Suppr超能文献

评估CA M26、CA M29、CA 15-3和癌胚抗原作为乳腺癌患者循环肿瘤标志物的情况。

Evaluation of CA M26, CA M29, CA 15-3 and CEA as circulating tumor markers in breast cancer patients.

作者信息

Dnistrian A M, Schwartz M K, Greenberg E J, Smith C A, Schwartz D C

机构信息

Department of Clinical Chemistry, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), New York, N.Y.

出版信息

Tumour Biol. 1991;12(2):82-90. doi: 10.1159/000217692.

Abstract

The clinical utility of CA M26 and CA M29 was studied in 116 breast cancer patients and compared with results for CA 15-3 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA). The highest sensitivities for breast cancer detection were achieved with CA 15-3 (0.60) and CEA (0.56), but this was compromised by a relative lack of specificity (0.87 and 0.88 for CA 15-3 and CEA, respectively). Sensitivities attained with CA M26 (0.47) and CA M29 (0.53) were lower, but there was an excellent specificity (1.00) for each assay in this series of benign patients. Tumor marker elevations were appreciable with advanced disease such that 82 of 91 patients (90%) with active metastatic breast cancer exhibited at least one abnormal test value. Longitudinal studies demonstrated that CA M26, CA M29, CA 15-3 and CEA complement each other and combinations of these markers reflect disease status better than individual tests.

摘要

在116例乳腺癌患者中研究了CA M26和CA M29的临床效用,并与CA 15-3和癌胚抗原(CEA)的检测结果进行比较。检测乳腺癌的最高敏感性来自CA 15-3(0.60)和CEA(0.56),但相对缺乏特异性(CA 15-3和CEA的特异性分别为0.87和0.88),这削弱了其检测效能。CA M26(0.47)和CA M29(0.53)的敏感性较低,但在这一系列良性患者中,每项检测的特异性均极佳(均为1.00)。肿瘤标志物在疾病进展时明显升高,91例有活跃转移性乳腺癌的患者中有82例(90%)至少有一项检测值异常。纵向研究表明,CA M26、CA M29、CA 15-3和CEA相互补充,这些标志物的组合比单项检测能更好地反映疾病状态。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验