首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     

常用血清肿瘤标志物在可手术肺癌患者预后中的价值
引用本文:李少雷,马媛媛,雄英,张善渊,黄淼,杨跃. 常用血清肿瘤标志物在可手术肺癌患者预后中的价值[J]. 肿瘤防治研究, 2018, 45(1): 24-28. DOI: 10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2018.17.0854
作者姓名:李少雷  马媛媛  雄英  张善渊  黄淼  杨跃
作者单位:100142 北京,北京大学肿瘤医院暨北京市肿瘤防治研究所胸外二科,恶性肿瘤发病机制及转化研究教育部重点实验室
基金项目:北京大学“临床医院合作专项”;首都卫生发展科研专项(2014-2-1201);北京市医管局临床医学发展专项“扬帆”计划(ZYLX201509)
摘    要: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。

关 键 词:肿瘤标志物  非小细胞肺癌  CEA  CA125  CA199  CYFRA21-1  
收稿时间:2017-07-17

Role of Serum Tumor Markers in Prognosis of Operable Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Patients
LI Shaolei,MA Yuanyuan,XIONG Ying,ZHANG Shanyuan,HUANG Miao,YANG Yue. Role of Serum Tumor Markers in Prognosis of Operable Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Patients[J]. Cancer Research on Prevention and Treatment, 2018, 45(1): 24-28. DOI: 10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2018.17.0854
Authors:LI Shaolei  MA Yuanyuan  XIONG Ying  ZHANG Shanyuan  HUANG Miao  YANG Yue
Affiliation:Department of Thoracic Surgery Ⅱ, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing 100142, China
Abstract:Objective To evaluate the prognostic value of CEA, CA125, CA199, NSE, CYFRA21-1 and SCCAg as serum tumor markers on the diagnosis of operable non-small cell lung cancer(NSCLC) after radical operation. Methods We reviewed 1851 consecutive NSCLC patients who underwent radical resection from January 2005 to December 2014. We used analysis of variance (ANOVA) to analyze the associations between tumor markers and pathological stage. Survival probability was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to identify independent prognostic factors. Results The positive rates of CEA, CA125, CA199, CYFRA21-1 and SCC-Ag in stage Ⅱ and Ⅲ NSCLC were higher than those in stage Ⅰ(P<0.001), but there was not significant difference among different stages for NSE (P=0.743). The overall survival in negative group of CEA, CA125, CA199 and CYFRA21-1 were better than those in positive group respectively (P<0.05), but the survival in positive group of NSE was better than that in negative group (P=0.033). SCC-Ag negative group had longer survival time than SCC-Ag positive group, without statistically significant difference (P=0.072). 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), CYFRA21-1 (HR=1.445, 95%CI: 1.044-2.000, P=0.027) were detected to be independent risk factors for the prognosis of NSCLC patients. Conclusion CEA, CA125 and CYFRA21-1 play an important role prior to CA199, NSE and SCC-Ag in predicting severity and prognosis of NSCLC patients.
Keywords:Tumor marker  NSCLC  CEA  CA125  CA199  CYFRA21-1  
点击此处可从《肿瘤防治研究》浏览原始摘要信息
点击此处可从《肿瘤防治研究》下载免费的PDF全文
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号