BACKGROUND: Cutaneous melanoma is the most aggressive form of skin carcinoma in humans, frequently with a rapid progression of disease. To detect early developing metastasis, laboratory tests to determine levels of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and alkaline phosphatase (AP) form part of the regular follow-up, but often cannot discover recurrent disease at a sufficiently early stage. METHODS: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of protein S-100beta (S-100beta), melanoma-inhibitory activity (MIA), LDH, AP, and tyrosinase/MART-1 reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), the authors included 296 consecutive AJCC Stage II or III clinically disease-free melanoma patients. Follow-up examinations were performed every 3 months and blood samples were drawn to determine the levels of these tumor markers. RESULTS: Metastasis occurred in 41 of the 296 patients during a median follow-up period of 19 months (range, 1-33 months). The sensitivity to detect new metastases was 29% for protein S-100beta, 22% for MIA, 2% for LDH, 17% for AP, and 24% for RT-PCR. The diagnostic accuracy was best for MIA (86%) and S-100beta (84%), whereas AP (79%), LDH (77%), and RT-PCR (72%) demonstrated lower values. Elevated values of S-100beta and MIA during follow-up examinations were associated with decreased survival rates in the further course of the disease, but pathologic findings of the other tumor markers showed no prognostic impact. CONCLUSIONS: To the authors' knowledge, the current study is the first comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of currently available tumor markers in the follow-up of high-risk melanoma patients. Protein S-100beta and MIA demonstrated a higher sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy in the diagnosis of newly occurring metastasis compared with to the tumor markers AP, LDH, and RT-PCR diagnostics. Therefore, the tumor markers S-100beta and MIA may be useful in the follow-up of disease-free Stage II and III melanoma patients. Copyright 2003 American Cancer Society.DOI 10.1002/cncr.11250
BACKGROUND:Cutaneous melanoma is the most aggressive form of skin carcinoma in humans, frequently with a rapid progression of disease. To detect early developing metastasis, laboratory tests to determine levels of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and alkaline phosphatase (AP) form part of the regular follow-up, but often cannot discover recurrent disease at a sufficiently early stage. METHODS: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of protein S-100beta (S-100beta), melanoma-inhibitory activity (MIA), LDH, AP, and tyrosinase/MART-1 reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), the authors included 296 consecutive AJCC Stage II or III clinically disease-free melanomapatients. Follow-up examinations were performed every 3 months and blood samples were drawn to determine the levels of these tumor markers. RESULTS: Metastasis occurred in 41 of the 296 patients during a median follow-up period of 19 months (range, 1-33 months). The sensitivity to detect new metastases was 29% for protein S-100beta, 22% for MIA, 2% for LDH, 17% for AP, and 24% for RT-PCR. The diagnostic accuracy was best for MIA (86%) and S-100beta (84%), whereas AP (79%), LDH (77%), and RT-PCR (72%) demonstrated lower values. Elevated values of S-100beta and MIA during follow-up examinations were associated with decreased survival rates in the further course of the disease, but pathologic findings of the other tumor markers showed no prognostic impact. CONCLUSIONS: To the authors' knowledge, the current study is the first comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of currently available tumor markers in the follow-up of high-risk melanomapatients. Protein S-100beta and MIA demonstrated a higher sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy in the diagnosis of newly occurring metastasis compared with to the tumor markers AP, LDH, and RT-PCR diagnostics. Therefore, the tumor markers S-100beta and MIA may be useful in the follow-up of disease-free Stage II and III melanomapatients. Copyright 2003 American Cancer Society.DOI 10.1002/cncr.11250
Authors: Angel Díaz-Lagares; Estíbaliz Alegre; Ainhoa Arroyo; María González-Cao; Maria E Zudaire; Santiago Viteri; Salvador Martín-Algarra; Alvaro González Journal: Tumour Biol Date: 2011-08-20
Authors: Gary A Clawson; Eric Kimchi; Susan D Patrick; Ping Xin; Ramdane Harouaka; Siyang Zheng; Arthur Berg; Todd Schell; Kevin F Staveley-O'Carroll; Rogerio I Neves; Paul J Mosca; Diane Thiboutot Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-07-19 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Markus Essler; Anna Link; Benedetta Belloni; Vesna Mirceva; Michael Souvatzoglou; Markus Thaler; Bernhard Haller; Ruediger Hein; Bernd J Krause Journal: PLoS One Date: 2011-09-14 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: S Kruijff; E Bastiaannet; A C Muller Kobold; R J van Ginkel; A J H Suurmeijer; H J Hoekstra Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 5.344