联合检测肿瘤标志物在肿瘤诊断中的意义

目的探讨肿瘤标志物AFP、CEA、CA19-9、CA125联合检测在肿瘤诊断中的意义。方法对120例肿瘤患者血清中AFP、CEA、CA19-9、CA125进行联合检测。结果 120例肿瘤患者血清中AFP、CEA、CA19-9、CA125含量明显增高,四项联合检测的阳性率分别为消化道恶性肿瘤组82.3%,消化道良性肿瘤组57.1%,肺癌组74.1%,卵巢肿瘤组87.5%。结论联合检测AFP、CEA、CA19-9、CA125具有互补性,可以提高肿瘤检出率,是对肿瘤诊断有效的方法。     

多肿瘤标志物蛋白芯片在卵巢癌诊断中的应用

目的：探讨多肿瘤标志物蛋白芯片技术对卵巢癌诊断的应用价值。方法：应用多肿瘤标志物蛋白芯片技术测定66例卵巢癌患者，64例妇科良性病患者和144例健康女性的血清12项肿瘤标志物（CA19-9、NSE、CEA、CA242、CA125、CA153、AFP、Ferritin、f-PSA、PSA、β-HCG、HGH）的水平，并评价蛋白芯片的诊断价值。结果：卵巢癌组的血清CA19-9、CEA、CA242、Ferritin、AFP、CA125和CA153水平显著高于妇科良性病组和健康对照组（P〈0．01）。卵巢癌组CA125、Ferritin、CA19-9、CEA、CA242和CA153单项指标的阳性率依次分别为68．2％、31．8％、30．3％、22．7％、19．7％和19．7％，与妇科良性病组和健康组比较有显著性差异（P〈0．001）。蛋白芯片12项指标联合检测的阳性率显著高于任何单项标志物（P〈0．001）。蛋白芯片检测中CA125＋CA19-9二项和CA125＋CA19-9＋CEA三项联合检测的诊断敏感性和准确性明显高于其CA125单项指标。蛋白芯片12项指标联合检测的诊断敏感性、特异性、准确性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值分别为87．9％、93．3％、92．0％、80．6％和96．0％。与其CA125单项指标比较，诊断敏感性和准确性分别从68．2％和90．5％增加到87．9％和92．0％。结论：应用蛋白芯片技术联合检测肿瘤标志物有效提高诊断敏感性和准确性，对卵巢癌的辅助诊断具有重要临床应用价值。     

外周血内CA19-9、CA242及CEA对胰腺癌诊断及病理分期评估的价值

目的：分析糖类抗原19-9（carbohydrate antigen 19-9,CA19-9）、CA242、癌胚抗原（carcino-embryonic anti-gen,CEA）联合检测诊断胰腺癌的临床价值及其对临床分期判断的指导作用。方法选取95例胰腺癌患者为患者组,及同期60例健康体检者为对照组,比较两组受试者血清CA19-9、CA242和CEA的表达水平,计算血清CA19-9、CA242、CEA单独检测及联合检测诊断胰腺癌的敏感度、特异度和准确性,并比较不同临床分期胰腺癌患者血清CA19-9、CA242、CEA的差异,评价上述指标对胰腺癌临床分期判断的指导作用。结果患者组血清 CA19-9、CA242、CEA水平均高于对照组,差异均具有统计学意义（均P＜0．05）。联合检测诊断胰腺癌的敏感度、特异度和准确性分别为96．8％、66．7％、85．2％,其敏感度、准确性均优于单项检测。随着患者病理分期的增加,其血清CA19-9、CA242、CEA水平均升高,差异均具有统计学意义（均P＜0．05）。患者组治疗后6个月血清CA19-9、CA242、CEA水平均较术前降低,差异均具有统计学意义（均P＜0．05）。肿瘤直径≥5 cm者、肿瘤位于胰腺体／尾部者,其血清CA19-9、CA242、CEA水平均高于肿瘤直径＜5 cm 者及肿瘤位于胰腺头部或全胰腺者,差异均具有统计学意义（均 P＜0.05）。结论联合检测血清CA19-9、CA242和CEA有助于胰腺癌的早期诊断及分期判断,具有较高的临床价值。     

血清糖类抗原及癌胚抗原联合检测在恶性肿瘤诊断中的价值

目的探讨血清糖类抗原及癌胚抗原(CEA)联合检测在恶性肿瘤诊断中的价值,以期为恶性肿瘤的早期诊断提供更可靠的依据。方法选取毕节市中医院2010年3月至2014年3月间收治的恶性肿瘤患者90例,其中直肠癌患者30例,肝癌30例,胰腺癌30例,并选择同期健康体检者40例作为对照,分析癌胚抗原(CEA)以及血清糖类抗原(CA125、CA19-9)在各人群、各类型肿瘤中表达情况。结果在恶性肿瘤患者中,CEA、CA125、CA19-9表达升高的比例显著高于健康体检者,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);各类型肿瘤中,直肠癌中CEA升高明显高于胰腺癌和肝癌,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);胰腺癌中CA125、CA19-9升高率明显高于肝癌和直肠癌,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);CEA、CA125、CA19-9联合检测率直肠癌为96.7%、肝癌为90.0%、胰腺癌为93.3%,明显高于各组的单项检测率,三项联合检测率与单个检查率相比,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论联合检测肿瘤标志物CEA、CA125、CA19-9可显著提高胰腺癌、肝癌、直肠癌等恶性肿瘤诊断的敏感性,为临床治疗提供依据。     

血清CA125、CA19-9、CEA及SCC水平在子宫内膜癌患者中的诊断意义

目的：探讨血清CA125、CA19－9、CEA及SCC联合测定在子宫内膜癌患者中的诊断及对病情评估的意义。方法：测定107例子宫内膜癌患术前血清CA125、CA19－9、CEA及SCC水平，分析不同临床期别与4项标志物之间的关系。结果：4例肿瘤标志物中以血清CA125在子宫内膜患者中阳性率最高，达30．3％，联合测定阳性率升高，以CA125、CA19－9及CEA联合为最佳，阳性率可提高到48．5％，随着患者临床期别的增高，各项肿瘤标志物的中位数值及阳性率有升高趋势，Ⅱ-Ⅳ期患者显著高于Ⅰ期患者，血清CA125和（或）CA19－9≥40U/ml者，有50．3％的可能临床期别已达Ⅲ期。结论：子宫内膜癌患者术前联合测定CA125、CA19－9、CEA及SCC可协助正确诊断，有利于子解病情程度，制定合适的治疗方案。     

联合检测血清 CEA、CA50、CA19-9、CA125水平在胃癌诊断中的价值

目的：探讨联合检测血清癌胚抗原（CEA）、糖类抗原125（CA125）、糖类抗原50（CA50）、糖类抗原19-9（CA19-9）水平在胃癌诊断中的临床价值。方法采用放射免疫分析法检测56例经病理学确诊的胃癌患者和48例胃部良性疾病患者血清 CEA、CA50、CA19-9、CA125水平,并收集30例正常健康体检者作比较作为正常对照。结果胃癌患者术前血清 CEA、CA50、CA19-9、CA125水平明显高于胃部良性疾病患者及正常健康体检者（P 均＜005）;胃部良性疾病患者及正常健康体检者血清 EA、CA50、CA19-9、CA125水平比较差异均无统计学意义（P 均＞005）。胃癌患者术后3个月血清 CEA、CA50、CA19-9、CA125水平明显低于术前（P 均＜005）。联合检测 CEA、CA50、CA19-9、CA125的敏感性为875%,明显高于任一单项检测（P 均＜005）。复发胃癌患者血清CEA、CA50、CA19-9、CA125水平明显高于未复发患者（P 均＜005）。结论联合检测血清CEA、CA50、CA19-9、CA125水平可以提高胃癌患者诊断的敏感性,有助于胃癌的诊断、治疗方案选择及预后评估。     

血清肿瘤标志物单项及联合检测在肺癌诊断中的临床价值

目的探讨血清癌胚抗原(Carcinoembryonic antigen,CEA)、糖类抗原19-9(CA19-9)、糖类抗原125(CA125)、细胞角蛋白19片断(Cytokeratinfragment 19,CYFRA21-1)、神经特异性烯醇化酶(Neuron-specific enolase,NSE)、鳞状细胞抗原(SCC-Ag)6种肿瘤标志物单项及联合检测在肺癌诊断中的临床价值。方法采用化学发光免疫法检测92例肺癌患者、92例肺良性疾病患者、92例健康体检者的血清CEA、CA19-9、CA125、CYFRA21-1、NSE、SCC-Ag表达水平。结果肺癌患者的血清肿瘤标志物CEA、CA19-9、CA125、CYFRA21-1、NSE、SCC-Ag的表达均明显高于肺良性疾病患者和健康体检者(P均<0.05);6种肿瘤标志物对肺癌诊断的灵敏性和准确度分别为:CEA(51.1%、73.3%)、CY-FRA21-1(58.7%、73.9%)、CA125(38.0%、71.4%))、CA19-9(27.2%、70.3%)、NSE(26.1%、65.9%)、SCC-Ag(35.9%、71.0%),而六者联合检测的灵敏性和准确度分别为92.4%和83.7%,明显高于各单项检测(P<0.05)。结论血清肿瘤标志物CEA、CA19-9、CA125、CYFRA21-1、NSE、SCC-Ag是诊断肺癌较好的标志物,六者联合检测可明显提高肺癌诊断的灵敏性和准确度。     

血清肿瘤标志物在预测胃癌病理学分期的应用研究

目的?探讨血清肿瘤标志物在预测胃癌病理学分期的应用价值。方法?分析2014年8月至2017年8月广东省东莞东华医院收治的174例胃癌患者。所有患者均经病理组织活检确诊并分期,均检测血清肿瘤标志物CEA、CA125、CA72-4、CA19-9水平。分析CEA、CA125、CA72-4、CA19-9肿瘤标志物在不同病理学分期胃癌患者中的表达以及阳性表达率,分析其与胃癌病理分期的相关性。结果?血清肿瘤标志物CEA、CA125、CA72-4、CA19-9在Ⅰ期、Ⅱ期、Ⅲ期、Ⅳ期胃癌患者中的表达水平依次增高,差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。胃癌患者CEA、CA125、CA72-4、CA19-9阳性表达率Ⅰ期、Ⅱ期、Ⅲ期、Ⅳ期胃癌患者中依次增高, CEA、CA125、CA72-4、CA19-9阳性表达率与病理分期呈正相关,r值分别为0.691、0.582、0.768、0.550,P值分别为0.000、0.004、0.000、0.006,差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。结论?血清肿瘤标志物CEA、CA125、CA72-4、CA19-9在预测胃癌病理学分期中具有较好的应用效果,对其进行监测,能为其诊断及病情评估提供参考。     

多肿瘤标志物蛋白芯片中CA19-9表达水平升高对恶性肿瘤的诊断价值

目的探讨多肿瘤标志物蛋白芯片中糖链抗原CA19-9水平升高的临床诊断意义。方法收集可供分析的25 076例多肿瘤蛋白芯片检测结果,分析CA19-9水平在各人群、各肿瘤组织中升高情况。结果恶性肿瘤患者CA19-9水平升高发生率明显高于良性病变患者及正常体检者,且胰腺癌发生率最高(62.04%),其次为肝癌(44.25%)、胃癌(26.40%)、结直肠癌(26.32%);CA19-9伴随升高的指标以CA242最为常见,其次为CEA、CA125;CA19-9/CA242、CA19-9/CEA伴随升高最常见于结直肠癌(90.00%,86.45%);CA19-9/CA125伴随升高最常见于肺癌(71.66%)。CA19-9+CA242+CA125联合升高最常见于胰腺癌(54.91%);CA19-9+CA242+CEA联合升高最常见于结直肠癌(81.61%);CA19-9+AFP+CA125联合升高最常见于肝癌(32.14%);CA19-9+CEA+CA125联合升高最常见于肺癌(55.56%)。结论 CA19-9在恶性肿瘤中广泛表达,但并非恶性肿瘤的特异性指标。CA19-9单项指标升高对消化系统肿瘤具有较高的诊断价值,尤其对胰腺癌,而CA19-9伴随CA125、CA19-9、CA242水平升高,有助于提高各肿瘤诊断阳性率,降低误诊率。     

肿瘤标志物联合检测在胸腹水性质鉴别中的临床应用

目的：探讨CEA、CA125、CYFRA21-1等8种肿瘤标志物检测在胸腹水鉴别诊断中的临床应用价值.方法：采用电化学发光法分别对176例患者的胸水和/或腹水进行癌胚抗原（CEA）、糖类癌抗原125 （CA125）、细胞角蛋白片段19（CYFRA21-1）等8项肿瘤标志物检测（其中恶性胸腹水81例,结核性胸腹水45例及不明原因胸腹水50例）,评价上述指标在鉴别胸腹水性质诊断中的灵敏度及特异性.结果：8项肿瘤标志物在良、恶性胸腹水中的表达水平具有显著性差异（P＜0.05）.恶性胸腹水中CEA、CA125、CYFRA21-1、NSE的水平及阳性率较高,分别为94%、81%、62%和52%.相关胸腹水肿瘤标志物联合检测对鉴别诊断不同良恶性胸腹水有统计学意义（P＜0.05）.结论：胸腹水中CEA、CA125、CYFRA21-1、NSE联合检测对良恶性胸腹水鉴别诊断有重要价值.     

Applicative Value of Serum CA19-9, CEA,CA125 and CA242 in Diagnosis and Prognosis for Patients with Pancreatic Cancer Treated by Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy

Objective: To evaluate the application value of serum CA19-9, CEA, CA125 and CA242 in diagnosis andprognosis of pancreatic cancer cases treated with concurrent chemotherapy. Materials and Methods: 52patients with pancreatic cancer, 40 with benign pancreatic diseases and 40 healthy people were selected. Theelectrochemiluminescence immunoassay method was used for detecting levels of CA19-9, CEA and CA125, anda CanAg CA242 enzyme linked immunoassay kit for assessing the level of CA242. The Kaplan-Meier methodwas used for analyzing the prognostic factors of patients with pancreatic cancer. The Cox proportional hazardmodel was applied for analyzing the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidential interval (CI) for survival timeof patients with pancreatic cancer. Results: The levels of serum CA19-9, CEA, CA125 and CA242 in patientswith pancreatic cancer were significantly higher than those in patients with benign pancreatic diseases andhealthy people (P<0.001). The sensitivity of CA19-9 was the highest among these, followed by CA242, CA125and CEA. The specificity of CA242 is the highest, followed by CA125, CEA and CA19-9. The sensitivity andspecificity of joint detection of serum CA19-9, CEA, CA125and CA242 were 90.4% and 93.8%, obviouslyhigher than single detection of those markers in diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. The median survival time of52 patients with pancreatic cancer was 10 months (95% CI7.389~12.611).. Patients with the increasing level ofserum CA19-9, CEA, CA125, CA242 had shorter survival times (P=0.047. 0.043, 0.0041, 0.029). COX regressionanalysis showed that CA19-9 was an independent prognostic factor for patients with pancreatic cancer (P=0.001,95%CI 2.591~38.243). Conclusions: The detection of serum tumor markers (CA19.9, CEA, CA125 and CA242)is conducive to the early diagnosis of pancreatic cancer and joint detection of tumor markers helps improve thediagnostic efficiency. Moreover, CA19-9 is an independent prognostic factor for patients with pancreatic cancer.     

Carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9) and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in pancreatic cancer. Role of age and liver dysfunction

In order to ascertain the clinical usefulness of CA 19-9 in detecting pancreatic cancer in comparison with CEA, and to verify the influence of age and liver dysfunction on serum levels of these two antigens, serum CA 19-9 and CEA were assessed in 32 control subjects, 32 patients with pancreatic cancer, 26 with chronic pancreatitis and 43 with gastrointestinal extra-pancreatic diseases. Sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy of CA 19-9 and CEA in detecting pancreatic cancer were: 69% and 44%, 91% and 75%, 60% and 19% respectively. Linear correlations were observed between the age of the subjects on the one hand and CA 19-9 or CEA on the other. Significant relationships were also noticed between alanine-amino-transferase or bilirubin serum levels and CA 19-9 values. Serum CA 19-9 seems to be a better diagnostic tool than CEA in the assessment of pancreatic cancer; nevertheless the influence of liver dysfunction and age to some extent limits the diagnostic value of CA 19-9.     

CEA,CA 19-9 and CA 72-4 improve the diagnostic accuracy in gastrointestinal cancers

BACKGROUND: CEA, CA 19-9, CA 242 and CA 72-4 are commonly used tumour markers for gastrointestinal malignancies. The advantage of the concomitant use of these markers is under debate. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Serum concentrations of the markers were measured at the time of diagnosis in 161 patients with benign and 125 with malignant gastrointestinal diseases. Concomitant use of the markers was evaluated in a logistic regression model. RESULTS: CA 19-9, CA 242 or CA 72-4 showed similar sensitivity of 44% for gastric cancer, whereas CEA was elevated in 25% of the cases. In patients with colorectal cancer, CEA was most frequently elevated (54%), followed by CA 242 (46%), CA 19-9 (36%) and CA 72-4 (25%). High CA 19-9 and CA 242 serum levels were frequent in patients with cholangiocarcinoma (86% and 68%, respectively) and pancreatic cancer (80% and 63%, respectively). In the benign disease group, serum CA 19-9 was most frequently elevated, i.e. in 24%, 25% and 38% of patients with pancreatic, biliary and liver disorders, respectively. The overall accuracy of CEA, CA 19-9, CA 242 and CA 72-4 was 66%, 71%, 71% and 66%, respectively (p > 0.18). When combined in a logistic regression model, CA 72-4, CA 19-9 and CEA provided independent diagnostic information, whereas CA 242 contributed with independent diagnostic information only on excluding CA 19-9. The probability of cancer for each patient, calculated with the model, was applied as a diagnostic test and was compared with the single markers by ROC-curve analysis. The AUC value of the probability index was significantly higher than the values of the different tumour markers. CONCLUSION: An algorithm based on the combination of CEA, CA 19-9 and CA 72-4 improved the diagnostic accuracy in gastrointestinal tract malignancies compared with these markers alone.     

CA125联合 CA19－9、CEA、CA72－4检测在上皮性卵巢癌诊断中的意义

目的：阐明联合检测糖类抗原（CA125、CA19－9、CA72－4）与癌胚抗原（CEA）在上皮性卵巢癌中的诊断意义。方法：对81例上皮性卵巢癌患者,81例良性卵巢肿瘤患者以及作为对照的80例健康体检者血清中的 CA125、CA19－9、CA72－4与 CEA 进行检测。采用 ROC 曲线及 AUC、Logistic 回归分析评估上述血清标记物对上皮性卵巢癌的诊断意义。结果：卵巢癌患者血清肿瘤标记物 CA125、CA19－9、CA72－4的水平与阳性率明显高于良性卵巢肿瘤以及对照组健康体检者（P ＜0．05）。ROC 曲线显示 CA125、CA19－9、CEA 与CA72－4曲线下面积分别为0．904±0．025、0．670±0．042、0．497±0．046 and 0．821±0．033。联合检测上述肿瘤标记物显示最高的敏感性（91．4％）与较好的特异性（83．9％）。与其他单一肿瘤标记物相比,CA125显示最高的敏感性与较好的特异性。结论：联合检测 CA125、CA19－9、CEA 与 CA72－4可以提高上皮性卵巢癌早期诊断的敏感性与准确性。     

The clinical value of serum CEA, CA19-9, and CA242 in the diagnosis and prognosis of pancreatic cancer.

AIM: Serum tumour markers carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) and CA242 were investigated to evaluate the values of single and combined test in the diagnosis and prognosis of pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Pre-operative serum CEA, CA19-9 and CA242 were measured in 105 pancreatic cancers, 70 non-pancreatic malignancies and 30 benign pancreatic diseases. RESULTS: The sensitivity of CA19-9 alone was the highest in pancreatic cancer patients (80%), but the specificity was significantly lower than that of CEA and CA242 (P<0.01). The combination of CEA and CA242 could increase the specificity to 92%. In serum CA242 positive patients, the survival time was remarkably shorter than that of patients with negative result (P<0.01). The survival time in patients with more than two markers positive expression of CEA, CA19-9 and CA242 was obviously shorter than that of only one or no marker positive expression (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: The diagnostic rate of CA19-9 in pancreatic cancer is better than that of CEA and CA242. Combined detection of CEA and CA242 can improve the diagnostic specificity obviously. High levels of serum markers are associated with advanced stage of the disease. Patients with two or three markers positive expression of CEA, CA19-9, and CA242 simultaneously had a shorter survival time.     

Tumor Markers in Serum and Ascites in the Diagnosis of Benign and Malignant Ascites

Objective: To evaluate the values of 4 tumor markers in serum and ascites and their ascites/serum ratios inthe identification and diagnosis of benign and malignant ascites. Materials and Methods: A total of 76 patientswere selected as subjects and divided into malignant ascites group (45 cases) and benign ascites group (31cases). Samples of ascites and serum of all hospitalized patients were collected before treatment. The levels ofcarcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), alpha fetoprotein (AFP), cancer antigen 125 (CA125) and carbohydrate antigen19-9 (CA19-9) were detected by chemiluminescence (CLIA) . Results: CEA, AFP and CA19-9 in both serumand ascites as well as CA125 in ascites were evidently higher in the malignant ascites group than in the benignascites group (P<0.01). Malignant ascites was associated with elevated ascites/serum ratios for AFP and CA125(P<0.01). The areas under receiver operating characteristic (AUROCs) of CEA and CA125 in ascites and theratios of ascites/serum of AFP, CEA, CA125 and CA19-9 were all >0.7, suggesting certain values, while those ofascites CA19-9 and serum CEA were 0.697 and 0.629 respectively, indicating low accuracy in the identificationand diagnosis of benign and malignant ascites. However, the AUROCs of the remaining indexes were <0.5, with novalue for identification and diagnosis. Compared with single index, the sensitivity of combined detection increasedsignificantly (P<0.05), in which the combined detection of CEA, CA19-9 and CA125 in ascites as well as the ratioof ascites/serum of CEA, CA19-9, CA125 and AFP had the highest sensitivity (98.4%) but with relevantly lowspecificity. Both sensitivity and specificity of combined detection should be comprehensively considered so asto choose the most appropriate index. Conclusions: Compared with single index, combined detection of tumormarkers in serum and ascites can significantly improve the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity.     

外周血内CA19-9、CA242、CEA检测对不同病理分期胰腺癌的临床诊断价值

目的:分析糖类抗原19-9、糖类抗原242、癌胚抗原(CEA)检测对不同病理分期胰腺癌的临床诊断价值。方法:选取我院2015年7月至2017年1月收治的106例胰腺癌患者,检测血清CA19-9、CA242、CEA表达水平,比较手术治疗前后及不同临床分期胰腺癌患者血清CA19-9、CA242、CEA差异,评价上述指标对胰腺癌临床诊断及判断分期的指导作用。结果:胰腺癌病理分期越高,其血清CA19-9、CA242、CEA水平升高越显著,差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。肿瘤直径≥5 cm者、肿瘤位于胰腺体/尾部者,其血清CA19-9、CA242、CEA均显著高于肿瘤直径＜5 cm者及肿瘤位于胰腺头部或全胰腺者,差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。 结论:血清CA19-9、CA242、CEA有助于胰腺癌的临床诊断及分期判断,具有较高的临床价值。