Preoperative Determination of Several Serum Tumor Markers in Patients with Primary Epithelial Ovarian CarcinomaKudoh K. · Kikuchi Y. · Kita T. · Tode T. · Takano M. · Hirata J. · Mano Y. · Yamamoto K. · Nagata I.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, National Defense Medical College, Tokorozawa, Saitama, Japan
Do you have an account?
- Rent for 48h to view
- Buy Cloud Access for unlimited viewing via different devices
- Synchronizing in the ReadCube Cloud
- Printing and saving restrictions apply
Rental: USD 8.50
Cloud: USD 20.00
This study was designed to evaluate the clinical significance of the use of preoperative serum tumor markers in primary epithelial ovarian cancer. Subjects comprised 111 patients with primary epithelial ovarian cancer. Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), α-hydroxybutyrate dehydrogenase (HBDH), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), CA19-9, tissue polypeptide antigen (TPA), CA125 and sialyl TN (STN) serum levels were measured within 7 days before surgery. The tumor marker values were compared with the histopathologic diagnosis. The overall agreement between the test results and the actual outcome was calculated using Student’s t test and analysis of variance (ANOVA). Survival curves were constructed according to the Kaplan-Meier method, and differences in survival were assessed with the log-rank test. The prognostic significance of tumor markers for survival was assessed in a multivariate analysis with the Cox proportional hazards model. Of the tumor markers examined in this study, CA125 showed the highest positive rate (77.6%), followed by 63.2% for STN and 55.9% for CA19-9. When the positive rate was compared according to histologic types, serous cystadenocarcinoma, mucinous cystadenocarcinoma, endometrioid adenocarcinoma and clear cell carcinoma showed the highest positive rates for CA125 (94.1%), CA19-9 (76.9%), CA125 (91.7%) and STN (75.0%), respectively. Regarding the distribution of tumor marker levels according to the FIGO stage, LDH, HBDH, TPA and CA125 were correlated with the clinical stage while CEA, CA19-9 and STN did not show any correlation. From analyses of tumor marker levels according to histologic types, all patients with a ratio of CA125 to CEA of >1,000 had serous cystadenocarcinoma and a ratio of CA125 to CA19-9 of >50 showed serous cystadenocarcinoma or endometrioid adenocarcinoma. On the other hand, all patients with a ratio of LDH or HBDH to CA19-9 of <1.0 had mucinous cystadenocarcinoma or clear cell carcinoma. From univariate analysis, the survival time of patients with elevated CA125, TPA or STN was significantly shorter than that of patients with normal CA125, TPA or STN levels. When the Cox’s proportional hazard model was used, we identified age, clinical stage, clear cell carcinoma and serum STN as independent prognostic factors. Serum CA125, TPA or STN may give significant prognostic information in epithelial ovarian carcinoma. It is noteworthy that STN has been identified as an independent prognostic factor and has a high rate of positivity in clear cell carcinoma.
- Omura G, Blessing JA, Ehrlich CE, Miller A, Yordan E, Creasman WT, Homesley HD: A randomized trial of cyclophosphamide and doxorubicine with or without cisplatin in advanced ovarian carcinoma. Cancer 1986;57:1725–1730.
Gruppe Interegionale Cooperatino Oncologico Ginecologia: Randomised comparison of cisplatin with cyclophosphamide/cisplatin and with cyclophosphamide/doxorubicine/cisplatin in advanced ovarian cancer. Lancet 1987;ii:353–359.
- Cannistra SA: Cancer of the ovary. N Engl J Med 1993;329:1550–1559.
- Omura GA, Brady MF, Homesley HD, Yordan E, Major FJ, Buchsbaum HJ, Park RC: Long-term follow-up and prognostic factor analysis in advanced ovarian carcinoma: The Gynecologic Oncology Group experience. J Clin Oncol 1991;9:1138–1150.
- Goff BA, de la Cuesta RS, Muntz HG, Fleischhacker P, Ek M, Rice LW, Nikrui N, Tamimi HK, Cain JM, Greer BE, Fuller AF Jr: Clear cell carcinoma of the ovary: A distinct histologic type with poor prognosis and resistance to platinum-based chemotherapy in stage III disease. Gynecol Oncol 1996;60:412–417.
Morgenstern S, Flor R, Kessler G, Klein B: Automated determination of NAD-coupled enzymes, determination of lactic dehydrogenase. Anal Biochem 1965;13:149–154.
- Kjeldsen T, Clausen H, Hirohashi S, Ogawa T, Iijima H, Hakomori S: Preparation and characterization of monoclonal antibodies directed to the tumor-associated O-linked sialosyl-2-6-α-N-acetylgalactosaminyl (sialyl-Tn) epitope. Cancer Res 1988;48:2214–2220.
- Shimizu Y, Umezawa S, Hasumi K: The results of chemosensitivity test for clear cell adenocarcinoma of the ovary (in Japanese). Jpn J Cancer Chemother 1996;23:945–947.
Hiramatsu H, Kataoka Y, Kudoh K, Ishii K, Yamamoto K, Kita T, Tode T, Kikuchi Y, Nagata I: Prognosis of patients with primary epithelial ovarian carcinoma who were not successfully cytoreduced. Oncol Rep 1997;4:107–110.
- Rustin GRS, Nelstrop AE, McClean P, Brady MF, McGuire WP, Hoskins WJ, Mitchell H, Lambert HE: Defining response of ovarian carcinoma to initial chemotherapy according to serum CA125. J Clin Oncol 1996;14:1545–1551.
- Münstedt K, Krisch M, Sachsse S, Vahrson H: Serum CA125 levels and survival in advanced ovarian cancer. Arch Gynecol Obstet 1997;259:117–123.
- Sevelda P, Scemper M, Spona J: CA125 as an independent prognostic factor for survival in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1989;161:1213–1216.
- Kobayashi H, Terao T, Kawashima Y: Sialyl Tn as a prognostic marker in epithelial ovarian cancer. Br J Cancer 1992;66:984–985.
Nishimura H, Kiyozuka Y, Imamura K, Murakami F, Ookura N, Yakushiji M: Tumor markers for discrimination between benign and malignant ovarian tumors. J Jpn Soc Cancer Ther 1997;32:262–270.
Article / Publication Details
Copyright / Drug Dosage / DisclaimerCopyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.