The application of C12 biochip in the diagnosis and monitoring of colorectal cancer: systematic evaluation and suggestion for improvement

Can combination of CEA, CA 19-9, and CA242 improve diagnostic sensitivity and diagnostic value for colorectal cancer? A Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In this study, the combination of CEA, CA19-9, and CA242 in the diagnosis of colorectal cancer (CRC) was analyzed by Meta-analysis, and the clinical value of combined CEA, CA19-9, and CA242 in the diagnosis of CRC was discussed.

AIM

To investigate whether combined detection of CEA, CA 19-9, and CA242 can improve detection rate and diagnostic value compared to single biomarkers for CRC.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang database and Sinomed up to October 25, 2019. Diagnostic tests on CEA, CA 19-9, and CA242 used for CRC were included in this Meta-analysis. Two reviewers finished data extraction and quality assessment on the basis of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2. By using bivariate regression model, we analyzed the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), area under the curve (AUC), and corresponding 95% credible interval (CI). Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were employed to explore possible source of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies (3534 patients) were included. For single biomarkers, the pooled sensitivity of CA 19-9 [0.37(0.32, 0.43)] was lower than that of CEA [0.50 (0.46, 0.55)] and the pooled AUC of CEA [0.73 (0.68, 0.76)] was lower than that of CA 19-9 [0.82 (0.78, 0.85)] and CA242 [0.87 (0.83, 0.89)]. For biomarker combination, the sensitivity of any two or three biomarkers was greater than that of any single biomarker. For AUC, there was no statistically significant difference between biomarker combinations and single biomarkers but CEA. The result of heterogeneity exploration showed that subject number was the heterogeneity source of CEA and CA 19-9 while cut-off value was the heterogeneity source of CA242.

CONCLUSION

Combination of CEA, CA 19-9, and CA242 can remarkably improve the diagnostic sensitivity for CRC compared to single biomarkers. There is no discernable differences between biomarker combinations and single biomarkers except CEA in diagnostic value for CRC.

Chinese expert consensus on cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal malignancies

Locoregional spread of abdominopelvic malignant tumors frequently results in peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC). The prognosis of PC patients treated by conventional systemic chemotherapy is poor, with a median survival of < 6 mo. However, over the past three decades, an integrated treatment strategy of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) + hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has been developed by the pioneering oncologists, with proved efficacy and safety in selected patients. Supported by several lines of clinical evidence from phases I, II and III clinical trials, CRS + HIPEC has been regarded as the standard treatment for selected patients with PC in many established cancer centers worldwide. In China, an expert consensus on CRS + HIPEC has been reached by the leading surgical and medical oncologists, under the framework of the China Anti-Cancer Association. This expert consensus has summarized the progress in PC clinical studies and systematically evaluated the CRS + HIPEC procedures in China as well as across the world, so as to lay the foundation for formulating PC treatment guidelines specific to the national conditions of China.

Comparative study of tumor markers in patients with colorectal carcinoma before and after chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Colorectal carcinoma (CRC), the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in US, has a rising time-trend in India. Tumour markers in CRC are extensively researched, and there's still debate on their diagnostic and prognostic values.

METHODS

In this hospital-based longitudinal study in north India, 51 male diagnosed CRC cases (pre-chemotherapy) were contrasted against 50 age and sex matched controls. Nine biomarkers: carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), prolactin (PRL), alfa feto protein (AFP), total human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), cancer antigen-125 (CA-125), serum testosterone, prostate specific antigen (PSA) and ferritin were measured by direct chemiluminescence technique. Further, follow-up was done on 47 cases after treatment with six cycles of 5-flurouracil (5-FU) and oxaliplatin.

RESULTS

Mean serum CEA (case: 5.94±8.27 ng/mL, control: 2.5±0.79 ng/mL, P<0.05), PRL (case: 28.12±13.39 ng/mL, control: 14.24±13.13 ng/mL, P<0.0001), AFP (case: 10.9±6.65 ng/mL, control: 4.02±1.26 ng/mL, P<0.0001) levels were significantly raised in CRC cases compared to controls. On the contrary, mean testosterone level (P<0.05) was lower among the cases. After chemotherapy, the mean serum CEA (P<0.05), AFP (P<0.0001) and CA-125 (P<0.05) levels among the cases decreased significantly compared to their pretreatment levels.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study strongly indicates the role of CEA, PRL, AFP, CA-125 and testosterone as important biomarkers in male CRC patients from north India. Further, AFP, CA-125 and CEA may be used to assess the effectiveness of chemotherapy in such patients.

Comparison of serum tumor markers for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and hepatocellular carcinoma

Serum tumor markers such as alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), carcinoembryonic antigen, carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9, CA242, and CA50 were analyzed to evaluate their diagnostic values in single and combined tests for distinguishing intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Preoperative serum levels of AFP, carcinoembryonic antigen, CA19-9, CA242, and CA50 were measured in 45 ICC and 76 HCC patients. The serum levels and the positive rate of AFP, CA19-9, and CA242 were significantly different between the ICC patients and HCC patients. Although AFP (-) was the most sensitive assay for distinguishing ICC from HCC (91.1%), its specificity was significantly lower than that of CA242 (+) and CA19-9 (+). The combination of AFP (-) and CA242 (+) afforded a high specificity of 94.3 per cent and showed highest accuracy (78.5%). Evaluation of patients without liver cirrhosis also showed similar results. The diagnostic value of CA242 (+) is better than that of CA19-9 (+) and AFP (-) in distinguishing ICC from HCC. Combined detection of AFP (-) and CA242 (+) can improve the specificity and accuracy of diagnosing ICC.