Clinical value of joint detection of six tumor markers in patients with colorectal cancer
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1008?6315.2017.09.014
- VernacularTitle:六种血清肿瘤标志物联合检测对结直肠癌患者的诊断治疗价值
- Author:
Hui ZHANG
;
Ying ZHAO
;
Huili JIANG
;
Mei HAN
;
Chenghua LIU
- Keywords:
Tumor marker;
Joint detection;
Colorectal cancer
- From:Clinical Medicine of China
2017;33(9):834-838
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To investigate the clinical value of joint detection of six tumor markers in patients with colorectal cancer. Methods Eighty?six patients with colorectal cancer were included in the study group,86 healthy subjects were selected as the control group at the same period. The difference of tumor markers in different groups,tumor stages and prognosis were compared. Results The levels of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA),carbohydrate antigen 19?9 (CA19?9),carbohydrate antigen 242 (CA242),carbohydrate antigen 72?4 ( CA72?4) , carbohydrate antigen 125 ( CA125 ) and carbohydrate antigen 50 ( CA50 ) in study group were significantly higher than those in the control group (CEA: (22. 5±6. 2)μg/L vs. (2. 2±1. 0)μg/L;CA19?9:(95. 7±27. 3) U/ml vs. (17. 1±9. 5) U/ml;CA242:(29. 5±8. 3) U/ml vs. (6. 0±2. 7) U/ml;CA72?4:(21. 6 ±5. 1) U/ml vs. (3. 6±1. 2) U/ml;CA125:(95. 4±32. 8) U/ml vs. (18. 9±8. 4) U/ml;CA50:(51. 8±20. 6)μg/L vs. (8. 3±3. 7)μg/L,t=29. 98,25. 22,24. 97,31. 86,20. 95,19. 27,P<0. 05). Among the single index detections,the sensitivity and negative predictive value of CA72?4 were the highest ( 61. 6%, 68. 3%) , the specificity of CA19?9 was the highest( 91. 9%) ,the positive predictive value of CEA was the highest ( 80. 4%) . The sensitivity,positive predictive value and negative predictive value of the joint detection were all higher than those in each single index detection (80. 3%,87. 3%,74. 1%). The levels of CEA,CA19?9,CA242,CA72?4, CA125 and CA50 in patients with stage III and IV were significantly higher than those in patients with stageⅠandⅡ(CEA:(32. 7±7. 1)μg/L vs. (15. 9±4. 4)μg/L;CA19?9:(127. 8±33. 7) U/ml vs. (52. 5±13. 8) U/ml;CA242:(40. 3±12. 7) U/ml vs. (23. 5±8. 6) U/ml;CA72?4:(37. 6±10. 2) U/ml vs. (13. 6±4. 1) U/ml;CA125:(128. 9±38. 4) U/ml vs. (59. 7±12. 8) U/ml;CA50:(88. 3±23. 7)μg/L vs. (41. 8±15. 6)μg/L,t=13. 04,13. 32,7. 11,14. 06,10. 99,10. 64,P<0. 05) . The levels of CEA,CA19?9,CA242,CA72?4,CA125 and CA50 in the recurrent metastasis group were significantly higher than those in the non?recurrent metastasis group ( CEA:( 37. 7 ± 8. 6 ) μg/L vs. ( 3. 8 ± 1. 7 ) μg/L;CA19?9:( 110. 5 ± 29. 4 ) U/ml vs. ( 25. 5 ± 13. 8 ) U/ml;CA242:( 33. 6 ± 10. 3 ) U/ml vs. ( 15. 5 ± 6. 6 ) U/ml;CA72?4:( 33. 1 ± 15. 3 ) U/ml vs. ( 9. 3 ± 3. 0 ) U/ml;CA125:(113. 4±31. 7) U/ml vs. (28. 7±7. 8) U/ml;CA50:(55. 4±14. 6)μg/L vs. (16. 8±9. 6)μg/L,t=29. 04,18. 31,9. 86,11. 47,19. 28,14. 65,P<0. 05) . Conclusion The joint detection of six markers can further improve the sensitivity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of diagnosis, and can provide a more reliable basis for the auxiliary diagnosis of colorectal cancer.
