Ebert W, Hoppe M, Muley T, Drings P
Thoraxklinik Heideiberg-Rohrbach, Germany.
Anticancer Res. 1997 Jul-Aug;17(4B):2875-8.
In a series of 381 consecutive patients with lung tumors and benign pulmonary diseases, we examined whether tumor markers CYFRA 21-1 (EIA, Boehringer, Mannheim), TPA-M (IRMA AB Sangtec Medical, Bromma, Sweden), TPS (IRMA, Beki Diagnostics AB, Bromma, Sweden), CEA and NSE (EIA, Roche, Basel) have the potential to contribute to clinical decision-making processes with respect to diagnosis and assessment of response to therapy. The sensitivity values of the marker tests in NSCLC (CYFRA 21-1: 44.4% > 3.9 ng/ml, TPA-M: 39.4% > 200 U/ml, TPS: 13.2% > 230 U/ml, CEA: 37.5% > 8.6 ng/ml), in SCLC (NSE: 61.9% > 14.0 ng/ml) and in pleural mesothelioma (CYFRA 21-1 and TPS: 36.4%) were found to be clearly inferior to the yield of standard cytopathological examinations (85-98%) when using the 95% specificity versus the group with benign pulmonary disease as cut-off values. Therefore, currently available tumor markers are of minor value in the primary diagnosis of lung tumors. After curative surgery (Ro) of NSCLC only CYFRA 21-1 levels dropped to the normal range within one week. The other markers simulated residual tumor mass by displaying elevated marker levels after surgery. During the monitoring of response to chemo-/radiotherapy the changes in marker levels were compared to the clinical assessment according to standard criteria of the WHO. The criteria defined for marker response were a 65% decrease for a partial response and a 40% increase of the marker levels for progressive disease. Concordant results were obtained in 59.4% of the cases for CYFRA 21-1 (TPA-M: 63.3%, TPS: 65.5%, CEA: 54.8%, NSE: 68.9%). Most discordant results were obtained in tumor remission due to an insufficient decrease in the markers. Progressive disease was most effectively indicated by CYFRA 21-1 in NSCLC 60%) and by NSE in SCLC (70.0%). It is concluded that increasing marker levels may contribute to clinical decision making, at least in helping to decide which patients should no longer treated by ineffective and toxic drugs.
在连续的381例肺肿瘤和良性肺部疾病患者中,我们研究了肿瘤标志物CYFRA 21-1(酶免疫分析,德国曼海姆宝灵曼公司)、TPA-M(免疫放射分析,瑞典布罗玛AB Sangtec Medical公司)、TPS(免疫放射分析,瑞典布罗玛Beki Diagnostics AB公司)、癌胚抗原(CEA)和神经元特异性烯醇化酶(NSE,酶免疫分析,瑞士巴塞尔罗氏公司)在肺肿瘤诊断及评估治疗反应方面对临床决策过程是否有帮助。当以95%的特异性及良性肺部疾病组作为临界值时,发现这些标志物检测在非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)中的敏感性值(CYFRA 21-1:44.4%,>3.9 ng/ml;TPA-M:39.4%,>200 U/ml;TPS:13.2%,>230 U/ml;CEA:37.5%,>8.6 ng/ml)、小细胞肺癌(SCLC)中的敏感性值(NSE:61.9%,>14.0 ng/ml)及胸膜间皮瘤中的敏感性值(CYFRA 21-1和TPS:36.4%)明显低于标准细胞病理学检查的阳性率(85-98%)。因此,目前可用的肿瘤标志物在肺肿瘤的初步诊断中价值不大。非小细胞肺癌根治性手术后(R0),仅CYFRA 21-1水平在一周内降至正常范围。其他标志物术后仍显示升高水平,提示有残留肿瘤。在监测放化疗反应期间,将标志物水平的变化与根据世界卫生组织标准进行的临床评估进行比较。标志物反应的标准定义为部分缓解时标志物水平下降65%,疾病进展时标志物水平升高40%。CYFRA 21-1在59.4%的病例中结果一致(TPA-M:63.3%,TPS:65.5%,CEA:54.8%,NSE:68.9%)。大多数不一致的结果出现在肿瘤缓解时,原因是标志物下降不足。在非小细胞肺癌中,CYFRA 21-1最有效地提示疾病进展(60%),在小细胞肺癌中,NSE最有效(70.0%)。结论是,标志物水平升高可能有助于临床决策,至少有助于决定哪些患者不应再接受无效和有毒的药物治疗。