Background: Updated National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry (NACB) Laboratory Medicine Practice Guidelines for the use of tumor markers in the clinic have been developed.
Methods: Published reports relevant to use of tumor markers for 5 cancer sites—testicular, prostate, colorectal, breast, and ovarian—were critically reviewed.
Results: For testicular cancer, α-fetoprotein, human chorionic gonadotropin, and lactate dehydrogenase are recommended for diagnosis/case finding, staging, prognosis determination, recurrence detection, and therapy monitoring. α-Fetoprotein is also recommended for differential diagnosis of nonseminomatous and seminomatous germ cell tumors. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is not recommended for prostate cancer screening, but may be used for detecting disease recurrence and monitoring therapy. Free PSA measurement data are useful for distinguishing malignant from benign prostatic disease when total PSA is <10 μg/L. In colorectal cancer, carcinoembryonic antigen is recommended (with some caveats) for prognosis determination, postoperative surveillance, and therapy monitoring in advanced disease. Fecal occult blood testing may be used for screening asymptomatic adults 50 years or older. For breast cancer, estrogen and progesterone receptors are mandatory for predicting response to hormone therapy, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 measurement is mandatory for predicting response to trastuzumab, and urokinase plasminogen activator/plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 may be used for determining prognosis in lymph node–negative patients. CA15-3/BR27–29 or carcinoembryonic antigen may be used for therapy monitoring in advanced disease. CA125 is recommended (with transvaginal ultrasound) for early detection of ovarian cancer in women at high risk for this disease. CA125 is also recommended for differential diagnosis of suspicious pelvic masses in postmenopausal women, as well as for detection of recurrence, monitoring of therapy, and determination of prognosis in women with ovarian cancer.
Conclusions: Implementation of these recommendations should encourage optimal use of tumor markers.
CEA, CA 125, SCC, CYFRA 21-1 and NSE were prospectively studied in 211 patients with non-small cell lung cancer and compared with clinical parameters (age, sex, Karnofsky Index, symptoms and smoking status), histopathological parameters (stage, histology, tumor size and nodal involvement), biological parameters (LDH and albumin) and the therapy used (surgery, chemotherapy or radiotherapy). Tumor marker sensitivity was CYFRA 21-1: 76%, CA 125: 55%, CEA: 52%, SCC: 33% and NSE: 22%. One of the tumor markers was abnormally high in 87% of the patients with locoregional disease and in 100% of the patients with metastases. Except for NSE, all tumor markers showed a clear relationship with tumor stage and histology and therefore enabled a better histological diagnosis. Abnormal CEA serum levels were mainly found in adenocarcinomas, CA 125 in large-cell lung cancers (LCLC) and adenocarcinomas and SCC in squamous tumors. Eighty-five percent of the patients with SCC levels >2 ng/ml had squamous tumors. Likewise, CA 125 levels <60 U/ml or CEA <10 ng/ml excluded adenocarcinoma or LCLC with a probability of 82 and 91%, respectively.
The low rate of approval of novel anti-cancer agents underscores the need for better preclinical models of therapeutic response as neither xenografts nor early-generation genetically engineered mouse models (GEMMs) reliably predict human clinical outcomes. Whereas recent, sporadic GEMMs emulate many aspects of their human disease counterpart more closely, their ability to predict clinical therapeutic responses has never been tested systematically. We evaluated the utility of two state-of-the-art, mutant Kras-driven GEMMs--one of non-small-cell lung carcinoma and another of pancreatic adenocarcinoma--by assessing responses to existing standard-of-care chemotherapeutics, and subsequently in combination with EGFR and VEGF inhibitors. Standard clinical endpoints were modeled to evaluate efficacy, including overall survival and progression-free survival using noninvasive imaging modalities. Comparisons with corresponding clinical trials indicate that these GEMMs model human responses well, and lay the foundation for the use of validated GEMMs in predicting outcome and interrogating mechanisms of therapeutic response and resistance.
The aim of our study was to analyse the serum interleukin-6 (IL-6), tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), interleukin-1 beta (IL-1 beta) and interferon-gamma (IFN-gamma) levels in patients with AS and their relationship with disease activity. An ELISA test was used to analyse serum cytokine (IL-6, TNF-alpha, IL-1 beta and IFN-gamma) levels in 69 patients with AS. Results were compared with those from 43 patients with RA and 36 patients with non-inflammatory back pain. The relationship between serum concentrations of the different cytokines and parameters of disease activity and severity in AS patients was also evaluated. IL-6 and TNF-alpha serum levels, but not IL-1 beta and IFN-gamma, were significantly higher in AS than in NIBP. However, patients with RA showed higher serum levels of IL-6, TNF-alpha and IFN-gamma than both AS and NIBP patients. In AS, IL-6 correlated with clinical parameters of disease activity with significant correlation being observed with laboratory parameters of inflammation such as ESR, CRP, platelet count and clinical parameters of severity such as vertebral mobility. TNF-alpha did not correlate with laboratory or clinical parameters of activity. Macrophagic cytokines (TNF-alpha and IL-6), are increased in AS patients and IL-6 closely correlated with the activity of the disease.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.