Suppr超能文献

对肺癌患者血清标志物的评估是否有助于临床决策过程?

Does the assessment of serum markers in patients with lung cancer aid in the clinical decision making process?

作者信息

Ebert W, Muley T, Drings P

机构信息

Thoraxklinik Heidelberg-Rohrbach, Germany.

出版信息

Anticancer Res. 1996 Jul-Aug;16(4B):2161-8.

PMID:8694537
Abstract

This survey describes potential clinical applications of the tumour markers CYFRA 21-1, SCC antigen, NSE, and CEA in patients with lung cancer. Due to the rather low prevalence of bronchogenic carcinoma in the general public and the limited diagnostic accuracy, currently available tumour markers are unsuitable for the screening of asymptomatic individuals. All studies performed so far in patients with histologically confirmed NSCLC, agree that the best performance characteristics, in terms of sensitivity and specificity, were obtained with the CYFRA 21-1 test (sensitivity: 40-66%, specificity: 95% versus patients with benign pulmonary disorders) while NSE was found to be the marker of first choice in patients with SCLC (sensitivity: 77-85%). For diagnostic purpose, the value of tumour markers must be compared with the efficiency of standard clinical methods including imaging techniques and cytopathological examinations (detection rates: sputum cytology: 40-70%, biopsy at bronchoscopy in central tumours: 95-98%, biopsy at bronchoscopy + bronchial washing + thin needle aspiration in peripheral tumours: 85%). These figures show that the diagnostic yield of cytopathological examinations by far exceeds that of tumour markers. In addition, these investigations supply with histology and give informations on the T-stage (bronchoscopy). Tumour markers, however, may be used for diagnosis in advanced stages in which patients are very often not eligible for extensive investigations due to their performance status. In the differential diagnosis between NSCLC and SCLC a combination of CYFRA 21-1 and NSE was claimed to be helpful. It was demonstrated that 97% of patients could be correctly classified. NSE was shown to be useful to distinguish SCLC from malignant lymphoma, both the Hodgkin's (rate of false-positive elevations: 6.5%) and the non-Hodgkin's (rate of false positive elevations: 22.4%) types. By applying a cut-off point of NSE assays of 21.9 ng/ml corresponding to a 95% specificity versus the lymphoma group, SCLC is still indicated by elevated NSE levels with a sensitivity of 57.7%. Although a positive correlation of marker concentrations with increasing anatomical tumour extent could be demonstrated, the markers cannot be used for staging purposes due to a considerable overlap of marker levels between the individual stages. CYFRA 21-1 was shown to be unable to differentiate between operable (TNM I-IIIa) and inoperable (TNM IIIb/IV) NSCLC patients. The latter were identified with a detection rate of only 17% by the CYFRA 21-1 test (specificity 95% versus operable patients, cut-off point 20 ng/ml). Pretreatment-measured tumour markers, in particular CYFRA 21-1, were shown to provide prognostic information for the overall survival. The negative prognostic effect of CYFRA-21-1 was independent of classical prognostic markers such as performance status and tumour extent. There are several potential applications of serially-assessed tumour markers for disease monitoring of patients under therapy. In SCLC, increasing NSE levels within the remission phase were demonstrated to be strongly suggestive of tumour recurrence. This finding should give rise to further diagnostic procedures. NSE, however, was not able to differentiate between partial and complete remission since, in both cases, NSE levels dropped to the normal range; thus, NSE cannot replace clinical response evaluations. In NSCLC, it was found that curative surgery resulted in a significant drop of preoperatively elevated CYFRA 21-1 or SCC antigen levels down to the normal range. Although rising SCC antigen levels in the postoperative surveillance of patients with squamous cell carcinoma indicated very early tumour relapse, these results are of minor clinical utility due to the absence of curative therapy. Serial measurement of CYFRA 21-1 during chemotherapy in patients with inoperable squamous cell carcinoma has shown that there is a concordance of 74% between the course of the m

摘要

本调查描述了肿瘤标志物CYFRA 21-1、鳞状细胞癌抗原(SCC抗原)、神经元特异性烯醇化酶(NSE)和癌胚抗原(CEA)在肺癌患者中的潜在临床应用。由于支气管源性癌在普通人群中的患病率较低且诊断准确性有限,目前可用的肿瘤标志物不适合用于筛查无症状个体。迄今为止,在组织学确诊的非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)患者中进行的所有研究均表明,就敏感性和特异性而言,CYFRA 21-1检测表现最佳(敏感性:40-66%,特异性:95%,与良性肺部疾病患者相比),而NSE被发现是小细胞肺癌(SCLC)患者的首选标志物(敏感性:77-85%)。出于诊断目的,必须将肿瘤标志物的值与包括成像技术和细胞病理学检查在内的标准临床方法的效率进行比较(检出率:痰细胞学检查:40-70%,中央型肿瘤支气管镜活检:95-98%,周围型肿瘤支气管镜活检+支气管冲洗+细针穿刺活检:85%)。这些数据表明,细胞病理学检查的诊断率远远超过肿瘤标志物。此外,这些检查可提供组织学信息并给出关于T分期(支气管镜检查)的信息。然而,肿瘤标志物可用于晚期诊断,在晚期,由于患者的身体状况,他们往往不适合进行广泛的检查。在NSCLC和SCLC的鉴别诊断中,CYFRA 21-1和NSE的联合应用被认为是有帮助的。结果表明,97%的患者能够被正确分类。NSE被证明有助于区分SCLC与恶性淋巴瘤,包括霍奇金淋巴瘤(假阳性升高率:6.5%)和非霍奇金淋巴瘤(假阳性升高率:22.4%)。通过将NSE检测的临界值设定为21.9 ng/ml(与淋巴瘤组相比特异性为95%),NSE水平升高仍可提示SCLC,敏感性为57.7%。尽管可以证明标志物浓度与解剖学肿瘤范围增加呈正相关,但由于各阶段之间标志物水平有相当大的重叠,这些标志物不能用于分期。CYFRA 21-1被证明无法区分可手术(TNM I-IIIa)和不可手术(TNM IIIb/IV)的NSCLC患者。CYFRA 21-1检测对后者的检出率仅为17%(与可手术患者相比特异性为95%,临界值为20 ng/ml)。术前检测的肿瘤标志物,尤其是CYFRA 21-1,已被证明可为总生存期提供预后信息。CYFRA-21-1的负面预后作用独立于诸如身体状况和肿瘤范围等经典预后标志物。连续评估肿瘤标志物在监测接受治疗的患者疾病方面有几种潜在应用。在SCLC中,缓解期NSE水平升高强烈提示肿瘤复发。这一发现应促使进行进一步的诊断程序。然而,NSE无法区分部分缓解和完全缓解,因为在这两种情况下,NSE水平均降至正常范围;因此,NSE不能替代临床反应评估。在NSCLC中,发现根治性手术导致术前升高的CYFRA 21-1或SCC抗原水平显著下降至正常范围。尽管在鳞状细胞癌患者术后监测中SCC抗原水平升高表明肿瘤复发非常早,但由于缺乏根治性治疗,这些结果的临床实用性较小。对无法手术的鳞状细胞癌患者化疗期间连续测量CYFRA 21-1表明,m的病程之间一致性为74%。

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