．1％,44．1％,35．3％,29．4％,13．2％,5．9％,特异性均为100％。4种肿瘤标志物联合检测＋DNA倍体检测的敏感性为88．2％（60／68）,特异性95％,显著高于细胞学诊断。结论DNA倍体联合CEA、CA199、CYFRA211和CA125检测诊断恶性胸腔积液有较高敏感性,具有定量、快速、价廉、易标准化的特点,且操作简单。     

肺癌单克隆抗体检测良,恶性胸腔积液的评价

为了评价肺癌单克隆抗体检测良恶性胸腔积液的诊断与鉴别诊断价值，同步采集临床上明确诊断的６３例良恶性胸腔积液患者的胸水和血清，以及１０例正常人的血清，进行肺癌单抗金标免疫斑点渗透法的检测，并与癌胚抗原的检测比较。结果显示：恶性胸腔积液组肺癌单抗金标免疫斑点渗透法和癌胚抗原的阳性率明显高于良性胸腔积液组及正常组（Ｐ＜０．０１），而且肺癌单抗金标免疫斑点渗透法检测的阳性率高于癌胚抗原。在恶性胸腔积液中，肺癌单抗金标免疫斑点渗透法的灵敏度和特异度分别为６５．１％和１００．０％，癌胚抗原的灵敏度和特异度分别为５３．５％和９５．０％，两项指标联合检测的灵敏度和特异度分别为７６．７％和９５．０％。说明肺癌单抗金标免疫斑点渗透法对良恶性胸腔积液有鉴别诊断价值，而且优于癌胚抗原；两项指标联合检测可以提高对恶性胸腔积液的诊断符合率。     

联合检测EGFR、CEA对恶性胸腔积液的诊断价值

目的:评价联合检测胸腔积液患者的胸水细胞块表皮生长因子受体（epidermal growth factor receptor,EGFR）基因拷贝数,以及胸水、血清CEA水平对良恶性胸腔积液鉴别诊断的价值。方法:应用荧光原位杂交技术（Fish法）检测恶性胸腔积液（n=35）、良性胸腔积液（n=30)组患者胸水细胞块EGFR基因拷贝数水平。采用电化学发光全自动生化分析仪检测胸水及血清中CEA水平,根据受试者工作特性曲线（ROC）选取最佳灵敏性和特异性的点作为临界值,评价CEA及联合检测EGFR基因拷贝数对良恶性胸腔积液的诊断价值。结果:35例恶性胸腔积液完成Fish检测。恶性胸腔积液中15例阴性,20例阳性,阳性率为57.1％。其中13例为EGFR基因高度多体性,7例为EGFR基因扩增。肺腺癌16例中,EGFR基因高度多体性、扩增14例,肺腺癌扩增率为87.5％;肺鳞癌14例中,EGFR基因簇状扩增3例(21.4％),点状扩增3例(21.4％),无扩增8例(57.1％),肺鳞癌扩增率为42.9％。腺癌Fish阳性率(87.5％)高于鳞癌(42.9％）,P<0．01。30例良性胸腔积液中有1例脓胸患者EGFR Fish检测阳性,阳性率为3.3%,余检测结果均阴性。恶性胸腔积液患者胸水及血清CEA分别为（220.9±71.65）ng/ml、(18.11±11.38）ng/ml,显著高于良性胸腔积液组（2.31±1.29)ng/ml、(1.67±1.06）ng/ml,差异有统计学意义（P<0.01）。其中,恶性胸腔积液胸水CEA明显高于血清CEA,而良性胸腔积液组中,胸水CEA与血清CEA无明显差异。肺腺癌所致胸水及血清CEA分别为（441.02±102.65)ng/ml、(32.87±28.66）ng/ml,鳞癌所致胸水及血清CEA分别为（28.75±21.39）ng/ml、（5.99±5.32）ng/ml,腺癌显著高于鳞癌,差异有统计学意义（P<0.01）。比较胸水EGFR、CEA对良恶性胸腔积液诊断的效能,两者之间无明显差异（P=0.453＞0.05）。Spearman相关性分析胸水EGFR同CEA之间存在显著正相关。结论:EGFR在恶性胸腔积液的形成中起重要作用,通过Fish技术检测胸水细胞块EGFR基因拷贝数可行,其敏感性为57.1%。对肺腺癌导致恶性胸腔积液的诊断敏感性为87.5%。CEA（临界值5.0ng/ml）在恶性胸腔积液及血清中显著高于良性,其中胸水CEA检测诊断敏感性为65.7%,而在腺癌中为87.5%,其在胸水及血清中的比值＞1.5有助于恶性胸腔积液的诊断。EGFR基因突变阳性与肿瘤标记物CEA阳性表达呈正相关,尤见于肺腺癌患者,两者联合检测可提高诊断性试验的准确性。     

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。     

Diagnostic value of metabolic phenotypes in malignant pleural effusions: expression of GLUT1 and CAIX by immunocytochemistry

BACKGROUND:

The sensitivity of conventional cytology for the detection of malignant cells in pleural effusion is insufficient. GLUT1 and CAIX are the hallmarks of metabolic change in cancer cells. The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of GLUT1 and CAIX expression to the detection of cancer cells in pleural effusions.

METHODS:

A total of 150 pleural effusions were subjected to immunocytochemical staining for GLUT1 and CAIX expression. According to their cytological diagnosis and etiology, these included 58 benign effusions, 38 probable malignant effusions, 7 atypical effusions, and 47 malignant effusions,.

RESULTS:

None of the benign effusions showed GLUT1 or CAIX expression, but probable malignant effusions and malignant effusions significantly expressed GLUT1 and CAIX with a positive result in 74.5% and 63.8% of the malignant effusions, respectively, with 100% specificity. When the combination of both markers was evaluated, GLUT1 and CAIX displayed a higher diagnostic performance, ie, a sensitivity of 76.6%, specificity of 100%, and accuracy of 89.5%. A statistically significant positive correlation between GLUT1 and CAIX expression was observed. In addition, 18% of cases with cells resembling mesothelial cell hyperplasia in probable malignant effusions and 71.4% of cases with atypical cells of uncertain significance in atypical effusions were highlighted on GLUT1 or/and CAIX immunocytochemical stains.

CONCLUSIONS:

Immunocytochemical staining for GLUT1 and CAIX may be a complementary tool for the detection of malignant pleural effusions and is helpful in distinguishing cancer cells from reactive mesothelial cells. A combination of GLUT1 and CAIX immunocytochemical staining can give a higher diagnostic performance. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 2011;. © 2011 American Cancer Society.