Suppr超能文献

胃癌患者中CA72-4与CEA和CA19-9相比的临床意义及预后价值

Clinical significance and prognostic value of CA72-4 compared with CEA and CA19-9 in patients with gastric cancer.

作者信息

Ychou M, Duffour J, Kramar A, Gourgou S, Grenier J

机构信息

Digestive Oncology Unit, CRLC Val d'Aurelle-Paul Lamarque, Montpellier, France.

出版信息

Dis Markers. 2000;16(3-4):105-10. doi: 10.1155/2000/595492.

Abstract

Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and CA 19-9 are both widely used in the follow up of patients with gastrointestinal cancer. More recently another tumor marker, named CA 72-4 has been identified and characterized using two different monoclonal antibodies B72.3 and CC49. Several reports evaluated CA 72-4 as a serum tumor marker for gastric cancer and compared its clinical utility with that of CEA or CA 19-9; few reports concerned its prognostic value. In the present study, CA 72-4 is evaluated and compared with CEA and CA 19-9 in various populations of patients with gastric cancer and benign disease; for 52 patients with gastric adenocarcinoma and 57 patients without neoplastic disease CEA, CA 19-9 and CA 72-4 were evaluated before treatment. Sensitivity of the tumor markers CA 72-4, CA 19-9 and CEA at the recommended cut-off level in all 52 patients were 58%, 50% the sensitivity increased to 75%. of these markers, for non metastatic patients, multivariate analyses indicated that none of the markers were significant, when adjusted for gender and age (which were indicators of poor prognosis); patients with abnormal values of CA72-4 tended to have shorter survival than patients with normal values (p<0.07). In the metastatic population, only high values of CA19-9 (p<0.02) and gender (women) p<0.03) were indicators of poor prognosis in univariate analysis; multivariate analysis revealed that both CA72-4 (p=0.034) and CA19-9 p=0.009), adjusted for gender were independent prognostic factors. However, CA72-4 lost significance (p=0.41) when adjusted for CA19-9 and gender, indicating that CA19-9 provides more prognostic information than CA72-4. When limited to the metastatic male population with normal values of CA 19-9 and CEA, CA 72-4 pretherapeutic positive levels were associated with a worse prognosis (p<0.005). In conclusion, this study suggests that the addition of CA 72-4 to CEA and/or CA 19-9 could improve sensitivity in gastric cancer. The prognostic role of this marker is not yet clearly demonstrated but its usefulness in the monitoring of gastric cancer should be taken into account.

摘要

癌胚抗原(CEA)和CA 19-9均广泛应用于胃肠道癌患者的随访。最近,另一种名为CA 72-4的肿瘤标志物已通过两种不同的单克隆抗体B72.3和CC49得以鉴定和表征。多篇报告评估了CA 72-4作为胃癌的血清肿瘤标志物,并将其临床效用与CEA或CA 19-9的临床效用进行了比较;很少有报告涉及其预后价值。在本研究中,对CA 72-4进行了评估,并在各类胃癌患者和良性疾病患者群体中与CEA和CA 19-9进行了比较;对52例胃腺癌患者和57例无肿瘤疾病的患者在治疗前评估了CEA、CA 19-9和CA 72-4。在所有52例患者中,肿瘤标志物CA 72-4、CA 19-9和CEA在推荐临界值水平时的敏感性分别为58%、50%,敏感性增至75%。对于这些标志物,在非转移性患者中,多变量分析表明,在根据性别和年龄(这是预后不良的指标)进行调整后,没有一个标志物具有显著性;CA72-4值异常的患者的生存期往往比值正常的患者短(p<0.07)。在转移性患者群体中,在单变量分析中,只有CA19-9值高(p<0.02)和性别(女性,p<0.03)是预后不良的指标;多变量分析显示,在根据性别进行调整后,CA72-4(p=0.034)和CA19-9(p=0.009)均为独立的预后因素。然而,在根据CA19-9和性别进行调整后,CA72-4失去了显著性(p=0.41),这表明CA19-9比CA72-4提供了更多的预后信息。当仅限于CA 19-9和CEA值正常的转移性男性患者群体时,治疗前CA 72-4阳性水平与较差的预后相关(p<0.005)。总之,本研究表明,在CEA和/或CA 19-9基础上增加CA 72-4可提高胃癌的敏感性。该标志物的预后作用尚未得到明确证实,但应考虑其在胃癌监测中的有用性。

相似文献

4
Value of Combined Detection of Serum CEA, CA72-4, CA19-9 and TSGF in the Diagnosis of Gastric Cancer.
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2015;16(9):3867-70. doi: 10.7314/apjcp.2015.16.9.3867.
5
Tumor markers for diagnosis, monitoring of recurrence and prognosis in patients with upper gastrointestinal tract cancer.
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2014;15(23):10267-72. doi: 10.7314/apjcp.2014.15.23.10267.
7
Clinical significance and diagnostic value of serum CEA, CA19-9 and CA72-4 in patients with gastric cancer.
Oncotarget. 2016 Aug 2;7(31):49565-49573. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.10391.
8
Clinical assessment and prognostic evaluation of tumor markers in patients with gastric cancer.
Int J Biol Markers. 2013 Jun 28;28(2):192-200. doi: 10.5301/jbm.5000023.
10
CA72-4 combined with CEA, CA125 and CAl9-9 improves the sensitivity for the early diagnosis of gastric cancer.
Clin Chim Acta. 2014 Nov 1;437:183-6. doi: 10.1016/j.cca.2014.07.034. Epub 2014 Jul 30.

引用本文的文献

1
Direct Identification of O-Glycopeptides by Low-Temperature Assisted Nanopore Technique.
Research (Wash D C). 2025 Sep 4;8:0850. doi: 10.34133/research.0850. eCollection 2025.
3
Comparison of the prognostic effect of taxane regimens combined with ramucirumab before nivolumab for advanced gastric cancer.
Int J Clin Oncol. 2025 Jun;30(6):1152-1161. doi: 10.1007/s10147-025-02737-x. Epub 2025 Mar 17.
4
Tumor Glycosylation: A Main Player in the Modulation of Immune Responses.
Eur J Immunol. 2025 Mar;55(3):e202451318. doi: 10.1002/eji.202451318.
5
Construction and Validation of a Gastric Cancer Diagnostic Model based on Blood Groups and Tumor Markers.
J Cancer. 2024 Jan 1;15(3):729-736. doi: 10.7150/jca.88190. eCollection 2024.
6
Prognostic Value of Tumor Markers in Gastric Cancer: A Tertiary Cancer Centre Experience.
Cureus. 2023 Jul 23;15(7):e42328. doi: 10.7759/cureus.42328. eCollection 2023 Jul.
7
The importance of CA 72-4 and CA 19-9 dosing in gastric cancer.
J Med Life. 2023 Feb;16(2):186-188. doi: 10.25122/jml-2022-0173.
8
Treatment Outcome and Safety of the TCX Regimen for Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Prospective Cohort Study.
Cancer Manag Res. 2022 Sep 19;14:2825-2837. doi: 10.2147/CMAR.S384325. eCollection 2022.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验