Literature DB >> 8694537

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

W Ebert1, T Muley, P Drings.   

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

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8694537

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anticancer Res        ISSN: 0250-7005            Impact factor:   2.480


  10 in total

1.  Antinuclear antibodies as potential markers of lung cancer.

Authors:  F Fernández-Madrid; P J VandeVord; X Yang; R L Karvonen; P M Simpson; M J Kraut; J L Granda; J E Tomkiel
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 12.531

2.  Using protein microarray as a diagnostic assay for non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Li Zhong; Giovanna E Hidalgo; Arnold J Stromberg; Nada H Khattar; James R Jett; Edward A Hirschowitz
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2005-08-18       Impact factor: 21.405

3.  Osteopontin is a marker for cancer aggressiveness and patient survival.

Authors:  G F Weber; G S Lett; N C Haubein
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2010-09-07       Impact factor: 7.640

4.  Identification of featured biomarkers in different types of lung cancer with DNA microarray.

Authors:  Chao Zhou; Hao Chen; Li Han; An Wang; Liang-An Chen
Journal:  Mol Biol Rep       Date:  2014-07-08       Impact factor: 2.316

5.  Serum cytokeratin 19 fragment in advanced lung cancer: could we eventually have a serum tumor marker?

Authors:  Ahmed El Bastawisy; Mahmoud El Azzouny; Gamal Mohammed; Ahmad Awad Allah; Eman Behiry
Journal:  Ecancermedicalscience       Date:  2014-01-30

6.  Expression of neuron-specific enolase in multiple myeloma and implications for clinical diagnosis and treatment.

Authors:  Haiping Yang; Ruihua Mi; Qian Wang; Xudong Wei; Qingsong Yin; Lin Chen; Xinghu Zhu; Yongping Song
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-05-05       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Carbohydrate antigen 19-9 is a useful prognostic marker in esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Ryuma Tokunaga; Yu Imamura; Kenichi Nakamura; Tomoyuki Uchihara; Takatsugu Ishimoto; Shigeki Nakagawa; Masaaki Iwatsuki; Yoshifumi Baba; Yasuo Sakamoto; Yuji Miyamoto; Naoya Yoshida; Shinichiro Oyama; Takashi Shono; Hideaki Naoe; Hiroshi Saeki; Eiji Oki; Masayuki Watanabe; Yutaka Sasaki; Yoshihiko Maehara; Hideo Baba
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2015-08-26       Impact factor: 4.452

8.  [Clinical significance of detection of serum values of neuron specific enolase before and after treatment for small cell lung cancer].

Authors:  Feng Xue; Liyan Wang; Mingyan Zhang; Li Cai
Journal:  Zhongguo Fei Ai Za Zhi       Date:  2011-09

9.  Effects of α-enolase Gene Silencing on Reproductive-related Hormone Receptor Expression and Steroid Hormone Synthesis of Primary Granulosa Cells from Goose F1 Follicles.

Authors:  Hong Ji; Chun-Yang Niu; Hong-Liang Zhang; Jing-Ru Guo; Li Zhen; Shuai Lian; Chuang Yang; Huan-Min Yang; Jian-Fa Wang
Journal:  J Vet Res       Date:  2020-01-31       Impact factor: 1.744

10.  Blood-sampling collection prior to surgery may have a significant influence upon biomarker concentrations measured.

Authors:  Nicolas Kahn; Julia Riedlinger; Markus Roeßler; Christina Rabe; Michael Lindner; Ina Koch; Sabine Schott-Hildebrand; Felix J Herth; Marc A Schneider; Michael Meister; Thomas R Muley
Journal:  Clin Proteomics       Date:  2015-07-31       Impact factor: 3.988

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.