Differing Serum Cea in Primary and Recurrent Rectal Cancer - A Reflection of Histology?

Elevated CEA is associated with worse survival in recurrent rectal cancer

This study investigated the prognostic impact of serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level in recurrent rectal cancer. We reviewed 745 patients who developed recurrence after curative treatment for rectal cancer between January 2000 and December 2012. Multivariate analyses for survival revealed that age > 60 years (p = 0.005), r-CEA ≥ 5 ng/ml (p < 0.001), disease free interval (DFI) < 12 months (p < 0.001), and palliative or conservative treatment (p < 0.001) were unfavorable factors.

Feasibility of CYFRA 21-1 as a serum biomarker for the detection of colorectal adenoma and advanced colorectal adenoma in people over the age of 45

BACKGROUND

Colon adenoma (CA) is a premalignant lesion of colorectal cancer, and its early removal is closely associated with more prolonged survival in the general population. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the relationship between diverse biologic markers and a newly diagnosed CA and to predict the clinical possibility of cytokeratin-19 soluble in serum fragment (CYFRA 21-1) as a screening tool in asymptomatic adults aged over 45 years.

METHODS

Four hundred and seventy-nine patients with a histologically confirmed CA or benign colon polyp (BCP), 76 patients with only benign colorectal diseases and 223 negative controls with no CA or BCP detected on colonofibroscopy were investigated. Multiple tumor markers and biochemical markers were simultaneously checked by radioimmunoassay and enzyme immunoassay.

RESULTS

The CYFRA 21-1 alone showed significant stepwise contrastive potential among the three groups (P<.001). Based on the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, Area under the curve (AUC) for CYFRA 21-1, with a value of 0.732 (95% confidence interval, 0.656-0.809, P<.001) for differentiating between negative controls and patients with advanced colon adenoma, was comparatively the highest among all analyzed factors. The sensitivity of CYFRA 21-1 was significantly higher than that of the other tumor markers in the diagnosis of CA and advanced CA, respectively (P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the results of our study, CYFRA 21-1 showed a significant diagnostic performance and significant stepwise comparative potential in differentiating patients with CA from benign controls. CYFRA 21-1 could be a simple and effective screening test for the diagnosis of CA.

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).

Clinical Usefulness of Serum CYFRA 21-1 in Patients with Colorectal Cancer

PURPOSE

Among diverse tumor markers, pretreatment evaluation and follow-up detection of recurrence in colorectal cancer are generally evaluated by serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels. However, there have been some reports about the low accuracy and high false-positive results of CEA in colorectal cancer. We investigated the clinical utilities of CYFRA 21-1 by comparing CEA and cancer antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9) in pretreatment and recurrent colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Using a solid-phase immunoradiometric assay, serum levels of CYFRA 21-1, CEA and CA 19-9 were analyzed in 132 patients with primary colorectal cancer, 124 healthy controls, 104 patients with benign colorectal disease and 19 patients with recurrent colorectal cancer. We determined three different cutoff values to evaluate the sensitivity of diagnostic performance in pretreatment and recurrent colorectal cancer.

RESULTS

CYFRA 21-1 (≥ 1.13 ng/ml) had a sensitivity of 47 %, compared with 37 % for CEA (≥ 3.05 ng/ml) and 32.6 % for CA 19-9 (≥ 23.1 ng/ml) in the initial staging of primary colorectal cancer. Using different cutoff values, CYFRA 21-1 showed higher sensitivity for pretreatment colorectal cancer than CEA and CA 19-9 in adenocarcinoma and adenosquamous carcinoma of this study. A mildly significant correlative relationship was noted between Dukes' stages and three tumor markers (p < 0.01). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves of CYFRA 21-1, CEA and CA 19-9 were 0.81 ± 0.03, 0.74 ± 0.03 and 0.62 ± 0.04, respectively, for discriminating colorectal cancer patients from patients with benign colorectal disease. In addition, CYFRA 21-1 was determined as the most sensitive tumor marker for evaluating recurrent colorectal cancer for all cutoff values.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that CYFRA 21-1 could be a useful and dependable tumor marker for pretreatment and recurrent colorectal cancer. Further prospective studies on its usefulness with respect to the prognosis and utility of combined tumor markers are needed.