OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to assess the role of HE4 and CA125 in differentiation between malignant and non-malignant endometrial pathologies. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective study of 87 patients with endometrial pathologies was conducted. Tumor markers were assessed two weeks before surgical intervention in each subject. The final diagnosis was established on the basis of the histopathological examination of the endometrium. RESULTS: Serum HE4 levels were significantly higher in patients with endometrial cancer (EC) as compared to non-malignant endometrial pathologies (p < 0.001), patients with stage I EC as compared to non-malignant endometrial pathologies (p < 0.001), and patients with stage Ia EC as compared to non-malignant endometrial pathologies (p = 0.003). Serum CA125 levels were not significantly different as far as these groups of patients were concerned. Both tumor markers were significantly higher in patients with stage II-III as compared to stage I EC and non-malignant endometrial pathologies (p < 0.001 for both markers). Sensitivity and specificity of HE4 at the cut-off level of 70 pmol/L for detecting endometrial malignancies were 73.08% and 85.71%, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity of CA125 at the cut-off level of 35 U/mL were 29.41% and 94.29%, respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) for HE4 was 0.875, suggesting that this marker reliably differentiates malignant from non-malignant endometrial pathologies (p < 0.001). AUC for CA125 was 0.552, suggesting that this marker does not reliably differentiate between malignant and non-malignant endometrial pathologies (p = 0.414). CONCLUSION: HE4, in contrast to CA125, might be a useful tool for detecting malignant endometrial pathologies.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to assess the role of HE4 and CA125 in differentiation between malignant and non-malignant endometrial pathologies. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective study of 87 patients with endometrial pathologies was conducted. Tumor markers were assessed two weeks before surgical intervention in each subject. The final diagnosis was established on the basis of the histopathological examination of the endometrium. RESULTS: Serum HE4 levels were significantly higher in patients with endometrial cancer (EC) as compared to non-malignant endometrial pathologies (p < 0.001), patients with stage I EC as compared to non-malignant endometrial pathologies (p < 0.001), and patients with stage Ia EC as compared to non-malignant endometrial pathologies (p = 0.003). Serum CA125 levels were not significantly different as far as these groups of patients were concerned. Both tumor markers were significantly higher in patients with stage II-III as compared to stage I EC and non-malignant endometrial pathologies (p < 0.001 for both markers). Sensitivity and specificity of HE4 at the cut-off level of 70 pmol/L for detecting endometrial malignancies were 73.08% and 85.71%, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity of CA125 at the cut-off level of 35 U/mL were 29.41% and 94.29%, respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) for HE4 was 0.875, suggesting that this marker reliably differentiates malignant from non-malignant endometrial pathologies (p < 0.001). AUC for CA125 was 0.552, suggesting that this marker does not reliably differentiate between malignant and non-malignant endometrial pathologies (p = 0.414). CONCLUSION:HE4, in contrast to CA125, might be a useful tool for detecting malignant endometrial pathologies.