The role of CA-242 and CEA in surveillance following curative resection for colorectal cancer

Assessment of the Value of Preoperative Serum Levels of CA 242 and CEA in the Staging and Postoperative Survival of Colorectal Adenocarcinoma Patients

Introduction

CEA is the most frequently used tumor marker in colorectal cancer. There may be an improvement in its efficacy when used in association with CA 242.

Aim

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of preoperative serum levels of the tumor markers CA 242 and CEA in the staging and postoperative follow-up of colorectal adenocarcinoma patients.

Patients and Methods

Of a series of 134 patients with colorectal adenocarcinomas 90 underwent radical surgery and 44 palliative surgery. The control group consisted of 22 organ donors. The cutoff serum levels utilized were 5 ng/mL for CEA and 20 U/mL for CA 242. The mortality during follow-up was recorded in order to determine the duration of survival. The data were submitted to statistical analysis using diagnostic tests, the chi-square test, survival analysis (Kaplan and Meier) and ROC curves. A significance level of p ≤ 0.05 was applied.

Results

The sensitivity of CEA in Dukes’ stages A, B, C and D was 27.8%, 32.4%, 32.1% and 66.7%, respectively. The sensitivity of CA 242 was 11.1%, 16.2%, 30.8% and 50%. When both markers were combined, the sensitivity was 33.3%, 48.6%, 40.7% and 72.5%. In the group of patients who underwent radical surgery the mean survival was 60.47 months for those with high preoperative CEA levels, 52.22 months for those with high preoperative CA 242 levels, and 44.80 months for those with elevated levels of both markers. There was a statistically significant difference in survival between patients undergoing radical surgery with elevated CA 242 levels, especially when CEA was also elevated, and patients without elevated CA 242.

Conclusion

Preoperative serum levels of CA 242 showed less efficacy than CEA levels for the staging of colorectal adenocarcinoma patients. Elevated preoperative serum levels of CA 242 alone were related to poor survival, especially in association with high levels of CEA.

Blood CEA levels for detecting recurrent colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Testing for carcino-embryonic antigen (CEA) in the blood is a recommended part of follow-up to detect recurrence of colorectal cancer following primary curative treatment. There is substantial clinical variation in the cut-off level applied to trigger further investigation.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic performance of different blood CEA levels in identifying people with colorectal cancer recurrence in order to inform clinical practice.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted all searches to January 29 2014. We applied no language limits to the searches, and translated non-English manuscripts. We searched for relevant reviews in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, MEDION and DARE databases. We searched for primary studies (including conference abstracts) in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Science Citation Index & Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science. We identified ongoing studies by searching WHO ICTRP and the ASCO meeting library.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included cross-sectional diagnostic test accuracy studies, cohort studies, and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of post-resection colorectal cancer follow-up that compared CEA to a reference standard. We included studies only if we could extract 2 x 2 accuracy data. We excluded case-control studies, as the ratio of cases to controls is determined by the study design, making the data unsuitable for assessing test accuracy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (BDN, IP) assessed the quality of all articles independently, discussing any disagreements. Where we could not reach consensus, a third author (BS) acted as moderator. We assessed methodological quality against QUADAS-2 criteria. We extracted binary diagnostic accuracy data from all included studies as 2 x 2 tables. We conducted a bivariate meta-analysis. We used the xtmelogit command in Stata to produce the pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity and we also produced hierarchical summary ROC plots.

MAIN RESULTS

In the 52 included studies, sensitivity ranged from 41% to 97% and specificity from 52% to 100%. In the seven studies reporting the impact of applying a threshold of 2.5 µg/L, pooled sensitivity was 82% (95% confidence interval (CI) 78% to 86%) and pooled specificity 80% (95% CI 59% to 92%). In the 23 studies reporting the impact of applying a threshold of 5 µg/L, pooled sensitivity was 71% (95% CI 64% to 76%) and pooled specificity 88% (95% CI 84% to 92%). In the seven studies reporting the impact of applying a threshold of 10 µg/L, pooled sensitivity was 68% (95% CI 53% to 79%) and pooled specificity 97% (95% CI 90% to 99%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

CEA is insufficiently sensitive to be used alone, even with a low threshold. It is therefore essential to augment CEA monitoring with another diagnostic modality in order to avoid missed cases. Trying to improve sensitivity by adopting a low threshold is a poor strategy because of the high numbers of false alarms generated. We therefore recommend monitoring for colorectal cancer recurrence with more than one diagnostic modality but applying the highest CEA cut-off assessed (10 µg/L).

Proteomic analysis of colorectal cancer: discovering novel biomarkers

Colorectal cancer is one of the most common cancers in the Western world. When detected at an early stage, the majority of cancers can be cured with current treatment modalities. However, most cancers present at an intermediate stage. The discovery of sensitive and specific biomarkers has the potential to improve preclinical diagnosis of primary and recurrent colorectal cancer, and holds the promise of prognostic and therapeutic application. Current biomarkers such as carcinoembryonic antigen lack sensitivity and specificity for general population screening. This review aims to highlight the role of current proteomic technologies in the discovery and validation of potential biomarkers with a view to translation to the clinic.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Elevated Serum Carcinoembryonic Antigen for Recurrence in Postoperative Stage II Colorectal Cancer Patients: Comparison With Stage III

Purpose

Elevated levels of serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) following a curative resection of colorectal cancer (CRC) indicate recurrence; however, the levels of CEA may be elevated above the normal limit without recurrence. The aim of this study is to analyze the diagnostic accuracy of elevated serum CEA for predicting recurrence in postoperative stage II and stage III CRC patients.

Methods

A total of 336 stage II and stage III CRC patients who underwent a curative resection between January 2005 and October 2009 were enrolled. Sensitivities, specificities, positive predictive values (PPVs), negative predictive values (NPVs), likelihood ratios and post-test probabilities of recurrence associated with elevated CEA were analyzed and compared.

Results

The median follow-up duration was 45 months (36 to 134 months). Twenty-seven of 189 stage II patients (14.3%) and 52 of 147 stage III patients (35.4%) developed recurrence during the follow-up period. Sensitivities, specificities, PPVs, and NPVs of elevated CEA were 37.0%, 91.4%, 41.7%, and 89.7%, respectively, in stage II patients and 46.2%, 90.5%, 72.7%, and 75.4% in stage III patients. Post-test probabilities of recurrence associated with elevated CEA were 41.8% in stage II patients and 71.9% in stage III patients.

Conclusion

The predictive performance of the probability of recurrence associated with elevated serum CEA after a curative resection in stage II CRC patients is lower than that in stage III CRC patients.

Advances in diagnosis, treatment and palliation of pancreatic carcinoma: 1990-2010

Several advances in genetics, diagnosis and palliation of pancreatic cancer (PC) have occurred in the last decades. A multidisciplinary approach to this disease is therefore recommended. PC is relatively common as it is the fourth leading cause of cancer related mortality. Most patients present with obstructive jaundice, epigastric or back pain, weight loss and anorexia. Despite improvements in diagnostic modalities, the majority of cases are still detected in advanced stages. The only curative treatment for PC remains surgical resection. No more than 20% of patients are candidates for surgery at the time of diagnosis and survival remains quite poor as adjuvant therapies are not very effective. A small percentage of patients with borderline non-resectable PC might benefit from neo-adjuvant chemoradiation therapy enabling them to undergo resection; however, randomized controlled studies are needed to prove the benefits of this strategy. Patients with unresectable PC benefit from palliative interventions such as biliary decompression and celiac plexus block. Further clinical trials to evaluate new chemo and radiation protocols as well as identification of genetic markers for PC are needed to improve the overall survival of patients affected by PC, as the current overall 5-year survival rate of patients affected by PC is still less than 5%. The aim of this article is to review the most recent high quality literature on this topic.

Proteomic analysis of colorectal cancer: prefractionation strategies using two-dimensional free-flow electrophoresis

This review deals with the application of a new prefractionation tool, free-flow electrophoresis (FFE), for proteomic analysis of colorectal cancer (CRC). CRC is a leading cause of cancer death in the Western world. Early detection is the single most important factor influencing outcome of CRC patients. If identified while the disease is still localized, CRC is treatable. To improve outcomes for CRC patients there is a pressing need to identify biomarkers for early detection (diagnostic markers), prognosis (prognostic indicators), tumour responses (predictive markers) and disease recurrence (monitoring markers). Despite recent advances in the use of genomic analysis for risk assessment, in the area of biomarker identification genomic methods alone have yet to produce reliable candidate markers for CRC. For this reason, attention is being directed towards proteomics as a complementary analytical tool for biomarker identification. Here we describe a proteomics separation tool, which uses a combination of continuous FFE, a liquid-based isoelectric focusing technique, in the first dimension, followed by rapid reversed-phase HPLC (1–6 min/analysis) in the second dimension. We have optimized imaging software to present the FFE/RP-HPLC data in a virtual 2D gel-like format. The advantage of this liquid based fractionation system over traditional gel-based fractionation systems is the ability to fractionate large quantity protein samples. Unlike 2D gels, the method is applicable to both high-M_r proteins and small peptides, which are difficult to separate, and in the case of peptides, are not retained in standard 2D gels.

Cytoreductive surgery plus intraperitoneal chemohyperthermia in patients with colorectal cancer at high risk for local-regional recurrence

This article was written to define the situations in which early second-look surgery with a combined treatment should be indicated in patients at high risk of developing peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC). Through a review of the literature, this is a definition of the second-look concept and of the different groups of patients at risk, in different situations (after resection of the primary, after initial cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, and after the discovery of isolated carcinoembryonic antigen elevation or isolated peritoneal uptake on positron emission tomography scan). Systematic second-look surgery for early treatment of asymptomatic PC is probably beneficial in patients presenting a high risk of developing PC after resection of their primary. The benefit seems considerably lower for the other groups of high-risk patients.

Carcinoembryonic Antigen in the Staging and Follow-up of Patients with Colorectal Cancer

CEA is a complex glycoprotein produced by 90% of colorectal cancers and contributes to the malignant characteristics of a tumor. It can be measured in serum quantitatively, and its level in plasma can be useful as a marker of disease. Because of its lack of sensitivity in the early stages of colorectal cancer, CEA measurement is an unsuitable modality for population screening. An elevated preoperative CEA is a poor prognostic sign and correlates with reduced overall survival after surgical resection of colorectal carcinoma. A failure of the CEA to return to normal levels after surgical resection is indicative of inadequate resection of occult systemic disease. Frequent monitoring of CEA postoperatively may allow identification of patients with metastatic disease for whom surgical resection or other localized therapy might be potentially beneficial. To identify this group, serial CEA measurement appears to be more effective than clinical evaluation or any other diagnostic modality, although its sensitivity for detecting recurrent disease is not as high for locoregional or pulmonary metastases as it is for liver metastases. Several studies have shown that a small percentage of patients followed postoperatively with CEA monitoring and who undergo CEA-directed salvage surgery for metastatic disease will be alive and disease-free 5 years after surgery. Furthermore, CEA levels after salvage surgery do appear to predict survival in patients undergoing resection of liver or pulmonary metastases. However, several authors argue that CEA surveillance is not cost-effective in terms of lives saved. In support of this argument, there is no clear difference in survival after resection of metastatic disease with curative intent between patients in whom the second-look surgery was performed on the basis of elevated CEA levels and those with other laboratory or imaging abnormalities. There is also no clear consensus on the frequency or duration of CEA monitoring, although the ASCO guidelines currently recommend every 2-3 months for at least 2 years after diagnosis. In the follow-up of patients undergoing palliative therapy, the CEA level correlates well with response, and CEA is indicative of not only response but may also identify patients with stable disease for whom there is also a demonstrated benefit in survival and symptom relief with combination chemotherapy. More recently, scintigraphic imaging after administration of radiolabeled antibodies afforded an important radionuclide technique that adds clinically significant information in assessing the extent and location of disease in patients with colorectal cancer above and beyond or complementary to conventional imaging modalities. Immunotherapy based on CEA is a rapidly advancing area of clinical research demonstrating antibody and T-cell responses.

Diagnostic precision of carcinoembryonic antigen in the detection of recurrence of colorectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the study was to evaluate the diagnostic precision of serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in the detection of local or distant recurrence following resectional surgery for colon and rectal cancer.

METHODS

Quantitative meta-analysis was performed on 20 studies, comparing serum CEA with radiological imaging and/or pathology in detecting colorectal cancer (CRC) recurrence in 4285 patients. The cut-off for a 'positive' CEA ranged from 3 to 15 ng/ml between the various studies. Sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were calculated for each study. Summary receiver operating characteristic curves (SROC) and sub-group analysis were undertaken.

RESULTS

The overall sensitivity and specificity of CEA for detecting CRC recurrence was 0.64 (95% CI: 0.61-0.67) and 0.90 (95% CI: 0.89-0.91), respectively. The area under the SROC curve was 0.75 (SE=0.04) and the diagnostic odds ratio was 18.44 (95% CI: 11.94-28.49). A CEA cut-off of 5 ng/ml yielded a higher diagnostic odds ratio than a cut-off of 3 ng/ml (15.5 vs. 11.1). Using meta-regression analysis the optimum CEA cut-off point for the best combination of sensitivity and specificity was 2.2 ng/ml. On sub-group analysis high quality studies, and those involving > or =100 patients yielded a marginal improvement in the sensitivity and specificity with minimal change to the SROC.

CONCLUSION

Serum CEA is a test with high specificity but insufficient sensitivity for detecting CRC recurrence in isolation. A cut-off of 2.2 ng/ml may provide an ideal balance of sensitivity and specificity. It may be useful as a first-line surveillance investigation in patients during surgical follow-up based on serial CEA measurements using temporal trends in conjunction with clinical, radiological and/or histological confirmation.

Surgical treatment for rectal cancer: An international perspective on what the medical gastroenterologist needs to know

Rectal cancer accounts for one third of all colorectal cancers. The age adjusted death rates from colorectal cancer have declined over recent decades due to a combination of colorectal cancer screening, improved diagnostic tests, improved standardized surgical technique, improved medical support, neoadjuvant chemotherapies and radiation treatment or combinations of these. Because of complex treatment algorithms, use of multidisciplinary teams in the management of rectal cancer patients has also been popularized. Medical gastroenterologists performing colonoscopies are frequently the first health care provider to raise the suspicion of a rectal cancer. Although the diagnosis depends on histological confirmation, the endoscopic presentation is almost diagnostic in many cases. In order to meet the patient’s immediate needs for information, it is important that the endoscopist has knowledge about the investigations and treatment options that will be required for their patient. The aim of this paper is to describe the modern preoperative investigations and operative procedures commonly offered to rectal cancer patients taking into account perspectives of three colorectal surgeons, practicing in the USA, Europe and Asia.

Evaluation of contrast-enhanced computed tomographic colonography in detection of local recurrent colorectal cancer

AIM: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity of contrast-enhanced computed tomographic colonography in detecting local recurrence of colorectal cancer.

METHODS: From January 2000 to December 2004, 434 patients after potentially curative resection for invasive colorectal cancer were followed up for a period ranging from 20 to 55 mo. Eighty of the four hundred and thirty-four patients showing strong clinical evidence for recurring colorectal cancer during the last follow-up were enrolled in this study. Each patient underwent contrast-enhanced computed tomographic colonography and colonoscopy on the same day. Any lesions, biopsies, identified during the colonoscopic examination, immediate complications and the duration of the procedure were recorded. The results of contrast-enhanced computed tomographic colonography were evaluated by comparing to those of colonoscopy, surgical finding, and clinical follow-up.

RESULTS: Contrast-enhanced computed tomographic colonography had a sensitivity of 100%, a specificity of 83% and an overall accuracy of 94% in detecting local recurrent colorectal cancer.

CONCLUSION: Conventional colonoscopy and contrast-enhanced tomographic colonography can complement each other in detecting local recurrence of colorectal cancer.

Plasma gelatinase activity does not reflect disease activity after operation for colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

To investigate if plasma matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)-2 or -9 are better markers for disease activity than carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in the postoperative follow-up of colorectal cancer patients.

METHODS

A prospective study was performed including 61 patients operated for primary colorectal cancer. The follow-up was for at least 2 years and postoperative blood samples were obtained periodically with 3-month intervals. Plasma gelatinase activity was measured with quantitative gelatin zymography and serum CEA with a specific immunoassay.

RESULTS

Zymographic analysis of plasma samples revealed the presence of the proforms, but not the active forms, of both MMP-2 and -9. Prior to the detection of recurrent disease or metastasis in potentially curatively operated colorectal cancer patients, the changes in proMMP-2, -9 and CEA blood levels were determined. ProMMP-2 and -9 plasma levels changed little in this period and changes between patients with and without disease relapse were not statistically significant. In contrast, patients with disease relapse showed a significant increase (p = 0.002) in CEA in the two consecutive serum samples prior to the detection of recurrent disease or metastasis. Similarly, prior to death due to colorectal cancer, proMMP-2 and -9 plasma levels showed no significant change, whereas CEA levels increased considerably and significantly (p < 0.001) when compared to changes found in survivors.

CONCLUSION

Plasma proMMP-2 and -9 activities show no potential value as prognostic markers in the follow-up of colorectal cancer.

CEA, CA 242, CA 19-9, CA 72-4 and hCGbeta in the diagnosis of recurrent colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the utility of serum CEA, CA 19-9, CA 242, CA 72-4 and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG)beta in the follow-up of 102 surgically treated colorectal cancer patients, out of which 40 patients developed clinical recurrence.

METHODS

In patients with recurrent disease, serum samples were obtained at the time of clinical recurrence, and in the disease-free group, they were obtained postoperatively. The combined use of the markers was evaluated with logistic regression analysis. The sensitivities of the different tumour markers at various specificity levels were compared by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.

RESULTS

When the five tumour markers, Dukes stage and location of the primary tumour were evaluated together in the same model, only CEA provided significant diagnostic information (p < 0.0005) in addition to the location of the primary tumour (p = 0.003). The diagnostic information provided by the other serum tumour markers was insignificant, although CA 72-4 approached borderline significance (p = 0.053). ROC curves were constructed and the difference in the values of the area under the curve (AUC) between the different serum tumour markers was determined at the time of clinical recurrence. Of the individual markers, the highest AUC was observed for CEA (AUC = 0.931). The difference in AUC values between CEA and the other tumour markers was highly significant (p < or = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

CEA had the highest diagnostic accuracy in detecting recurrent colorectal cancer. Inclusion of CA 19-9, CA 242, CA 72-4 or hCGbeta in the model did not improve the accuracy, although CA 72-4 approached borderline significance (p = 0.053). Thus, CEA seems to retain its position as the surveillance marker of choice for patients surgically treated for colorectal cancer.

Clinical utility of biochemical markers in colorectal cancer: European Group on Tumour Markers (EGTM) guidelines

In recent years, numerous serum and cell/tissue-based markers have been described for colorectal cancer (CRC). The aim of this article was to provide guidelines for the routine clinical use of some of these markers. Lack of sensitivity and specificity preclude the use of any available serum markers such as carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), CA 19-9, CA 242, CA 72-4, tissue polypeptide antigen (TPA) or tissue polypeptide-specific antigen (TPS) for the early detection of CRC. However, preoperative measurement of CEA is desirable as this may give independent prognostic information, help with surgical management and provide a baseline level for subsequent determinations. For patients with stage 2 (Dukes' B) and 3 (Dukes' C) disease who may be candidates for liver resection, CEA levels should be measured every 2-3 months for at least 3 years after diagnosis. For monitoring treatment of advanced disease, CEA should also be tested every 2-3 months. Insufficient evidence is presently available to recommend the routine use of other serum markers for monitoring purposes. Similarly, the new cell and tissue-based markers (e.g, ras, P53) cannot yet be recommended for routine clinical use.

Follow-up of patients with colorectal cancer: numbers needed to test and treat

Follow-up after curative treatment of patients with colorectal cancer has as its main aims the quality assessment of the treatment given, patient support, and improved outcome by the early detection and treatment of cancer recurrence. How often, and to what extent, the final aim, improved survival, is indeed realised is so far unclear. A literature search was performed to provide quantitative estimates for the main determinants of the effectiveness of the follow-up. Data were extracted from a total of 267 articles and databases, and were aggregated using modern meta-analytic methods. In order to provide one more colorectal cancer patient with long-term survival through follow-up, 360 positive follow-up tests and 11 operations for colorectal cancer recurrence are needed. In the remaining 359 tests and 10 operations, either no gains are achieved or harm is done. As the third aim of colorectal cancer follow-up, improved survival, is realised in only few patients, follow-up should focus less on diagnosis and treatment of recurrences. It should be of limited intensity and duration (3 years), and the search for preclinical cancer recurrence should primarily be performed by carcino-embryonic antigen (CEA) testing and ultrasound (US). The focus of colorectal cancer follow-up should shift from the early detection of recurrence towards quality assessment and patient support. As support that is as good or even better can be provided by a patient's general practitioner (GP) or by specialised nursing personnel, there is no need for routine follow-up to be performed by the surgeon.

Curative resection for rectal carcinoma: definition influences outcome in terms of local recurrence

OBJECTIVE

There are wide variations in local recurrence rate following curative surgery for rectal cancer and there are substantial inconsistencies among surgeons regarding the method of defining curative resection. This paper seeks to explore whether defining criteria is one of the important factors driving the variations in outcome.

METHOD

A literature review was undertaken to find all UK-based studies that had data on curative resection and local recurrence rates. The studies were divided into groups with distinct definitions of curative resection for rectal cancer. Meta-analyses were performed to pool the risks of local recurrence by group definition. Statistical tests were used to explore the variation in local recurrence by group. Confounding relationships of age, sex, Dukes stage, length of follow-up and year of study were explored as far as possible given the limitations of the available data.

RESULTS

For rectal cancers significant differences were found between the pooled local recurrence risks by group definition (P < 0.01). Meta-regression tests including all the studies indicate that the definition of curative resection is an important predictor of local recurrence.

CONCLUSION

It is suggested that a standardized approach towards defining curative resection and local recurrence may have a significant effect on outcomes in colorectal cancer surgery and would enable comparisons to be made between different series.

CEA, CA 50 and CA 242 in patients surviving colorectal cancer without recurrent disease

AIMS

To establish a baseline and intraindividual fluctuations of the tumour markers CEA, CA 50 and CA 242 in patients cured from colorectal cancer, and to test the hypothesis that serum concentrations and intraindividual fluctuations do not differ from the concentrations in cancer-free individuals.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Ninety patients with colorectal cancer, who had undergone surgery with curative intent, were still alive at least 5 years after surgery with no signs of recurrent disease. Serum levels of tumour markers CEA, CA 50 and CA 242 before and up to 2 years after surgery were analysed after the prospective study was terminated.

RESULTS

The pre-operative serum levels of CEA, CA 50 and CEA 242 were elevated in 36%, 16% and 20% of the patients. They were lowered after curative surgery. A small increase of CEA levels was found after the initial post-operative decrease. The intraindividual fluctuations for CA 50 and CA 242 did not exceed 15% but in 24% of the patients the serum levels of CA 50 were high and oscillating. The patients cured from Dukes >> C cancer had higher serum concentrations of CEA than patients who had a Dukes >> B cancer, which were higher than in patients who had Dukes >> A cancer. Concentrations of CA 242 were higher in patients cured from Dukes >> A than patients cured from Dukes>> B or C cancers.

CONCLUSIONS

During the first 2 years after curative surgery for colorectal cancer the serum levels of CEA did not differ from those levels in normal cancer-free subjects. The serum levels of CEA were related to Dukes >> staging whereas the levels of CA 242 were inversely related to Dukes >> staging.

CEA and CA 19-9 measurement as a monitoring parameter in metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) under palliative first-line chemotherapy with weekly 24-hour infusion of high-dose 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and folinic acid (FA)

BACKGROUND

There have been contradictory reports on the benefit of CEA and CA 19-9 measurements in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer using palliative chemotherapy. The object of this study was to examine the diagnostic accuracy of monitoring of palliative chemotherapy by means of CEA and CA 19-9.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The tumour markers CEA and CA 19-9 were subjected to serial measurement in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (n = 90) using palliative first-line chemotherapy with weekly 24-hour infusion of high-dose 5-FU with FA and were compared with objective response according to WHO criteria. 85 patients could be evaluated. 43 patients (51%) initially had elevated CEA (> or = 10 ng/ml) and 33 patients (39%) elevated CA19-9 (> or = 50 IE/ml). In 24 patients (28%), both markers were initially increased. With CEA positive patients, 143 cycles of chemotherapy were carried out, which showed the following response in the various cycles: 21 episodes with progressions (ePD), 69 episodes with no change (eNC), 53 episodes with partial/complete remission (ePR/eCR). With CA 19-9 positive patients, 100 cycles of chemotherapy were carried out with the following results: 21 episodes with progressions (ePD), 48 episodes with eNC, and 31 episodes with ePR/eCR.

RESULTS

A CEA rise by at least 50% differentiated between ePD versus eNC/ePR/eCR with a sensitivity of 76% and specificity of 90%. With CEA decreases of at least 30% in 99% of these patient episodes (78 of 79), a tumour progression could be excluded. Patients with an initial drop in CEA after the first cycle of chemotherapy of at least 50% of the initial level had a significantly higher probability of achieving an ePR/eCR in further therapy (relative risk 2.9; P = 0.002). With an CA 19-9 increase of at least 30%, a sensitivity progression of 62% and a specifity of 90% could be calculated. A CA 19-9 decrease of at least 60% excludes a progression in 95% of the patient episodes.

CONCLUSIONS

A CEA or CA 19-9 rise is only conditionally appropriate for recording progressions. A progression however, can be excluded with falling levels with high diagnostic accuracy, in which CEA offers a greater degree of certainty than CA 19-9. With a drop in CEA 79 of 143 (= 55%) of the CT scans could be saved, in which case 78 of 79 patient episodes (99%) were correctly assessed as 'no progression'. In patients with an increased CEA and CA 19-9 the CEA determination is sufficient for the further monitoring. A confirmation of these results by multicenter trials can result in a considerable decrease of monitoring costs for palliative treatment.

N-terminal peptide of type III procollagen: a possible predictor of colorectal carcinoma recurrence

BACKGROUND

The first step of colorectal carcinoma spread depends on the ability of the tumor cells to degrade and invade the extracellular matrix (ECM). The objectives of the current study were to evaluate the serum pattern of laminin, C-terminal peptide of Type I (PIP), and N-terminal peptide of Type III (PIIIP) procollagens, markers of ECM synthesis, in the follow-up of patients after resection for colorectal carcinoma and to evaluate their role in predicting local recurrence or metastases.

METHODS

A total of 32 patients who had undergone resection for colorectal carcinoma were followed for a median period of 24 months (range, 6-36 months). Every 3 months, laminin, PIP, and PIIIP were measured in the sera together with the tumor markers carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), CA 19-9, and tissue plasminogen activator (TPA). Twenty-one patients (Group 1) had no signs of recurrence, whereas the remaining 11 (Group 2) developed hepatic (n = 7) or pulmonary (n = 4) metastases.

RESULTS

No variations were observed in either group for laminin, CEA, CA 19-9, or TPA, whereas significant increases in PIP and PIIIP were observed in both groups 3 months after surgery. The increase in PIP and PIIIP at the 3-month follow-up was significantly greater in Group 1 than in Group 2. The difference between values at 3 months and basal values enabled a discrimination between Group 1 and Group 2, with a sensitivity of 36% and 91% and a specificity of 71% and 71% for PIP and PIIIP, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors believe PIIIP is useful as an early prognostic indicator of recurrence in the follow-up of patients who have undergone radical resection for colorectal carcinoma.

Independent prognostic value of preoperative serum markers CA 242, specific tissue polypeptide antigen and human chorionic gonadotrophin beta, but not of carcinoembryonic antigen or tissue polypeptide antigen in colorectal cancer

The prognostic value of preoperative serum concentrations of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), CA 242, tissue polypeptide antigen (TPA), specific tissue polypeptide antigen (TPS) and human chorionic gonadotrophin beta (hCG beta) in 251 patients with colorectal cancer (39 Dukes' A, 98 Dukes' B, 56 Dukes' C and 58 Dukes' D) was investigated. When using the cut-off levels recommended for diagnostic purposes, there was a significantly longer overall survival in patients with low tumour marker levels compared with patients with elevated serum levels for all the investigated markers. In Dukes' stage B, C and D CA 242 emerged as a significant predictor of survival, whereas TPA, TPS and hCG beta showed a value only in Dukes' D. Unfortunately, no marker provided prognostic information in Dukes' A. In multivariate analysis, entering the tumour markers as continuous variables, Dukes' stage was the strongest prognostic factor, followed by CA 242. TPS, hCG beta and localisation of the tumour were also independent prognostic factors, whereas age, gender, CEA and TPA were not.

Serum tumor markers in colorectal cancer staging, grading, and follow-up

Early diagnosis of colorectal cancer, a frequent neoplasia in industrialized countries, permits curative surgery. In this study we assessed the clinical role of serum tumor markers determination in diagnosing, staging, and grading colorectal cancer; the role of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), CA 19-9, tissue polypeptide antigen (TPA) and CA 72-4 in colorectal cancer follow-up was also assessed. In 114 patients with colorectal cancer, the oncofetal antigen CEA was compared with the membrane-associated glycoproteins CA 19-9, CA 242, and CA 72-4 and with the cytokeratins TPA, tissue polypeptide-specific antigen (TPS) and tissue polypeptide monoclonal antigen (TPM). Overall, the most sensitive indices were TPA and TPS (67% and 70%, respectively). Tumor stage influenced the levels of CEA, CA 19-9, and TPA, but not those of TPS, while tumor grade influenced CEA and TPS, but not CA 72-4, TPA, and TPM. TPA was the most sensitive index in identifying early or well-differentiated colorectal cancers. The sensitivity was enhanced when this marker was determined in combination with CEA, in diagnosing both advanced and early colorectal tumors. Seventy-seven patients were followed up after therapy for at least 18 months. CEA was the most sensitive index of recurrence (58%); however, this sensitivity is too low to consider tumor markers useful in colorectal cancer follow-up.

Pre-operative serum levels of CA 242 and CEA predict outcome in colorectal cancer

The prognostic value of the preoperative serum levels of CA 242 and CEA in patients with colorectal cancer was investigated. The serum concentrations of CA 242 and CEA were determined from preoperative serum samples of 259 patients with colorectal cancer (39 Dukes' A, 100 Dukes' B, 59 Dukes' C and 61 Dukes' D). Survival data of these patients were obtained to the end of 1993. There was a significantly longer survival in patients with a CA 242 level below 20 U/ml compared with patients with an elevated serum level. A difference was seen in overall survival (P < 0.0001), and in Dukes' B (P = 0.016) and Dukes' D (P = 0.009) stages. In Dukes' A and C colorectal cancer, the difference was not significant (P = 0.67 and P = 0.07, respectively). When 5 ng/ml was used as cut-off value for CEA, there was a significant difference in overall survival (P < 0.0001), but not within the different Dukes' stages. The prognosis was considerably worse in patients with concomitant elevation of CA 242 and CEA, compared with the prognosis of patients with normal levels or only one marker elevated (P < 0.0001). When analysing according to stage, a significant difference was seen in Dukes' B (P = 0.0004) and Dukes' C (P = 0.0007) stages. In a multivariate analysis, CA 242 was an independent prognostic factor (P < 0.0001). CEA was also an independent prognostic factor (P = 0.03), but only after exclusion of CA 242. Concomitant rise of CA 242 and CEA was found to be a strong independent prognostic factor (P < 0.0001). This study shows that the pre-operative serum CA 242 level is an independent prognostic factor in patients with colorectal cancer and that the prognosis of patients having a concomitant pre-operative elevation of CA 242 and CEA is poor.

Preoperative serum levels of CEA and CA 242 in colorectal cancer

Preoperative serum levels of CEA and CA 242 were determined in 260 patients with colorectal cancer and in 92 patients with benign colorectal diseases. The overall sensitivity of the CEA test was 43% and of the CA 242 test 39%. The corresponding specificities were 90% and 87% respectively, using 5 ng ml-1 as cut-off level for CEA and 20 U ml-1 for CA 242. The sensitivity of CEA was 26%, 32%, 38% and 77% for Dukes A, B, C and D colorectal cancer, and the sensitivity of CA 242 was 26%, 26%, 40% and 67%, respectively. The correlation between CEA and CA 242 was low. Concomitant elevation of both markers was seen in 5%, 12%, 18% and 59% of patients with Dukes A, B, C and D colorectal cancer, respectively. Of all the patients, 23% showed elevation of both the CEA and the CA 242 level, whereas CEA alone was elevated in 20% and CA 242 alone in 15% of the patients with colorectal cancer. Combined use of both markers raised the overall sensitivity from 43% to 58%, but reduced the specificity from 90% to 80%. The increase in sensitivity by combining the two markers was most marked in Dukes A, B and C colorectal cancer. Either or both of the markers were elevated in 46%, 46% and 60% of the patients respectively. The clinical value of combining CEA and CA 242 seems very promising and should be further investigated in prospective studies.