Serum levels of carcinoembryonic antigen, gastrointestinal cancer-associated antigen and alphafetoprotein in staging and management of patients with advanced carcinoma of the stomach

Serum levels of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), gastrointestinal cancer-associated antigen (GICA or CA 19-9), and alphafetoprotein (AFP) were concurrently determined in patients with carcinoma of the stomach: in 84 preoperatively, and in 67 serially postoperatively. Before surgery, serum CEA gave information about the tumor load analogous to serum GICA in 69% of the patients: true-positive in 25% and false-negative in 43%; less information in 18% and more in 14%. The sensitivity of the test tended to be better in the more advanced stages, and was higher for CEA with GICA than for CEA alone or GICA alone. During follow-up, serum CEA gave information about the presence or absence of active disease analogous to serum GICA in 78% of the patients: true-positive in 30%, true-negative in 36% and false-negative in 12%; less information in 9% and more in 13%. Neither test gave any false-positive indications. Sensitivity of the test rose from 67% for CEA alone and 60% for GICA alone to 81% for CEA with GICA. Serum AFP was elevated only preoperatively in 2% of patients. We conclude that joint application of CEA and GICA tests gave only slightly better preoperative sensitivity than CEA alone or GICA alone but proved fairly sensitive for postoperative follow-up of the patients. AFP was of little value for either purpose.     

Carcinoembryonic antigen and breast carcinoma antigen (CA 15.3) in preoperative staging and postoperative monitoring of patients with carcinoma of the breast

Serum levels of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and breast carcinoma antigen (CA 15.3) were determined in patients with breast carcinoma: in 129 before initial surgical or nonsurgical treatment and in 134 afterwards. Before any initial treatment, CEA was elevated in 15% of patients with Stage IV disease and CA 15.3 was high in 11% with Stage III and 48% with Stage IV. While monitoring management active disease was associated with elevated serum CEA in 66% of the patients, with elevated CA 15.3 in 73% and with at least one of the markers elevated in 86%. Both tests had high specificity (93% and 98%). The rise in serum CEA and, even more so, of serum CA 15.3 roughly paralleled the increase in bulk of the tumor: from locoregional disease through metastases to the lungs, bones, lungs with bones, and liver. Decreases in the levels of serum CEA and CA 15.3 reflected response to therapy, increases in the level of at least one marker-treatment failure, and levels fluctuating above the normal range indicated stationary disease. During follow-up, the predictive value of a negative test (levels within the normal range), suggesting that the patient might be free of disease, was 61% for CEA alone, 67% for CA 15.3 alone, and 80% for the two tests combined. We conclude that an elevated serum level of only one of the markers was useful for staging, implying advanced disease. Determination of both markers jointly was useful for monitoring the effectiveness of the therapy and for follow-up aimed at detection of relapse.     

Tumour associated antigens CA 15.3 and CA 125 in ovarian cancer

CA 125 and CA 15.3 antigens were determined by enzyme immunoassay in 78 patients with ovarian cancer for a total of 540 determinations. The antigens were also investigated in sera from 100 women with other gynaecological diseases, 82 lung cancer patients and in 39 pleural fluids of varying origin. CA 15.3 reference values were evaluated in 91 healthy women (cut-off: 25 U/ml). CA 15.3 sensitivity at diagnosis (60%) and for detecting relapse (44%) was lower than that of CA 125 (90% and 64.7%, respectively). However, CA 15.3 does not increase with aspecific mesothelial cell reaction and thus it is more specific than CA 125. Combined use of the markers during follow-up improves early detection of relapse (at least one of the two was positive in 79% of cases). Therefore both CA 15.3 and CA 125 should be routinely determined for the detection and monitoring of ovarian cancer.     

Serial determination of CEA and CA 15.3 in breast cancer follow-up: An assessment of their diagnostic accuracy for the detection of tumour recurrences

We studied the diagnostic accuracy of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and cancer antigen 15.3 (CA 15.3) in detecting breast cancer recurrence. Biomarker follow-up determinations, made over 900 patients, were related to local–regional or distant recurrence using statistical models for longitudinal data. The diagnostic accuracy was quantified in terms of sensitivity, specificity and Youden index. The biomarkers were poorly predictive of local–regional recurrence. As for distant recurrence, the best diagnostic accuracy was obtained considering the two biomarkers jointly and combining two positivity criteria: a value above the normal limit or a difference between two consecutive measurements greater than the critical difference for at least one biomarker. A third criterion, based on within-patient comparison between follow-up determinations and a baseline, failed to improve the above result. CEA and CA 15.3 might play a role in patient monitoring during follow-up for the search of distant recurrence.     

Clinical evaluation of CA 15.3 in the post-operative follow-up of breast cancer patients

In 265 patients operated for breast carcinoma the monoclonal antibody serum test CA 15.3 was predictive of metastatic diffusion of the disease. Its level increased in cases of distant metastasis with no significant difference between multiple and single sites (p = 0.014). The concentration of the marker was higher in 21 (23.8%) patients without nodal involvement and in 19 (27.5%) with nodal involvement (p = 0.193). Our study suggests that CA 15.3 may be an aid in the follow-up of patients with metastatic diffusion of breast cancer.     

Circulating CA 15.3 levels in breast cancer. Our present experience

CA 15.3 is an antigen expressed by human breast carcinoma cells, and defined by two monoclonal antibodies, 115D8 and DF3. We used IRMA to determine the circulating serum levels of CA 15.3 in 1178 subjects with breast cancer, non-breast malignancies, benign diseases and controls. A threshold level of 40 U/ml was established with 140 healthy controls and 650 patients with benign diseases (respectively 0% subjects and 1.5% patients had abnormal antigen levels). Elevated CA 15.3 was found in 12 of 184 patients with malignancies different from breast cancer (6.5%), either epithelial carcinomas with distant metastases, mainly in the liver, or primary liver tumors. Breast cancer patients (n = 204) were analysed by prior therapy, UICC stage and WHO response to therapy. Eight of 134 (5.9%) patients with stage II or III breast cancer at presentation and no evidence of disease (NED) had elevated CA 15.3. All of 22 patients with stage IV breast cancer not responding to therapy (SD and PD) had antigen levels greater than 40 U/ml, as did 10 of 34 (29.4%) stage IV patients in objective response (CR + PR). Three of 14 pretreatment patients had abnormal marker levels, and they later proved to have distant metastases. Serum CA 15.3 values were statistically different (p less than 0.01) in NED (20.6 +/- 11.2 U/ml), CR + PR (33.5 +/- 24.0 U/ml), stable disease (98.8 +/- 50.4 U/ml) and progressive disease (greater than 200 U/ml) breast cancer patients. Our results suggest that circulating CA 15.3 antigen levels agree with the stage of breast cancer and with the response to therapy.     

CA 15.3 as a tumour marker in breast cancer

CA 15.3 is an antigenic determinant associated with human mammary carcinomas. Two murine monoclonal antibodies have been raised against the determinants, and an immunoradiometric assay (IRMA-Kit, Centocor, USA) has been developed to determine the antigen levels in plasma of cancer patients. Based on the 99% confidence limit of healthy women, plasma values above 30 U/ml are considered abnormal. Plasma samples from 357 women were examined in the present study. Healthy females (n = 84) ranged below the cut-off level between less than 10 and 29 U/ml. Higher values were found in 12.5% of benign breast diseases and in 23.6% of breast cancer patients, including all stages. Depending on the stage of the disease, there were elevated levels in 11% of operable breast cancer patients preoperatively, in 7% of the cases with no evidence of disease after primary treatment and in 63.5% of patients with disseminated mammary carcinoma. In metastasized breast cancer the frequency and the degree of abnormal titers were closely related to the extent of the metastatic disease. Follow-up examinations of 63 patients under cytotoxic therapy showed CA 15.3 changes correlating well with the clinical course in up to 90% of the antigen positive cases. The present data indicate that CA 15.3 may be useful in the surveillance of breast cancer patients. However in our study one third of the patients with metastatic breast cancer did not show any increase in CA 15.3 and must be regarded as antigen negative.     

CA 15.3 and CEA plasma level monitoring in patients with breast cancer

CA 15.3 and CEA were determined in the serum of 217 patients with early and advanced breast carcinoma. CA 15.3 was high (greater than 30 U/ml) in 1/6 (17%) patients with stage I-II primary tumor, in 4/77 (5%) patients without clinical signs of disease after mastectomy, in 67/102 (65%) patients with advanced disease in progression, and in 13/32 (41%) patients with advanced disease not in progression and undergoing therapy. The corresponding incidences of pathological CEA values (greater than 2.5 ng/ml) were 33, 8, 55 and 14%. The combination of the two markers brings about a certain improvement in the sensitivity for recognising patients with advanced disease in progression (79/102 = 77%). The presence of high values of CA 15.3 is statistically correlated to the prevalent site of metastases (bone and viscera greater than soft tissues). Monitoring the two markers during antitumor therapy in 36 patients showed good accordance (56%) between CA 15.3 changes and response to therapy. The decrease of the marker in patients who achieved partial remission was statistically significant. In conclusion, CA 15.3 is more sensitive than CEA in recognising patients with advanced disease in progression and gives better accordance with the response to therapy. The simultaneous use of the two markers may be useful in the follow-up of operated patients and in monitoring the disease during treatment.     

Tumor markers in patients with chronic renal failure.

In order to evaluate the specificity of tumor markers in chronic renal failure, we have determined serum levels of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), carbohydrate antigen 19.9 (CA 19.9), carbohydrate antigen 50 (CA 50), alphafetoprotein (AFP), neuron-specific enolase (NSE), prostatic acid phosphatase (PAP), prostatic specific antigen (PSA), squamous cell carcinoma antigen (SCC), carbohydrate antigen 15.3 (CA 15.3) and carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA 125) in 30 patients with chronic renal failure and in 36 hemodialyzed patients without clinical evidence of neoplasia. CEA, CA 50, NSE and SCC frequently show increased serum levels, suggesting a renal metabolism, while others remain, generally, within the normal levels.     

乳腺癌改良根治术患者术后复发转移的危险因素及血清CA125、COX-2、sTNFR-P55的预测价值研究

摘要 目的：探讨乳腺癌改良根治术患者术后复发转移的危险因素及血清糖类抗原125（CA125）、环加氧酶-2（COX-2）、可溶性肿瘤坏死因子受体P55（sTNFR-P55）的预测价值。方法：对2014年1月至2016年12月新疆医科大学第一附属医院收治的109例行乳腺癌改良根治术的乳腺癌患者进行前瞻性研究,所有患者术后均随访5年,其中2例失访,107例完成随访。根据5年内患者复发转移情况将其分为复发转移组（n=31）和未复发转移组（n=76）。收集患者入院时的临床病理资料,采用电化学发光法检测术前血清CA125,采用酶联免疫吸附法检测术前血清COX-2、sTNFR-P55。采用logistic回归模型分析患者术后复发转移的影响因素,绘制受试者工作特征（ROC）曲线评估血清CA125、COX-2、sTNFR-P55对术后复发转移的预测价值。结果：复发转移组肿瘤直径＞5 cm、浸润性非特殊癌、脉管癌栓、雌激素受体（ER）/孕激素受体（PR）阴性、无内分泌治疗构成比、TNM分期IIIA期、腋窝淋巴结转移数量4~9个构成比高于未复发转移组（P<0.05）。复发转移组血清CA125、COX-2、sTNFR-P55水平高于未复发转移组（P<0.05）。多因素logistic回归分析结果显示,肿瘤直径＞5 cm、浸润性非特殊癌、TNM分期IIIA期、脉管癌栓、腋窝淋巴结转移数量4~9个、CA125升高、COX-2升高、sTNFR-P55升高是乳腺癌改良根治术患者术后5年内复发转移的独立危险因素（OR=1.318、1.213、1.223、1.137、1.257、1.241、1.313、1.351,P<0.05）。血清CA125、COX-2、sTNFR-P55均可有效预测乳腺癌术后复发转移,曲线下面积（AUC）分别为0.803、0.749、0.761,三指标联合预测术后复发转移的AUC为0.915,灵敏度和特异度分别为0.94、0.83。结论：肿瘤直径、浸润性非特殊癌、TNM分期、脉管癌栓、腋窝淋巴结转移数量以及术前血清CA125、COX-2、sTNFR-P55异常升高是乳腺癌改良根治术患者术后5年内复发转移的危险因素,术前血清CA125、COX-2、sTNFR-P55联合检测可预测乳腺癌改良根治术后的复发转移风险。     

Relationship of CA 125 and CA 19.9 with lung carcinoma histological subtype: preliminary study

The aim of this work was to study the possible utility of simultaneous determination of CA 125 and CA 19.9 in patients with lung cancer. Serum levels of both markers were studied in 87 patients without metastases (Mo), 72 patients with distant metastases (MT) and 15 cases without clinical evidence of disease after primary treatment (NED). Sixty-five tumors were epidermoid, 34 were adenocarcinomas, 24 were cell undifferentiated carcinomas and 51 were small-cell carcinomas. Sera from 75 healthy subjects and 20 patients with benign lung disease were used as controls. The cut-off values used were 35 and 37 U/ml for CA 125 and CA 19.9, respectively. CA 125 and CA 19.9 serum levels were within normal limits in all control patients. In NED patients these markers were not elevated, except in one with chronic liver disease who showed elevated CA 19.9 (76 U/ml). Twenty-five percent of Mo lung cancer patients and 40.3% of MT cases had CA 19.9 over 37 U/ml. Abnormally high levels of CA 125 were found in 18.7% and 22.9% of Mo and MT patients, respectively. Sixty percent of patients with large cell undifferentiated carcinoma had elevated CA 125 (mean 176 U/ml) compared to 15.4% of patients with all other histological types of tumors combined (54.3 U/ml, p less than 0.01). CA 19.9 serum levels were also more often elevated in patients with large cell undifferentiated carcinomas (50%, 7/14 cases) than in other histological types (30%, 36/120 patients), but the difference was not statistically significant.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Analytical and clinical evaluation of a new tumor marker in breast cancer: CA 27.29.

Evaluation of a radioimmunoassay for a new tumor marker, named CA 27.29, recently proposed for use in breast cancer patients, is reported in this study. After considering the analytical performance, the clinical study was directed to a control group of 66 apparently healthy subjects (Controls), a group of 25 women with benign breast disease (BBD) and a group of 164 breast cancer patients divided into primary before any treatment (M-), in follow-up with no evidence of disease (NED) and presence of metastases (M+). When compared to CA 15.3, our results showed similar sensitivity of both markers with a slightly lower specificity for CA 27.29. In some cases, however, CA 27.29 elevation appears earlier than CA 15.3 as a sign of metastases. We thus propose their associated use.     

Cholestasis is the main determinant of abnormal CA 19-9 levels in patients with liver cirrhosis

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Altered CA19-9 levels are commonly found in patients with liver cirrhosis though a clear explanation for this finding has not yet been given. The aim of this study was to investigate whether CA19-9 levels might be related to alterations in biochemical parameters and/or to functional impairment in cirrhotic patients with and without hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: We studied 126 patients with liver cirrhosis, 60 of whom also had hepatocellular carcinoma. CA19-9 values were related to clinical, biochemical and functional parameters. In half of the patients CA19-9 levels were related to the monoethylglycinexylidide test, which is a dynamic liver function test. RESULTS: In more than half the cases CA19-9 values were above the upper limit. Liver function worsening as assessed by Child-Pugh's score and monoethylglycinexylidide test did not seem to influence the alteration of the marker. By contrast, in univariate analysis CA19-9 correlated with aminotransferases, gamma-glutamyltransferase and alkaline phosphatase. Multivariate analysis showed that besides alkaline phosphatase also the presence of hepatocellular carcinoma might influence the alteration of CA19-9, although the marker was of no use for the diagnosis of liver cancer in patients with altered though not diagnostic alpha-fetoprotein levels. CONCLUSIONS: In our study we confirmed the correlation of CA19-9 levels with cholestasis and cytolysis parameters. Moreover, we found no association between CA19-9 levels and impaired liver function as assessed by means of the Child-Pugh's score and the monoethylglycinexylidide test, which is cholestasis-independent and explores liver metabolic and clearance activities. The cholestatic picture that characterizes liver cirrhosis might enhance the expression and passage of the marker from the bile to the blood. The addition of CA19-9 assessment is not useful for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with non-diagnostic levels of alpha-fetoprotein. Caution should therefore be used when evaluating CA19-9 in cirrhotic patients with cholestasis, since false positive results may occur.     

Comparison between CEA, TPA, CA 15/3 and hydroxyproline, alkaline phosphatase, whole body retention of 99mTc MDP in the follow-up of bone metastases in breast cancer

The development of bone metastases in cancer can be monitored easily using three markers: 24 h urinary hydroxyproline excretion (HOP) (an index of osteoclastic activity), serum alkaline phosphatase (Alk.Ph.) (an index of osteoblastic activity) and 24 h whole body retention of 99mTc-methylene diphosphonate (WBR%) (an index of bone turnover). To evaluate the effectiveness of this group of bone tumor markers in breast cancer we compared it with the following group of three markers which are commonly used in the monitoring of breast cancer and in the follow-up of advanced disease with or without bone metastases: carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), tissue polypeptide antigen (TPA) and breast carcinoma antigen (CA 15/3). In 48 patients with bone metastases CEA, TPA and CA 15/3 were shown to be sensitive (79%, 85%, 90% respectively), while HOP, Alk.Ph. and WBR%, which are commonly accepted as reliable markers of bone activity, showed a lower sensitivity (67%, 46%, 75% respectively). These results may be explained by the lack of osteoclastic or osteoblastic (or both) activity at the time of diagnosis. This explanation is supported by the fact that the bone markers HOP, Alk.Ph. and WBR% were found to be more sensitive than the others in the subsequent follow-up study. We conclude that in our study, CEA, TPA and CA 15/3 are at first more sensitive than Alk.Ph., HOP and WBR% but during the follow-up Alk.Ph., HOP and WBR% are possibly both more specific and more sensitive.     

CA 549 as a marker in breast cancer.

CA 549 is one of several carcinoma associated mucin antigens proposed as a breast cancer tumor marker. In this study, the performance characteristics of the CA 549 assay were validated and the clinical utility of the test was compared with that of other breast cancer markers including CA 15-3, CA M26, CA M29 and carcinoembryonic antigen. The upper limit of normal was established as 15.5 U/ml based on data for 250 control subjects apparently free of disease. Overall, CA 549 had a low negative predictive value (0.51) due to a low sensitivity in the detection of early breast cancer. However, the test had a high positive predictive value (0.93) reflecting a high specificity for the disease. In 56 patients with advanced breast cancer, the sensitivity was 0.71 for CA 549 alone and 0.79-0.84 for CA 549 combined with any of the other markers studied.     

TPA and CA 15.3 measurements for breast cancer monitoring in a routine setting.

TPA and CA 15.3 concentrations were routinely determined in serum of patients treated for breast cancer during a 15-month period. ROC curves did not show differences in the ability to differentiate between NED and PD on the basis of matching tumor marker values. During monitoring of patients with NED, TPA levels showed fluctuations of more than 25% that were not disease related. We concluded that CA 15.3 is a more slowly reacting marker of tumor burden than TPA, which is an immediate indicator of cell turnover.     

子宫内膜癌患者血浆溶血磷脂酸、血清癌抗原125及人附睾蛋白4的表达及临床意义

目的:探讨子宫内膜癌患者血浆溶血磷脂酸(LPA)、血清癌抗原125(CA125)及人附睾蛋白4(HE4)的表达及与临床病理特征的关系。方法:选取2014年3月到2016年6月在同济大学附属第一妇婴保健院进行治疗的子宫内膜癌患者76例作为观察组,另选取我院同期收治的子宫内膜增生症患者50例作为良性病变组,再选取同期在我院体检结果为健康的志愿者50例作为对照组。比较三组受试者血浆LPA、血清CA125以及HE4水平。以病理检测结果为金标准,计算血浆LPA、血清CA125、HE4诊断子宫内膜癌的灵敏度、特异度、阳性预测值、阴性预测值。分析子宫内膜癌患者血浆LPA、血清CA125以及HE4水平与临床病理特征的关系。结果:观察组的血浆LPA、血清CA125以及HE4水平均高于对照组和良性病变组(P0.05),良性病变组的血浆中CA125水平高于对照组(P0.05)。血浆LPA、血清CA125以及HE4诊断子宫内膜癌的灵敏度、特异度、阳性预测值、阴性预测值比较无统计学差异(P0.05)。子宫内膜癌患者LPA水平与年龄、肿瘤直径无关(P0.05),与淋巴结转移、临床分期、分化程度、疾病类型有关(P0.05);CA125、HE4水平与年龄、疾病类型无关(P0.05),与淋巴结转移、临床分期、肿瘤直径、分化程度有关(P0.05)。结论:子宫内膜癌患者血浆LPA、血清CA125以及HE4水平偏高,LPA、CA125、HE4与部分临床病理参数相关,三指标对子宫内膜癌均有较高的诊断价值。     

彩色多普勒超声联合血清CEA、CA125、TK1、TFF1对乳腺癌的诊断价值研究

摘要 目的：探究彩色多普勒超声联合血清癌胚抗原（CEA）、糖类抗原125（CA125）、胸苷激酶1（TK1）、三叶因子1（TFF1）对乳腺癌的诊断价值。方法：回顾性选取2019年1月到2022年1月间我院收治的97例乳腺癌患者为观察组,同期收治的97例乳腺良性病变患者为对照组,均行彩色多普勒超声检查及血清CEA、CA125、TK1、TFF1检测,比较两组超声特征、超声参数[搏动指数（PI）、收缩期峰值流速（PSV）、阻力指数（RI）],比较两组血清CEA、CA125、TK1、TFF1水平,通过受试者工作特征（ROC）曲线分析彩色多普勒超声联合血清CEA、CA125、TK1、TFF1诊断价值及单独诊断价值。结果：与对照组比较,观察组肿块边界不清晰、内部回声不均匀、形态不规则和钙化比例明显升高（P＜0.05）。与对照组比较,观察组患者RI、PSV、PI明显升高（P＜0.05）;其中观察组血流信号分级Ⅲ级比例明显高于对照组（P＜0.05）,观察组血流信号分级0级比例明显低于对照组（P＜0.05）。与对照组比较,观察组患者血清CEA、CA125、TK1、TFF1水平明显升高（P＜0.05）。ROC曲线发现,超声诊断乳腺癌的曲线下面积（AUC）值、灵敏度、特异度依次为0.773、76.30%、78.40%。CEA诊断乳腺癌的AUC值、灵敏度、特异度依次为0.774、78.40%、74.23%。CA125诊断乳腺癌的AUC值、灵敏度、特异度依次为0.824、77.31%、80.41%。TK1诊断乳腺癌的AUC值、灵敏度、特异度依次为0.818、78.43%、81.42%。TFF1诊断乳腺癌的AUC值、灵敏度、特异度依次为0.806、78.42%、77.31%。彩色多普勒超声联合血清CEA、CA125、TK1、TFF1诊断乳腺癌的AUC值0.929,显著优于各项指标单独使用（P＜0.05）。结论：与各项指标单一应用相比,彩色多普勒超声联合血清CEA、CA125、TK1、TFF1诊断乳腺癌的价值较高,有助于乳腺癌的早期筛查。     

Comparison of CA 15-3 and CEA in diagnosis and monitoring of breast cancer

In order to assess the utility of the tumor-associated antigen CA15-3 in the diagnosis of breast cancer, this new tumor marker was measured pre-operatively in 1342 patients. This group comprised 509 patients with malignant disease (134 with breast cancer and 375 with other malignancies not involving the breast) and 833 patients with benign surgical diseases (95 patients with fibroadenoma of the breast, 738 with other benign diseases). The results were compared with those for carcino-embryonic antigen (CEA) in the diagnosis of breast cancer. CA15-3 was above the normal limits of 25 U/ml in 31% of the patients with breast cancer, in 22% of patients with other malignancies, and in 9% of patients with benign diseases. CEA was elevated in 26% of patients with breast cancer (greater than 3 ng/ml). CA15-3 levels were above 50 U/ml in 13% of the breast cancer patients, in 6% of patients with other malignancies, and in 0.2% of the patients with benign diseases. There was a good correlation between CA15-3 level and tumor stage in breast cancer. CA15-3 serum levels were over 50 U/ml in respectively 0%, 2%, 13%, and 73% of the patients with stages I, II, III, and IV. CA15-3 and CEA were also determined in 671 patients who had received initial curative surgery of breast cancer, and who regularly attended our follow-up clinic. CA15-3 was found to be more sensitive than CEA in detecting recurrences of breast cancer.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Clinical evaluation of the simultaneous determination of CA 15-3, CA 125 and sHER2 in breast cancer

Objective We investigated serum levels of CA 15-3, sHER2 and CA 125, and their usefulness in the detection of metastatic disease in breast cancer patients.

Methods The levels of CA 15-3, sHER2 and CA 125 tumour markers were determined in 60 patients, 40 with localized and 20 with metastatic breast carcinoma. The control group consisted of 10 healthy women.

Results We found that, at the time of diagnosis, serum levels of all three tumour markers were elevated in patients with distant metastases, but of minute importance in the detection of any breast cancer. When the data for the individual markers were combined the overall sensitivity of metastases detection with all three markers improved. In this regard, 90% of patients with distant metastases had an increase in serum level of at least one of tested tumour markers. Similar results were obtained using receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC). Moreover, using ROC we defined cut-off values for metastasis detection for each of the tested markers.

Conclusion Our findings indicate that measurement of CA 15-3 serum values in conjunction with sHER2 and CA 15-3 can increase sensitivity in metastasis detection.