Simona Ferraro1, Domitilla Schiumarini2, Mauro Panteghini2. 1. Cattedra di Biochimica Clinica e Biologia Molecolare Clinica, Dipartimento di Scienze Biomediche e Cliniche 'Luigi Sacco', Università degli Studi, Milan, Italy. Electronic address: ferraro.simona@hsacco.it. 2. Cattedra di Biochimica Clinica e Biologia Molecolare Clinica, Dipartimento di Scienze Biomediche e Cliniche 'Luigi Sacco', Università degli Studi, Milan, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Amongst the newly proposed biomarkers for ovarian cancer, serum human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) shows the greatest potential for clinical use. However, systematic appraisals of its biological characteristics are not available. This study sought to critically revise the available literature on biological and lifestyle factors affecting HE4 concentrations in serum to understand their possible influence on the marker interpretation. METHODS: A literature search was undertaken on electronic databases and references from retrieved articles. Article results were analyzed by evaluating study design, sample size, statistical approach, employed assay and, when available, by collecting similar information for carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA-125). RESULTS: Several factors may influence serum HE4 concentrations. In contrast to CA-125, higher HE4 concentrations are reported in the elderly. Although no variations in HE4 concentrations can be clearly associated to menopausal status, a strong difference in biomarker biological intra-individual variation according to the fertility status is reported. Smoking and renal function can also significantly influence HE4 results. CONCLUSION: The knowledge of factors influencing HE4 concentrations is relevant to promote more adequate interpretative criteria for use of this biomarker in the clinical setting.
BACKGROUND: Amongst the newly proposed biomarkers for ovarian cancer, serum humanepididymis protein 4 (HE4) shows the greatest potential for clinical use. However, systematic appraisals of its biological characteristics are not available. This study sought to critically revise the available literature on biological and lifestyle factors affecting HE4 concentrations in serum to understand their possible influence on the marker interpretation. METHODS: A literature search was undertaken on electronic databases and references from retrieved articles. Article results were analyzed by evaluating study design, sample size, statistical approach, employed assay and, when available, by collecting similar information for carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA-125). RESULTS: Several factors may influence serum HE4 concentrations. In contrast to CA-125, higher HE4 concentrations are reported in the elderly. Although no variations in HE4 concentrations can be clearly associated to menopausal status, a strong difference in biomarker biological intra-individual variation according to the fertility status is reported. Smoking and renal function can also significantly influence HE4 results. CONCLUSION: The knowledge of factors influencing HE4 concentrations is relevant to promote more adequate interpretative criteria for use of this biomarker in the clinical setting.
Authors: Chanhee Han; Stefania Bellone; Eric R Siegel; Gary Altwerger; Gulden Menderes; Elena Bonazzoli; Tomomi Egawa-Takata; Francesca Pettinella; Anna Bianchi; Francesco Riccio; Luca Zammataro; Ghanshyam Yadav; Jarrod A Marto; Marie-France Penet; Douglas A Levine; Ronny Drapkin; Abhijit Patel; Babak Litkouhi; Elena Ratner; Dan-Arin Silasi; Gloria S Huang; Masoud Azodi; Peter E Schwartz; Alessandro D Santin Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2018-03-21 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Renée T Fortner; Allison F Vitonis; Helena Schock; Anika Hüsing; Theron Johnson; Raina N Fichorova; Titilayo Fashemi; Hidemi S Yamamoto; Anne Tjønneland; Louise Hansen; Kim Overvad; Marie-Christine Boutron-Ruault; Marina Kvaskoff; Gianluca Severi; Heiner Boeing; Antonia Trichopoulou; Vassiliki Benetou; Carlo La Vecchia; Domenico Palli; Sabina Sieri; Rosario Tumino; Giuseppe Matullo; Amalia Mattiello; N Charlotte Onland-Moret; Petra H Peeters; Elisabete Weiderpass; Inger Torhild Gram; Mie Jareid; J Ramón Quirós; Eric J Duell; Maria-Jose Sánchez; María Dolores Chirlaque; Eva Ardanaz; Nerea Larrañaga; Björn Nodin; Jenny Brändstedt; Annika Idahl; Kay-Tee Khaw; Naomi Allen; Marc Gunter; Mattias Johansson; Laure Dossus; Melissa A Merritt; Elio Riboli; Daniel W Cramer; Rudolf Kaaks; Kathryn L Terry Journal: J Ovarian Res Date: 2017-03-20 Impact factor: 4.234
Authors: Artur Czekierdowski; Norbert Stachowicz; Agata Smoleń; Tomasz Kluz; Tomasz Łoziński; Andrzej Miturski; Janusz Kraczkowski Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) Date: 2021-02-28