CEA, MCA, CA 15.3 and CA 549 and their combinations in expressing and monitoring metastatic breast cancer: a prospective comparative study

Martoni, A.; Zamagni, C.; Bellanova, B; L, Zanichelli; Vecchi, F; Cacciari, N.; Sperk, Elena; Pannuti, F

doi:10.1016/0959-8049(95)00340-o

Cited by 30 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…To make comparisons easier, the values were normalised, setting the reference limit to 100. The results from the commercial assays were similar to those in previous studies [17,[19][20][21][22][23].…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 81%

New Immunoassays for MUC1 in Breast Cancer

Norum¹,

Sauren²,

Rye³

et al. 2001

Tumor Biol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Eleven experimental immunofluorometric assays (IFMAs) were made using antibodies previously tested for epitope specificities. These assays were compared with six commercially available immunoassays. The clinical performance of these experimental assays was evaluated by analysing sera from 138 breast cancer patients and 105 female blood donors. The clinical performance of these assays was evaluated at a set specificity of 0.94. The highest overall sensitivity (0.56) was observed in the experimental assay with the antibody BC2 as solid phase and GP1.4 as the tracer antibody. This combination also showed the highest sensitivity in stage I/II breast cancer. The Truquant assay (Biomira) had an overall sensitivity of 0.51, and the highest sensitivity in stages III and IV at 0.65 and 0.94, respectively. The remaining commercial assays, with sensitivity ranging from 0.67 to 0.79, were below the top five experimental assays that showed sensitivity values between 0.79 and 0.85. The findings from our current study suggest that further development in MUC1 immunoassays could improve the detection of relapse in breast cancer patients.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 81%

New Immunoassays for MUC1 in Breast Cancer

Norum¹,

Sauren²,

Rye³

et al. 2001

Tumor Biol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Martoni et al, 1995 have reported that serum measurements of CEA were high at patients with adenocarcinoma.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship between Preoperative Serum CA15-3 and CEA Levels and Clinicopathological Parameters in Breast Cancer

Moazzezy¹,

Farahany²,

Oloomi³

et al. 2014

Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: CEA and CA 15.3 serum tumor markers are currently used in clinical practice for monitoring therapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate serum level of these markers among healthy females and invasive breast carcinoma (IBC) patients and to determine any relationships with clinicopathological factors. Materials and Methods: 60 Iranian females were enrolled in this study, 30 healthy and 30 diagnosed with breast cancer who had not received any preoperative chemotherapy or hormone therapy. Enzyme linked immunosorbent assays were used for the quantitative determination of the cancer associated antigens, CEA and MUC1 (CA15-3). Results: The serological levels of CEA and CA15-3 (5.0033±0.49 µg/L and 178.1667±15.11 U/ml) in the breast cancer patients were significantly higher (p=0.00) than the serum levels of normal controls (1.1237±0.11 µg/L and 21.13±3.058 U/ml). Regarding the CEA marker, a significant correlation with grade of tumor was shown. Furthermore, there was a low correlation between CA15-3 and CEA marker with correlation coefficient r=0.08. Conclusions: Collectively, markedly high levels of CEA and CA15-3 were found in our patients, pointing to their use as additional tools after clinical diagnosis.

show abstract

“…42,43 The determination of the level of MUC1 protein in the serum has been exploited as a measure of tumor burden and changing levels, as a reflection of the response to therapy. 44,45 …”

Section: Expression Of Muc1 Protein In Normal and In Cancermentioning

confidence: 99%