Differentiating Stage 1 epithelial ovarian cancer from benign ovarian tumours using a combination of tumour markers HE4, CA125, and CEA and patient’s age Ovarian Cancer and Us OVARIAN CANCER and US Ovarian Cancer and Us

Blog Archives: Nov 2004 - present

#ovariancancers



Special items: Ovarian Cancer and Us blog best viewed in Firefox

Search This Blog

Wednesday, March 13, 2013

Differentiating Stage 1 epithelial ovarian cancer from benign ovarian tumours using a combination of tumour markers HE4, CA125, and CEA and patient’s age



abstract

 Highlights
Distinguishing stage 1 ovarian cancer from benign adnexal masses is difficult
Usefulness of HE4 and other biomarkers for diagnosis is debated
Our model using biomarkers and patient’s age will help identify malignancies

Abstract

Objective

Evaluating the presence of possible malignant disease in women with ovarian masses relies on medical imaging and serum marker findings. This study considers the role of serum Human Epididymal Protein 4 (HE4) antigen in combination with other serum markers to more effectively estimate the risk of malignancy in patients with isolated pelvic masses.

Methods

We used prospectively collected biospecimens held by the Australian Ovarian Cancer Study (AOCS). Serum samples of patients with FIGO stage 1 epithelial ovarian cancer or with a benign condition, were analysed for levels of circulating HE4 antigen, CA 125, CEA and test results were used to predict the presence of malignancy and to differentiate benign from malignant pelvic masses.

Results

HE4 levels were significantly elevated among postmenopausal women and among patients with malignancy compared to premenopausal women and those with benign disease (p < 0.001 for both). The combination of CA125 and age, achieved an area under the ROC curve of 0.677 (95% CI: 0.584 to 0.770, p = 0.778), whilst HE4 + CA125 + CEA in combination with patient’s age showed significantly higher AUC of 0.797 (95% CI: 0.721 to 0.874, p = 0.0052). By adjusting ROMA cut-off values the percentage of correctly classified premenopausal patients into low and high risk groups increased from 36.99% to 69.86%.

Conclusions

In patients with isolated pelvic masses, the combination of HE4, CA 125 and age with or without CEA provide higher diagnostic value compared to CA125 and age alone. It may therefore be considered for continuous evaluation in patients with adnexal masses.

0 comments :

Post a Comment

Your comments?

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.