Comparison between serum CA 125 and CA 19-9 assays and tissular OC 125 and 1116NS 19-9 reactivity in malignant and benign ovarian tumors.

This preliminary study included 25 patients with primary epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) (18 serous, 3 serous-mucinous, 1 endometrioid, 2 undifferentiated carcinomas and 1 malignant Brenner carcinoma); 2 patients with borderline ovarian tumors and 20 patients with benign ovarian tumors (9 benign cystic teratomas, 6 serous cystoadenomas and 5 mucinous cystoadenomas). Blood samples for the measurement of CA 125 and CA 19-9 were drawn from all patients before surgery. Serum CA 125 (Reference Value-RV = 65 U/ml) and CA 19-9 (RV = 40 U/ml) were measured with IRMAs using the monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs) OC 125 and 1116NS 19-9. The same antigens were detected on paraffin-embedded tissue sections by immunocytochemistry with the avidin-biotin complex method employing the same MoAbs used for serum IRMAs. Among the 25 patients with EOC serum CA 125 levels were elevated in 20: tissular OC 125 reactivity was observed in 15 (75%) of them. Of the 5 EOC patients with normal CA 125 levels, 4 showed OC 125 reactivity. Only 2 of the 25 EOC patients had elevated serum CA 19-9 levels: one of them had tissular 1116 NS 19-9 reactivity. Among the 23 patients with normal serum CA 19-9 levels only 5 had immunocytochemical reactivity for this antigen. The 2 patients with borderline ovarian tumors had negative serum CA 125 and CA 19-9 assay: tissular OC 125 reactivity was observed in both patients, while 1116 NS 19-9 reactivity was detected in only one.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Prognostic role of immunosuppressive acidic protein in advanced ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to investigate immunosuppressive acidic protein in the prognostic characterization of advanced ovarian cancer. STUDY DESIGN: Serum levels of immunosuppressive protein were prospectively measured in 80 patients with untreated ovarian carcinoma. To evaluate the prognostic significance of immunosuppressive acidic protein levels, cutoff points were studied every 50 μg/ml between 450 and 1350 μg/ml. RESULTS: Pretreatment immunosuppressive acidic protein levels were not significantly associated with stage, histotype, grade of differentiation, postoperative residual tumor, and response to chemotherapy. The most significant association with survival was observed at a cutoff value of 1100 μg/ml (p = 0.0089). In the univariate analysis for overall survival, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage and immunosuppressive acidic protein status were found to have a role in predicting ovarian cancer prognosis. In the multivariate analysis only immunosuppressive acidic protein status was significantly associated with survival. A statistical correlation was found between serum levels and overall survival (p = 0.0104, χ² 6.56), including immunosuppressive acidic protein as a continuous variable. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that immunosuppressive acidic protein assay is a potentially useful tool in the prognostic characterization of advanced ovarian cancer. (Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;175:1606-10.)     

Prospective multicenter study on the clinical utility of ca-72.4 in postmenopausal patients with pelvic mass

The study objective was to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity as well as the positive predictive value and negative predictive value of CA 72.4 and CA 125 determination, separately and in combination, for diagnosing ovarian tumors in post-menopausal women with pelvic mass. The 299 patients recruited in this study underwent gynecological examination, plasma determination of CA 72.4 and CA 125, and laparotomy with histological definition of pelvic mass. CA 72.4 assay values were under 3.9 U/ml in 194 cases (70.8%); values ranged from 3.9 to 4.5 U/ml in 7 cases (2.5%) and were greater than 4.5 U/ml in 73 cases (26.6%). CA 72.4 assay was positive (>4.5 U/ml) in 56 cases (57.1%) of malignant ovarian pathology, in 4 cases (25%) of malignant extra-ovarian pathology as well as in 9 cases (7.1%) of benign ovarian pathology and in 4 cases (11.8%) of benign extra-ovarian pathology. With a cut-off at 3.9 U/ml, CA 72.4 showed a specificity of 91.3% and a sensitivity of 62.2%, whereas with a cut-off at 4.5 U/ml specificity was 92.9% and sensitivity 57.1%. Results of CA 125 assay for diagnosing a pelvic neoplasia (ovarian or extra-ovarian), showed a specificity of 85.3% and sensitivity of 68.8%. The agreement of the two markers (CA 125 and CA 72.4) as negative or positive shows a specificity of 77% and a sensitivity of 84.7% for ovarian cancer and a specificity of 73.5% and sensitivity of 75% for the diagnosis of pelvic neoplasias.     

An Analysis of Approaches to the Management of Endometrial Cancer in North America: A CTF Study

Objective.The aim of this study was to define the clinical–therapeutical approach to endometrial cancer now being followed in some of the most important centers of reference for gynecological cancer in North America by means of a questionnaire.Study design.The questionnaire focused on four principal areas: (1) surgical staging and therapy; (2) adjuvant treatment; (3) treatment modifications; and (4) management of advanced stages (FIGO III–IV).Results.There were 48 evaluable responses (77%) received by the end of December 1994 which were considered for this analysis. Lymphadenectomy is utilized routinely in 26/48 centers (54.2%) and in selective clinical–pathological conditions in another 21/48 centers (43.5%). In the majority of centers (31/48; 64.6%) radical surgery is utilized for selected indications such as cervical involvement. Only 3/48 (6.2%) centers consider the vaginal approach totally inappropriate. The great majority (40/48; 83.3%) of the centers considered postsurgical adjuvant therapy to be necessary in FIGO Stage Ic. Brachytherapy is routinely performed in 3 centers (6.2%) in postsurgical management of Stage I endometrial cancer, while the majority of the centers (31/48; 64.6%) perform brachytherapy of the vaginal vault in certain clinical–pathological conditions. A wide variety of treatments are used for advanced stages (FIGO III–IV).Conclusions.It emerges that some controversial aspects exist on endometrial cancer treatment, and these conflicting data need a large-scale multicenter randomized clinical trial.     

Analysis of the evolution in the management of endometrial cancer in Italy: a CTF study

OBJECTIVE: In 1994 we mailed questionnaires to referral centers in Italy in order to evaluate the different opinions concerning aspects of endometrial cancer treatment, which is still controversial. The data processing showed a significant nonhomogeneity in disease management and prompted the Italian Society of Gynecologic Oncology to define guidelines for endometrial cancer adjuvant treatment. In 2001, we mailed again the same questionnaire to the same referral Centers in Italy. The aim of the second enquiry was the evaluation of changes in endometrial cancer management and the effective impact of the guidelines published. METHODS: The enquiry used the same questionnaires mailed in 1994; actually, we mailed those questionnaires to the same referral centers in Italy twice: in December 2000 and March 2001.The results of both the enquiries were collected in a relational data base, and the statistical evaluations were calculated using SPSS-statistics (Window ver. 8). RESULTS: Endometrial cancer treatment consists in abdominal hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. The unique relevant difference as to 1994 consists in the systemic performing of peritoneal cytology in endometrial cancer staging. Unlike the previous enquiry, adjuvant radiotherapy is not systematically performed in disease at stage Ic because of the substantial absence of confirmed data demonstrating a real benefit in terms of survival rate.The comparison between the two enquiries shows a significant change in medical planning and diversification attitude according to patient age and menopausal state. The disease management changes in patients over 75 years old, mainly with respect to surgery and primary therapy. CONCLUSIONS: We noted a resistance of many centers to accept some trends actually widespread in the literature but not yet performed in practical clinical.