CA19-9及CA72-4联合检测在胰腺癌诊断中的应用价值

目的:探究联合检测血清糖类抗原(CA)19-9和CA72-4水平在胰腺癌诊断中的应用价值。方法:回顾性选取我院2016年1月～2017年12月收治的72例胰腺癌患者作为胰腺癌组,以同期住院的68例良性胰腺病患者作为良性胰腺疾病组,同时纳入67例健康体检者作为对照组。检测三组人群血清CA19-9和CA72-4水平,采用受试者工作特征曲线(ROC曲线)及曲线下面积(AUC)分析评估各单项检测指标及联合检测指标对胰腺癌特异性诊断的价值。结果:胰腺癌组患者血清CA19-9和CA72-4水平分别为(137.69±25.32)U/mL和(6.96±1.25)U/mL,显著高于良性胰腺疾病组和对照组(P0.05)。血清CA19-9和CA72-4联合检测诊断胰腺癌的ROC曲线AUC高于其单独检测(P0.05),CA19-9和CA72-4的最佳临界值分别为86.94 U/m L和4.23 U/m L,此时联合检测诊断胰腺癌的敏感性为94.7%,特异性为95.2%。结论:联合检测血清CA19-9和CA72-4诊断胰腺癌的临床价值明显优于其单独检测。     

血清CEA、CA19-9、CYFRA21-1与结直肠腺癌的相关性分析

目的:探究血清癌胚抗原(carcinoembryonic antigen,CEA)、糖类抗原19-9、细胞角蛋白19片段(cytokeratin19 fragements,CYFRA21-1)与结直肠腺癌的病理相关性。方法:选择于我院接受治疗的80例结直肠腺癌患者为病例组,选择同期于我院接受治疗的50例良性结直肠病变患者为良性对照组,选择我院体格检查的50例健康个体为对照组,分别采集三组个体的血样并进行CEA、CA19-9以及CYFRA21-1水平的检测,并比对三组个体上述因子阳性表达率、因子水平,同时分析三种因子同结直肠腺癌患者TNM分期相关性,最后探究三种因子对结直肠腺癌的诊断价值。结果:(1)以CEA≥2.805μg/L、CA19-9≥39 U/m L、CYFR21-1≥3.3 ng/mL为临界值,结果显示病例组CEA阳性率51.25%,CA19-9阳性率31.25%,CYFR21-1阳性率40.00%,明显高于良性组的10.00%、20.00%和10.00%,高于对照组的8.00%、12.00%和2.00%(P<0.05);(2)比较显示病例组患者的CEA、CA19-9以及CYFR21-1水平明显高于良性对照组以及对照组(P<0.05),良性对照组CEA、CA19-9以及CYFR21-1水平明显高于对照组(P<0.05);(3)比较显示IV期结直肠腺癌患者CEA、CA19-9以及CYFRA21-1水平明显高于III期以及I+II期(P<0.05),III期三种因子水平明显高于I+II期(P<0.05);(4)CEA对结直肠腺癌诊断一致性71.25%,灵敏度65.00%,特异度90.00%;CA19-9诊断一致性46.25%,灵敏度35.00%,特异度80.00%;CYFRA21-1诊断一致性55.00%,灵敏度46.67%,特异度80.00%;联合诊断一致性95.00%,灵敏度95.00%,特异度95.00%。结论:血清CEA、CA19-9以及CYFRA21-1对结直肠腺癌具有较明确的诊断价值,不同病理分期患者中表达差异明显,可以考虑将联合诊断作为结直肠腺癌鉴别方式之一,推广于临床中。     

CRP联合CA72-4, CEA, CA19-9检测对胃癌早期诊断的临床价值

目的:探究C反应蛋白(CRP)联合胃癌抗原(CA72-4)、癌胚抗原(CEA)、糖类抗原(CA19-9)检测对胃癌早期诊断的临床价值。方法:选择2014年3月~2016年6月我院收治的胃癌患者(103例)为胃癌组,包括早期胃癌患者30例,中晚期患者73例;同期就诊于我院的良性胃病患者为良性胃病组(61例),另选择20例年龄、性别相匹配的健康体检人群为健康对照组。比较三组人群血清C反应蛋白(CRP)、CA72-4、CEA、CA19-9水平,并探讨其表达与胃癌患者临床病理特征之间的关系。结果:早期胃癌组、良性胃病组患者的血清CRP、肿瘤标志物CA72-4、CEA、CA19-9的表达水平及阳性检测率均显著高于健康对照组(P0.05);早期胃癌组的上述指标显著高于良性胃病组(P0.05)。肿瘤分化程度低、发生转移、临床分期为Ⅲ,Ⅳ期胃癌患者的血清CRP、CA72-4、CEA、CA19-9阳性检测率显著高于肿瘤高分化、未发生转移、临床分期为Ⅰ、Ⅱ期的胃癌患者(p0.05)。血清CRP、CA72-4、CEA、CA19-9联合检测胃癌的敏感度92.23%,特异度为90.85%,联合检测敏感度显著高于CRP(68.93%)、CA72-4(71.84%)、CEA(77.67%)、CA19-9(59.22%)单项检测(p0.05)。结论:血清CRP、CA72-4、CEA、CA19-9水平与胃癌的临床病理特征密切相关,联合检测能显著提高检测灵敏度,有利于胃癌早期诊断。     

血清CEA、CA19-9联合CRP在消化道恶性肿瘤的诊断价值分析

摘要 目的：探讨与分析血清CEA、CA19-9联合CRP在消化道恶性肿瘤的诊断价值。方法：2019年8月到2022年5月选择在本院诊治的消化道恶性肿瘤患者150例作为消化道恶性肿瘤组,同期选择在本院体检的健康人群150例作为健康组。采集两组人群的血清癌胚抗原（CEA）、糖类抗原19-9（CA19-9）、C-反应蛋白（CRP）含量,调查患者的病理特征并判断诊断价值。结果：消化道恶性肿瘤组的血清CEA、CA19-9、CRP含量都高于健康组（P<0.05）。消化道恶性肿瘤组的CEA、CA19-9、CRP阳性率为54.7 %、58.7 %、60.7 %,高于健康组的3.3 %、4.0 %、4.7 %（P<0.05）。在消化道恶性肿瘤组中,不同组织学分化、临床分期、淋巴结转移患者的血清CEA、CA19-9、CRP含量对比有差异（P<0.05）。血清CEA、CA19-9联合CRP诊断为阳性113例,在健康组中诊断为阳性3例,血清CEA、CA19-9联合CRP在消化道恶性肿瘤的诊断敏感性与特异性分别为75.3 %（113/150）和98.0 %（147/150）。结论：消化道恶性肿瘤患者多伴随有血清CEA、CA19-9、CRP的高表达,病理特征与血清CEA、CA19-9、CRP含量存在相关性,血清CEA、CA19-9联合CRP在消化道恶性肿瘤的诊断敏感性与特异性都比较好。     

紫杉醇与地西他滨对晚期胃癌患者血清CEA、CA19-9 及CA72-4水平的影响

目的：探讨紫杉醇联合地西他滨对晚期胃癌患者血清癌胚抗原(CEA)、糖类抗原19-9(CA19-9)、糖类抗原72-4(CA72-4)水平 的影响。方法：收集2013 年10 月-2015 年1 月于我院住院治疗的晚期胃癌患者122 例,随机分为实验组和对照组。实验组患者给 予紫杉醇和地西他滨化疗,对照组患者给予紫杉醇和安慰剂化疗。观察并比较两组患者治疗前后卡氏积分、血常规、血尿素氮、肌 酐、转氨酶含量以及血清CA199、CEA及CA724 水平的变化情况。结果：治疗后,两组患者的卡氏积分均较治疗前明显升高,血清 CEA、CA19-9、CA72-4水平均较治疗前显著降低,且实验组的卡氏积分显著高于对照组,血清CEA、CA19-9、CA72-4 水平明显低 于对照组,差异均具有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。治疗前后,两组患者的白细胞、血红蛋白及血小板水平比较均无统计学差异（P＞ 0.05）。结论：紫杉醇联合地西他滨能有效降低晚期胃癌患者血清CEA、CA19-9、CA72-4 水平,并提高患者的生存质量,且安全性 较好。     

肺癌患者血清CEA，CA19-9，CA125 及CA153 围手术期动态监测的临床 意义

目的:探讨动态监测肺癌患者围手术期血清CEA、CA19-9、CA125及CA153水平变化的临床意义。方法:随机选取2014年5月至2015年5月收治的肺癌患者58例为研究对象,另选取同期在我院接受体检的健康人群15例为对照组。分别测定肺癌患者手术前及术后1天、1周、1个月、3个月的血清CEA、CA19-9、CA125、CA153水平,并与对照组的上述各血清肿瘤标志物进行比较。结果:肺癌患者术前空腹血清CEA、CA19-9、CA125、CA153水平明显高于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P0.01)。肺癌患者术后1天、1周、1个月及3个月的血清CEA、CA19-9、CA125、CA153水平明显低于术前,差异具有统计学意义(P0.05)。肺癌患者术后1个月的平均空腹血清CEA、CA19-9、CA125、CA153水平高于术后3个月平均水平,但差异不具有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:对肺癌患者的血清CEA、CA19-9、CA125、CA153水平进行围手术期动态监测有助于评估手术治疗效果。     

胰腺癌患者预后的影响因素及血清CA19-9、CEA对生存结局的预测价值研究

摘要 目的：探究胰腺癌患者预后的影响因素及血清糖类抗原19-9（CA19-9）、癌胚抗原（CEA）对生存结局的预测价值。方法：选择2010年7月至2016年7月我院诊治的80例胰腺癌患者作为研究对象。采用电化学发光法检测患者的血清CEA和CA19-9水平,采用多因素logistic回归分析影响胰腺癌患者预后的影响因素,采用受试者工作特征（ROC）曲线分析血清CEA和血清CA19-9对胰腺癌患者生存结局的预测价值。结果：单因素分析显示TNM分期、淋巴结转移、治疗方式、血清CEA和血清CA19-9与胰腺癌患者的预后有关（P<0.05）。多因素logistic回归分析则显示非手术治疗、有淋巴结转移、TNM分期Ⅲ～Ⅳ期、血清CEA>5 ng/mL和血清CA19-9>27 U/mL是影响胰腺癌患者预后的危险因素（OR_治疗方式 =1.714,OR _TNM分期 =2.746, OR_血清CEA =1.999, OR_血清CA19-9 =2.332, P<0.05）。ROC曲线分析结果显示血清CA19-9检测的曲线下面积（AUC）为0.818,最佳截断值为5.00 ng/mL,灵敏度、特异度分别为0.81、0.86,准确度为0.82;血清CEA检测的AUC为0.788,最佳截断值为27.00 U/mL,灵敏度、特异度分别为0.76、0.83,准确度为0.79;血清CEA联合血清CA19-9检测的AUC为0.910,灵敏度、特异度分别为0.89、0.90,准确度为0.91。结论：非手术治疗、有淋巴结转移、TNM分期Ⅲ～Ⅳ期、血清CEA>5 ng/mL和血清CA19-9>27 U/mL是影响胰腺癌患者预后的危险因素,检测血清CA19-9、CEA可作为预测患者生存结局的重要标记物。     

化学发光蛋白芯片用于检测肝癌患者血清CA19-9水平的方法研究

目的:探讨一种简单、有效、低成本、低耗时的化学发光蛋白芯片方法用于检测血清中的糖链抗原19-9(Carbohydrate Antigen19-9,CA19-9),以有助于对原发性肝癌的早期辅助诊断。方法:预先在醛基芯片上包被鼠源CA19-9单克隆抗体,建立CA19-9抗体蛋白芯片,共筛选出46份肝癌血清和32份正常健康人血清,然后用蛋白芯片方法进行检测,并以化学发光成像对检测结果进行判定。结果:24份肝癌血清的CA19-9水平高于37 U/m L,22份肝癌血清的CA19-9水平低于37 U/m L;30份正常人血清CA19-9含量低于37 U/m L,2份正常人血清的CA19-9含量为37 U/m L;灵敏度为52.17%,特异性为93.75%,ROC曲线下面积0.688[95%CI:0.566,0.811]。结论:本研究成功的建立了血清CA19-9的化学发光蛋白芯片检测方法。     

血清CEA、CA125、TSGF联合检测对乳腺癌的诊断价值

目的探讨血清癌胚抗原(CEA)、糖类抗原-125(CA125)以及恶性肿瘤特异生长因子(TSGF)联合检测对乳腺癌临床诊断的价值。方法选取2017年5月至2019年5月我院收治的70例乳腺疾病患者为研究对象,其中包含乳腺癌患者35例(乳腺癌组),良性乳腺增生患者35例(良性乳腺结节组)。选取同期于我院进行健康体检的健康女性30例作为对照组。分析各组对象血清CEA、CA125、TSGF表达情况,以及CEA、CA125、TSGF联合检测在乳腺癌诊断中的应用。结果乳腺癌组患者血清中CEA、CA125、TSGF水平明显高于良性乳腺结节组及对照组(均P<0.05),而良性乳腺结节组患者血清CEA、CA125以及TSGF水平与对照组差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。CEA诊断阳性率、阴性率分别为47.1%、52.9%;CA125诊断阳性率、阴性率分别为51.4%、48.6%;TSGF诊断阳性率、阴性率分别为50.0%,50.0%,联合诊断阳性率、阴性率分别为64.3%、35.7%。CEA、CA125以及TSGF单独检测的诊断灵敏度、特异度、准确度以及约登指数差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05),而联合检测诊断的灵敏度均显著高于CEA、CA125、TSGF单独检测(均P<0.05)。联合检测诊断的特异度、准确度和约定指数与CEA、CA125、TSGF单独检测水平差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。结论乳腺癌发病期间存在多种因子的水平变化。CEA、CA125、TSGF联合检测可以提高乳腺癌的诊断效能。     

胃癌患者血清CA125、CA724、CEA、CA199水平的表达及与临床病理特征的关系研究

目的:研究胃癌患者血清糖链抗原125(CA125)、糖链抗原724(CA724)、癌胚抗原(CEA)、糖链抗原199(CA199)水平的表达及与临床病理特征的关系。方法:选取2016年5月-2017年8月我院收治的胃癌患者94例记为胃癌组,胃部良性病变患者82例记为良性病变组,另取同期于我院接受体检的健康志愿者80例记为对照组。分别测定三组受试者血清CA125、CA724、CEA、CA199水平,并分析上述指标与胃癌患者临床病理特征的关系,并观察胃癌患者各指标单独检测和联合检测的阳性率。结果:三组受试者血清CA125、CA724、CEA、CA199水平整体比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05),胃癌组、良性病变组、对照组的血清CA125、CA724、CEA、CA199水平呈逐渐降低趋势,两两对比差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。不同性别的胃癌患者CA125、CA724、CEA、CA199水平比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05),年龄60岁、TNM分期为Ⅲ-Ⅳ期、肿瘤大小≥5 cm2的胃癌患者CA125、CA724、CEA、CA199水平均高于年龄≤60岁、TNM分期为Ⅰ-Ⅱ期、肿瘤大小5 cm2的胃癌患者,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。联合检测的胃癌阳性率高于CA125、CA724、CEA、CA199单独检测,且CA724单独检测高于CA125、CEA、CA199单独检测,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:胃癌患者血清CA125、CA724、CEA、CA199水平较高,与患者的年龄、TNM分期、肿瘤大小等因素有关,且联合检测的胃癌检出率较高,可为胃癌的早期诊断提供指导作用。     

CA 72-4 compared with CEA and CA 19-9 as a marker of some gastrointestinal malignancies

The objective of this study was to compare CA 72-4 with CEA and CA 19-9 in gastrointestinal malignancies. CA 72-4 was assayed by radioimmunoassay and CEA and CA 19-9 with the Abbott IMx analyser. The study included 52 patients with gastrointestinal cancer and 20 controls with benign gastrointestinal diseases. The 52 cases showed marker sensitivities of 39%, 49% and 35% for CA 72-4, CEA and CA 19-9, respectively, and 64% when the markers were combined. Marker expression in serum was highest in colorectal carcinoma followed by gastric and esophageal carcinoma. The sensitivities of the individual markers in colorectal, gastric and esophageal carcinomas, respectively, were: CA 72-4, 56%, 32% and 18%; CEA, 83%, 33% and 18%; CA 19-9, 53%, 25% and 18%. The sensitivity of the three markers in combination was 89%, 50% and 46% in colorectal, gastric and esophageal cancer, respectively. The specificity of CA 72-4, CEA and CA 19-9 was 100%, 72% and 86%, respectively. However, CA 72-4 is not a useful a marker for gastrointestinal cancers because of its poor sensitivity. CEA, which had the best overall sensitivity and a reasonable specificity, was the most useful single marker, especially for colorectal cancer. Whereas the single markers were not useful in gastric and esophageal cancer, the combination of the three may be.     

Elevated CEA and CA19-9 serum levels independently predict advanced pancreatic cancer at diagnosis

Abstract

Purpose: It is suggested that tumour markers carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) could be used to predict the stage of pancreatic cancer. However, optimal cut-off values for CEA and CA19-9 are disputable. This study aimed to assess the value of CEA and CA19-9 serum levels at diagnosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) as predictors for the advanced stage of PDAC in patients discussed at pancreatic multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings.

Methods: Patients with suspected PDAC discussed at MDT meetings from 2013 to 2017 were reviewed, in order to determine optimal cut-off values of both CEA and CA19-9.

Results: In total, 375 patients were included. Optimal cut-off values for predicting advanced PDAC were 7.0?ng/ml for CEA and 305.0?U/ml for CA19-9, resulting in positive predictive values of 83.3%, 73.6%, and 91.4% for CEA, CA19-9 and combined, respectively. Both tumour markers were independent predictors of advanced PDAC, demonstrated by an odds ratio of 4.21 (95% CI:1.85–9.56; p?=?0.001) for CEA and 2.58 for CA19-9 (95% CI:1.30–5.14; p?=?0.007).

Conclusions: CEA appears to be a more robust predictor of advanced PDAC than CA19-9. Implementing CEA and CA19-9 serum levels during MDT meetings as an additional tool for establishing tumour resectability is worthwhile for tailored diagnostics.     

Prognostic value of serum and tumor tissue CA 72-4 content in gastric cancer

To date no general agreement has been reached regarding the prognostic significance of CEA, CA 19-9 and CA 72-4 as serum markers in gastric cancer, and only scattered information is available on the predictive value of marker expression in tumor tissue. Therefore, a longitudinal study was designed to analyze the presurgical serum and tumor tissue content of CA 72-4, CEA and CA 19-9 in 166 patients at different stages of gastric cancer, and to evaluate the possible correlation with clinicopathological features in respect to prognostic information on relapse-free survival. The results obtained showed that 48.4% of patients with tumor recurrence had positive presurgical CA 72-4 levels compared to approximately 24% of patients who remained free of disease. Furthermore, the median presurgical serum CA 72-4 levels were significantly elevated in relapsing patients. Serosa and lymph node involvement as well as positive presurgical serum CA 72-4 levels had independent prognostic value in predicting recurrence. A significant association between disease-free survival and lymph node involvement, depth of invasion and tumor tissue content of CA 72-4 was also demonstrated. We may therefore conclude that CA 72-4 antigen can be considered the marker of choice in the follow-up of gastric cancer patients and may be used as a prognostic indicator of relapse.     

CA19-9、CA125、CEA及Ferritin联合检测诊断非小细胞肺癌脑、骨转移的临床价值研究

目的:研究CA19-9、CA125、癌胚抗原(CEA)以及铁蛋白(Ferritin)四种肿瘤标志物联合检测用于诊断非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)脑或(和)骨转移的临床价值。方法:选取2011年5月至2012年5月于我院就诊的NSCLC患者184例。将发现脑或(和)骨转移者归为转移组,共96例;将未发现脑、骨转移者归为无转移组,共88例,采用电化学发光免疫分析法测定各组患者血清中CA19-9、CA125、CEA以及Ferritin的水平,探讨其在NSCLC患者脑或(和)骨转移中的诊断效能。结果:在发生脑或(和)骨转移的NSCLC患者中,CA19-9、CA125、CEA及Ferritin四种肿瘤标志物的水平和阳性率均显著高于未发生骨、脑转移的患者。ROC曲线分析显示,以上四种肿瘤标志物对诊断NSCLC骨或(和)脑转移的敏感度分别为73.48%、69.13%、66.35%和61.34%;特异度分别为80.02%、32.51%、65.11%和62.58%;将四种肿瘤标志物联合进行诊断的敏感度和特异度分别为91.21%和88.64%,显著高于单一标志物诊断。结论:发生脑或(和)骨转移的NSCLC患者血清中CA19-9、CA125、CEA以及Ferritin四种肿瘤标志物水平均显著升高,以上标志物联合检测可提高NSCLC患者脑或(和)骨转移的诊断效能,可作为早期诊断NSCLC患者脑或(和)骨转移的辅助检测指标。     

胃癌根治术后腹腔热灌注化疗对患者血清CEA、CA19-9水平及免疫功能的影响

目的:探讨胃癌根治术后腹腔灌注化疗对患者血清CEA(血清癌胚抗原,carcinoembryonic antigen)、CA19-9(糖链抗原19-9,carbohydrate antigen19-9)水平及免疫功能的影响。方法:回顾性2015年2月至2017年4月我院收治的胃癌患者临床资料,依据接受治疗方案不同分为全身静脉化疗组(对照组)和全身静脉化疗联合腹腔热灌注化疗组(观察组),每组各41例。检测和比较两组患者化疗前(治疗前)与化疗1个月后(治疗后)血清肿瘤标志物CEA、CA19-9与免疫功能指标水平的变化,治疗后毒副作用发生情况及治疗前后生活质量的改善情况。结果:治疗前,两组间血清CEA、CA19-9、CD3~+、CD4~+、CD8~+、CD4+/CD8~+水平比较差异均无统计学意义(P0.05);观察组治疗后血清CEA、CA19-9及CD8~+水平显著低于对照组,CD3~+、CD4~+、CD4~+/CD8~+水平显著高于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05);两组骨髓抑制、恶心呕吐、腹痛腹泻及肠梗发生率比较差异均不显著无统计学意义(P=0.478,0.668,0.315,0.552);观察组生活质量改善总有效率为85.37%,显著高于对照组(70.73%,P=0.017)。结论:与单纯全身化疗相比,胃癌根治术后腹腔灌注化疗可更有效降低患者血清CEA、CA19-9水平,改善患者免疫功能,提高其生活质量,且安全性较高。     

Tumor markers in pancreatic cancer: a comparative clinical study between CEA, CA 19-9 and CA 50

Seventy-eight patients were evaluated to ascertain the usefulness of markers CA 19-9 and CA 50 in diagnosing pancreatic cancer, using a less specific marker (CEA) as reference. Three groups were considered: a) 36 controls; b) 22 patients with benign obstructive jaundice; c) 20 patients with pancreatic cancer. Preoperative blood samples were obtained to ascertain CEA (E.I.A.), CA 19-9 (R.I.A.) and CA 50 (T.R.-F.I.A.). Serum concentrations of the various markers were significantly higher for patients with pancreatic cancer in comparison with the other groups, at cut-offs of 10 ng/ml (CEA), 100 ng/ml (CA 19-9) and 170 U/ml (CA 50). The sensitivity of CA 19-9 (94%) and CA 50 (88%) was much greater than that of CEA (30%). The specificity of the three markers in patients with pancreatic cancer, with respect to the control group, was 100% and this figure is reduced with respect to the group suffering from benign obstructive jaundice (CEA: 90%; CA 19-9: 88% and CA 50: 87%). Diagnostic results (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (P.P.V.) and negative predictive value (N.P.V.] did not significantly increase with respect to CA 19-9 and CA 50 when considered individually. It is concluded that the serum concentrations of CA 19-9 and CA 50 showed high sensitivity and specificity as markers of pancreatic cancer with respect to the other groups, pointing towards clinical routine clinical use of both markers. In addition, a comparative study of the literature has been made and prospects for short-term development and concrete applications for early and reliable diagnosis have been highlighted.