Assessment of CA 15.3, CEA and TPA concentrations during monitoring of breast cancer

Clinical usefulness of circulating tumor markers

Tumor markers are a heterogeneous group of substances released by cancer cells into bloodstream, but also expressed by healthy tissues. Thus, very small concentrations can be present in plasma and serum from healthy subjects. Cancer patients tend to show increased levels correlating with tumor bulk, but false positive results could be present in patients with benign conditions. The correct interpretation of TM results could be challenging and many factors should be considered, from pre-analytical conditions to patient concomitant diseases. In this line, the Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine journal has made important contributions though several publications promoting the adequate use of TM and therefore improving patient safety. TM measurement offers valuable information for cancer patient management in different clinical contexts, such as helping diagnosis, estimating prognosis, facilitating early detection of relapse and monitoring therapy response. Our review analyzes the clinical usefulness of tumor markers applied in most frequent epithelial tumors, based on recent evidence and guidelines.

Critical review and meta-analysis of biological variation estimates for tumor markers

OBJECTIVES

Biological variation data (BV) can be used for different applications, but this depends on the availability of robust and relevant BV data. In this study, we aimed to summarize and appraise BV studies for tumor markers, to examine the influence of study population characteristics and concentrations on BV estimates and to discuss the applicability of BV data for tumor markers in clinical practice.

METHODS

Studies reporting BV data for tumor markers related to gastrointestinal, prostate, breast, ovarian, haematological, lung, and dermatological cancers were identified by a systematic literature search. Relevant studies were evaluated by the Biological Variation Data Critical Appraisal Checklist (BIVAC) and meta-analyses were performed for BIVAC compliant studies to deliver global estimates of within-subject (CV_I) and between-subject (CV_G) BV with 95% CI.

RESULTS

The systematic review identified 49 studies delivering results for 22 tumor markers; four papers received BIVAC grade A, 3 B, 27 C and 15 D. Out of these, 29 CV_I and 29 CV_G estimates met the criteria to be included in the meta-analysis. Robust data are lacking to conclude on the relationship between BV and different disease states and tumor marker concentrations.

CONCLUSIONS

This review identifies a lack of high-quality BV studies for many tumor markers and a need for delivery of BIVAC compliant studies, including in different, disease states and tumor marker concentrations. As of yet, the state-of-the-art may still be the most appropriate model to establish analytical performance specifications for the majority of tumor markers.

Mucins and Cytokeratins as Serum Tumor Markers in Breast Cancer

Structural and functional characteristics of mucins and cytokeratins are shortly described. Thereafter, those commonly used in breast cancer as serum tumor markers are considered. First CA15.3, MCA, CA549, CA27.29 mucins and CYFRA21.1, TPA, TPS cytokeratins alone or in association have been examined in different stages and conditions. Then their usefulness in monitoring disease-free breast cancer patients is evaluated. The central role of the established cut-off and critical change, the "early" treatment of recurrent disease and the potential benefit in survival are other issues that have been highlighted and discussed. The successive sections and subsections deal with the monitoring of advanced disease. In them, the current recommendations and the principal findings on using the above mentioned mucins and cytokeratins have been reported. A computer program for interpreting consecutive measurements of serum tumor markers also has been illustrated. The final part of the chapter is devoted to mucins and cytokeratins as markers of circulating and disseminated tumor cells and their usefulness for prognosis.

Cytokeratin19-2g2, a novel fragment of cytokeratin19 in serum, indicating a more invasive behavior and worse prognosis in breast cancer patients

Background

Various studies have been searching for new tumor biomarkers for breast cancer for years. However, so far, few markers have been proved clinically useful except CA153. Based on knowledge that most adenocarcinomas including breast carcinoma expressed Cytokeratin19, the authors studied CK19-2G2,a novel fragment of cytokeratin19 shedding into serum in breast cancer patients.

Patients and Methods

The serum samples of four hundred and seventeen patients including three hundred and three (fifty-four DCIS and two hundred and forty-nine stage I-III) PBC patients and one hundred and fourteen MBC patients, eighty-one healthy controls and twenty-one breast benign disease patients were provided for measurement of CK19-2G2, CEA and CA153.The correlation between clinicopathological characters, prognosis and CK19-2G2 levels was further studied.

Results

The serum CK19-2G2 levels in breast cancer patients were significantly higher than that in healthy and benign controls. For breast cancer patients, CK19-2G2 levels in MBC were significantly higher than that in PBC patients. The sensitivities of CK19-2G2 for breast carcinoma are as high as CEA and CA153, and up to 71% in MBC patients. Serum CK19-2G2 levels (≥2 mU/mL) were associated with pathological stages, tumor size (≥2 cm), lymph node involvement, and HER2 status. Multivariate analysis revealed that high serum CK19-2G2 level was an independent factor for relapse (P = 0.029) and death (P = 0.040) in breast cancer patients.

Conclusion

Serum CK19-2G2 may be an independent indicator for prognosis and a candidate marker for monitoring metastasis in breast cancer.

Design of tumor biomarker-monitoring trials: a proposal by the European Group on Tumor Markers

A major application of tumor biomarkers is in serial monitoring of cancer patients, but there are no published guidelines on how to evaluate biomarkers for this purpose. The European Group on Tumor Markers has convened a multidisciplinary panel of scientists to develop guidance on the design of such monitoring trials. The panel proposes a 4-phase model for biomarker-monitoring trials analogous to that in use for the investigation of new drugs. In phase I, biomarker kinetics and correlation with tumor burden are assessed. Phase II evaluates the ability of the biomarker to identify, exclude, and/or predict a change in disease status. In phase III, the effectiveness of tumor biomarker-guided intervention is assessed by measuring patient outcome in randomized trials. Phase IV consists of an audit of the long-term effects after biomarker monitoring has been included into standard patient care. Systematic well-designed evaluations of biomarkers for monitoring may provide a stronger evidence base that might enable their earlier use in evaluating responses to cancer therapy.

Cytokeratin fragments in the serum: their utility for the management of oral cancer

Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is the sixth most common malignancy and is a major cause of cancer morbidity and mortality worldwide. Oral cancer is the most predominant malignancy in the Indian subcontinent due to the widespread habits of chewing tobacco and related products. Patients with oral tumours have a high risk of early locoregional relapse. Early detection of disease progression remains a challenging task mainly due to the lack of adequate early prognostic markers. CEA, SCC Ag, CA-125, serum cytokeratin (CK) fragments, Cyfra 21-1 (CK 19), TPS (CK 18), TPA (CK 8, 18, and 19) etc. are being used as serum markers for the prediction of prognosis of various malignancies. This review presents the available literature on serum CK markers in different malignancies evaluates their utility in the management of oral cancer, and identifies the lacunae which need to be addressed to develop sensitive and specific assays for early detection of recurrence, prognosis, and treatment monitoring.

American Society of Clinical Oncology 2007 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer

PURPOSE

To update the recommendations for the use of tumor marker tests in the prevention, screening, treatment, and surveillance of breast cancer.

METHODS

For the 2007 update, an Update Committee composed of members from the full Panel was formed to complete the review and analysis of data published since 1999. Computerized literature searches of MEDLINE and the Cochrane Collaboration Library were performed. The Update Committee's literature review focused attention on available systematic reviews and meta-analyses of published tumor marker studies. In general, significant health outcomes (overall survival, disease-free survival, quality of life, lesser toxicity, and cost-effectiveness) were used for making recommendations. Recommendations and

CONCLUSIONS

Thirteen categories of breast tumor markers were considered, six of which were new for the guideline. The following categories showed evidence of clinical utility and were recommended for use in practice: CA 15-3, CA 27.29, carcinoembryonic antigen, estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, urokinase plasminogen activator, plasminogen activator inhibitor 1, and certain multiparameter gene expression assays. Not all applications for these markers were supported, however. The following categories demonstrated insufficient evidence to support routine use in clinical practice: DNA/ploidy by flow cytometry, p53, cathepsin D, cyclin E, proteomics, certain multiparameter assays, detection of bone marrow micrometastases, and circulating tumor cells.

Clinical utility of cytokeratins as tumor markers

Cytokeratins, belonging to the intermediate filament (IF) protein family, are particularly useful tools in oncology diagnostics. At present, more than 20 different cytokeratins have been identified, of which cytokeratins 8, 18, and 19 are the most abundant in simple epithelial cells. Upon release from proliferating or apoptotic cells, cytokeratins provide useful markers for epithelial malignancies, distinctly reflecting ongoing cell activity. It appears that motifs in certain cytokeratins make them likely substrates for caspase degradation, and their subsequent release occurs during the intermediate events in apoptosis. The clinical value of determining soluble cytokeratin protein fragments in body fluids lies in the early detection of recurrence and the fast assessment of the efficacy of therapy response in epithelial cell carcinomas. The three most applied cytokeratin markers used in the clinic are tissue polypeptide antigen (TPA), tissue polypeptide specific antigen (TPS), and CYFRA 21-1. TPA is a broad spectrum test that measures cytokeratins 8, 18, and 19. TPS and CYFRA 21-1 assays are more specific and measure cytokeratin 18 and cytokeratin 19, respectively. By following patients with repeated testing during management, the oncologist may obtain critical information regarding the growth activity in symptomatic patients. Although their main use is to monitor treatment and evaluate response to therapy, early prognostic information particularly on tumor progression and metastasis formation is also provided for several types of cancers. Cytokeratin tumor markers can accurately predict disease status before conventional methods and offer a simple, noninvasive, cheap, and reliable tool for more efficient management.

Monitoring different stages of breast cancer using tumour markers CA 15-3, CEA and TPA

The ability of the tumour markers Cancer Antigen 15-3 (CA 15-3), Carcinoembryonic Antigen (CEA), and Tissue Polypeptide Antigen (TPA) to signal progression in breast cancer patients was investigated in this study. Marker interpretation considered the analytical variation, intra-individual biological variation, and the rate of increase. Patient cohorts were as follows: (A) 90 stage II breast cancer patients who were monitored postoperatively, (B) 204 recurrent breast cancer patients who were monitored during first-line chemotherapy, and (C) 112 patients who were monitored during the time period after first-line chemotherapy. The sensitivity for progression was 44% (cohort A), 69% (cohort B), and 68% (cohort C) without any false progression signals. Marker lead-times exceeded 3 months in 20% (cohort A) and 27% (cohort C) of patients. Marker lead-times were 1-6 months among 33% of the patients receiving first-line chemotherapy (cohort B). Trials are necessary to determine whether tumour marker-guided therapy has any prognostic impact. The data suggest that tumour marker information may be used to stop ineffective treatments and reduce unnecessary adverse effects.

Interpretation of sequential measurements of cancer antigen 125 (CA 125), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), and tissue polypeptide antigen (TPA) based on analytical imprecision and biological variation in the monitoring of ovarian cancer

The main objective with cancer antigen 125 (CA 125), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), and tissue polypeptide antigen (TPA) monitoring of ovarian cancer patients is to detect an early change of disease activity with high reliability. We hypothesized that a monitoring scheme for ovarian cancer patients with serological tumor markers should take into account the stochastic variation, i.e. the probability that observed increases and decreases may solely be due to analytical imprecision and normal intra-individual biological variation. The aim of this study was to provide a detailed characteristic of the within-subject mean steady state concentrations and the associated variability in healthy individuals with an age distribution representative for ovarian cancer patients. Thirty-one healthy women with a median age of 55 years comprised the study population. Sixteen blood samples were collected from each subject in four series, with four samples per series, over a period of approximately 1 year. We found that, i) natural logarithmic-transformed concentrations were more homogeneously distributed between individuals than the original concentrations, ii) the within-subject mean steady state levels, the standard deviations, and the coefficients of variation differed among subjects, and iii) the steady state variability differed among the markers. In conclusion, our data indicate that the assessment of sequential CA 125, CEA, and TPA concentrations is more complex than hitherto recognized. We suggest that it is necessary to adjust the assessment criteria to the type of marker, and that assessment may be facilitated if based on natural logarithmic transformed concentrations.