• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

肿瘤标志物的标准化——通过外部质量评估确定的优先事项

Standardization of tumor markers - priorities identified through external quality assessment.

作者信息

Sturgeon Catharine

机构信息

a UK NEQAS [Edinburgh], Department of Laboratory Medicine , Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh , Edinburgh , UK.

出版信息

Scand J Clin Lab Invest Suppl. 2016;245:S94-9. doi: 10.1080/00365513.2016.1210334.

DOI:10.1080/00365513.2016.1210334
PMID:27542005
Abstract

Tumor markers are often heterogeneous substances that may be present in elevated concentrations in the serum of cancer patients. Typically measured by immunoassay, they contribute to clinical management, particularly in screening, case-finding, prognostic assessment, and post-treatment monitoring. Data both from external quality assessment (EQA) schemes and clinical studies demonstrate significant variation in tumor marker results obtained for the same specimen using different methods. Between-method between-laboratory coefficients of variation (CV) reported by EQA schemes generally reflect the complexity of the measurand, ranging from <5% for the structurally relatively simple α-fetoprotein (AFP) to >25% for the complex mucinous cancer antigen 19-9 (CA19-9). Improving the standardization of tumor marker measurements is particularly important for three reasons. The primary use of tumor markers is in monitoring cancer patients over long periods of time. Clinical interpretation of trends may consequently be affected if results are obtained in different laboratories using different methods or if a laboratory has to change method. Differences in results may have major implications for adoption of area-wide decision cut-offs and make implementation of these difficult. Method-related differences also make it difficult to compare clinical studies. Improving comparability of tumor marker results requires broad international agreement about which molecular forms of the measurand have clinical utility, identifying and adopting pure molecular forms as calibrants, and defining antibody specificities for their optimal detection. These aims have been achieved to varying extents for the most frequently measured serum tumor markers as described in this paper.

摘要

肿瘤标志物通常是异质性物质,在癌症患者血清中可能以升高的浓度存在。通常通过免疫测定法进行检测,它们有助于临床管理,特别是在筛查、病例发现、预后评估和治疗后监测方面。来自外部质量评估(EQA)计划和临床研究的数据表明,使用不同方法对同一标本进行肿瘤标志物检测时,结果存在显著差异。EQA计划报告的方法间实验室间变异系数(CV)通常反映了被测量物的复杂性,从结构相对简单的甲胎蛋白(AFP)的<5%到复杂的黏液癌抗原19-9(CA19-9)的>25%不等。由于三个原因,提高肿瘤标志物测量的标准化尤为重要。肿瘤标志物的主要用途是长期监测癌症患者。如果在不同实验室使用不同方法获得结果,或者如果一个实验室必须更换方法,那么对趋势的临床解释可能会受到影响。结果的差异可能对采用全区域决策临界值有重大影响,并使其难以实施。方法相关的差异也使得比较临床研究变得困难。提高肿瘤标志物结果的可比性需要就被测量物的哪些分子形式具有临床效用达成广泛的国际共识,确定并采用纯分子形式作为校准物,并定义其最佳检测的抗体特异性。如本文所述,对于最常检测的血清肿瘤标志物,这些目标已在不同程度上得以实现。

相似文献

1
Standardization of tumor markers - priorities identified through external quality assessment.肿瘤标志物的标准化——通过外部质量评估确定的优先事项
Scand J Clin Lab Invest Suppl. 2016;245:S94-9. doi: 10.1080/00365513.2016.1210334.
2
The pathway to clinical use of a cancer biomarker.癌症生物标志物的临床应用途径。
Scand J Clin Lab Invest Suppl. 2016;245:S17-21. doi: 10.1080/00365513.2016.1206441. Epub 2016 Jul 13.
3
The reference intervals for CA125, CA15-3, CA19-9, CA72-4, AFP, CEA, NSE and CYFRA21-1.CA125、CA15 - 3、CA19 - 9、CA72 - 4、甲胎蛋白(AFP)、癌胚抗原(CEA)、神经元特异性烯醇化酶(NSE)和细胞角蛋白19片段(CYFRA21 - 1)的参考区间。
Scand J Clin Lab Invest. 2019 Feb-Apr;79(1-2):71-74. doi: 10.1080/00365513.2018.1555855. Epub 2019 Feb 6.
4
Comparison of fresh frozen serum to proficiency testing material in College of American Pathologists surveys: alpha-fetoprotein, carcinoembryonic antigen, human chorionic gonadotropin, and prostate-specific antigen.在美国病理学家学会调查中新鲜冰冻血清与能力验证材料的比较:甲胎蛋白、癌胚抗原、人绒毛膜促性腺激素和前列腺特异性抗原。
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2005 Mar;129(3):331-7. doi: 10.5858/2005-129-331-COFFST.
5
Status of External Quality Assessment on Tumor Markers in China.中国肿瘤标志物室间质量评价现状
Clin Lab. 2015;61(10):1383-90. doi: 10.7754/clin.lab.2015.150309.
6
Clinical performance of LOCI™-based tumor marker assays for tumor markers CA 15-3, CA 125, CEA, CA 19-9 and AFP in gynecological cancers.基于LOCI™技术的肿瘤标志物检测法对妇科癌症中肿瘤标志物CA 15-3、CA 125、癌胚抗原(CEA)、CA 19-9和甲胎蛋白(AFP)的临床检测性能
Tumour Biol. 2017 Oct;39(10):1010428317730246. doi: 10.1177/1010428317730246.
7
[National external quality assessment and comparability of assays for tumor markers measurements].[肿瘤标志物检测的国家外部质量评估及检测方法的可比性]
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2010 Apr 13;90(14):993-7.
8
Clinical assessment and prognostic evaluation of tumor markers in patients with gastric cancer.胃癌患者肿瘤标志物的临床评估与预后评价。
Int J Biol Markers. 2013 Jun 28;28(2):192-200. doi: 10.5301/jbm.5000023.
9
Investigating the Current Harmonization Status of Tumor Markers Using Global External Quality Assessment Programs: A Feasibility Study.利用全球外部质量评估计划调查肿瘤标志物的当前协调状态:一项可行性研究。
Clin Chem. 2024 Apr 3;70(4):669-679. doi: 10.1093/clinchem/hvae005.
10
Evaluation of the UniCel™ DxI 800 immunoassay analyzer in measuring five tumor markers.评价 UniCel™ DxI 800 免疫分析系统检测五种肿瘤标志物的性能。
Yonsei Med J. 2012 May;53(3):557-64. doi: 10.3349/ymj.2012.53.3.557.

引用本文的文献

1
Longitudinal evaluation of external quality assessment results for CA 15-3, CA 19-9, and CA 125.CA 15-3、CA 19-9和CA 125外部质量评估结果的纵向评估
Front Mol Biosci. 2024 Jun 20;11:1401619. doi: 10.3389/fmolb.2024.1401619. eCollection 2024.
2
Interassay Variability and Clinical Implications of Five Different Prostate-specific Antigen Assays.五种不同前列腺特异性抗原检测方法的批间变异及临床意义
Eur Urol Open Sci. 2024 Mar 21;63:4-12. doi: 10.1016/j.euros.2024.03.008. eCollection 2024 May.
3
Recent developments in mass-spectrometry-based targeted proteomics of clinical cancer biomarkers.
基于质谱的临床癌症生物标志物靶向蛋白质组学的最新进展。
Clin Proteomics. 2024 Jan 30;21(1):6. doi: 10.1186/s12014-024-09452-1.
4
Method Comparison and Clinical Performance of Breast Cancer Tumor Markers on Novel Multiplex Immunoassay and Automatized LOCI Technology Platforms.新型多重免疫测定和自动化荧光偏振免疫分析技术平台上乳腺癌肿瘤标志物的方法比较及临床性能
Diagnostics (Basel). 2023 Sep 30;13(19):3101. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics13193101.
5
Longitudinal Evaluation of AFP and CEA External Proficiency Testing Reveals Need for Method Harmonization.甲胎蛋白(AFP)和癌胚抗原(CEA)外部能力验证的纵向评估显示需要方法协调统一。
Diagnostics (Basel). 2023 Jun 9;13(12):2019. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics13122019.
6
Quantitative protein biomarker panels: a path to improved clinical practice through proteomics.定量蛋白质生物标志物面板:通过蛋白质组学改善临床实践的途径。
EMBO Mol Med. 2023 Apr 11;15(4):e16061. doi: 10.15252/emmm.202216061. Epub 2023 Mar 20.
7
Comparison of Three Assays for Total and Free PSA Using Hybritech and WHO Calibrations.使用Hybritech和世界卫生组织校准法对总前列腺特异抗原(PSA)和游离PSA的三种检测方法的比较
In Vivo. 2021 Nov-Dec;35(6):3431-3439. doi: 10.21873/invivo.12643.
8
Novel RNA aptamers targeting gastrointestinal cancer biomarkers CEA, CA50 and CA72-4 with superior affinity and specificity.针对胃肠道癌生物标志物 CEA、CA50 和 CA72-4 的新型 RNA 适体,具有更高的亲和力和特异性。
PLoS One. 2018 Oct 10;13(10):e0198980. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0198980. eCollection 2018.
9
Comparison of Four Automated Carcinoembryonic Antigen Immunoassays: ADVIA Centaur XP, ARCHITECT I2000sr, Elecsys E170, and Unicel Dxi800.四种自动癌胚抗原免疫分析的比较:ADVIA Centaur XP、ARCHITECT I2000sr、Elecsys E170 和 Unicel Dxi800。
Ann Lab Med. 2018 Jul;38(4):355-361. doi: 10.3343/alm.2018.38.4.355.