CA 19-9 in evaluation of adnexal mass: retrospective cohort analysis and review of the literature

Factors influencing blood tumor marker concentrations in the absence of neoplasia

BACKGROUND

Tumor markers (TMs) are a heterogeneous group of molecules used in the diagnosis, prognosis and follow-up of cancer patients. During neoplastic differentiation, cells can either directly synthesize or induce the synthesis of TMs, and the release of these molecules into the bloodstream allows their quantification in biological fluids. Although very small concentrations of TMs are usually present in the serum or plasma of healthy subjects, increased concentrations may also be found in the presence of benign diseases or due to technical interference, producing false positive results.

MATERIAL AND METHODS AND RESULTS

Our review analyses the causes of false positives described between January 1970 to February 2023 for the TMs most frequently used in clinical practice: α-fetoprotein (AFP), β2-microglobulin (β2-M), cancer antigen 15-3 (CA 15-3), cancer antigen CA 19-9 (CA 19-9), cancer antigen CA 72-4 (CA 72-4), cancer antigen 125 (CA 125), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), chromogranin A (CgA), choriogonadotropin (hCG), cytokeratin 19 fragment (CYFRA 21-1), neuron-specific enolase (NSE), human epididymis protein 4 (HE4), serum HER2 (sHER2), squamous cell carcinoma antigen (SCCA), protein induced by vitamin K absence-II (PIVKA-II), Pro-gastrin-releasing peptide (Pro-GRP), prostate-specific antigen (PSA), Protein S-100 (S-100) and thyroglobulin (Tg). A total of 247 references were included.

CONCLUSIONS

A better understanding of pathophysiological processes and other conditions that affect the concentration of TMs might improve the interpretation of results and their clinical application.

Current and Emerging Strategies for Tubo-Ovarian Cancer Diagnostics

Tubo-ovarian cancer is the most lethal gynaecological cancer. More than 75% of patients are diagnosed at an advanced stage, which is associated with poorer overall survival. Symptoms at presentation are vague and non-specific, contributing to late diagnosis. Multimodal risk models have improved the diagnostic accuracy of adnexal mass assessment based on patient risk factors, coupled with findings on imaging and serum-based biomarker tests. Newly developed ultrasonographic assessment algorithms have standardised documentation and enable stratification of care between local hospitals and cancer centres. So far, no screening test has proven to reduce ovarian cancer mortality in the general population. This review is an update on the evidence behind ovarian cancer diagnostic strategies.

Diagnostic Clues for Women with Acute Surgical Abdomen Associated with Ruptured Endometrioma

(1) Background: An investigation of the preoperative diagnostic clues used to identify ruptured endometrioma by comparing the ruptured and unruptured states in patients who underwent laparoscopic operations due to endometrioma. (2) Methods: Patients with ruptured endometriomas (14 patients) and unruptured endometriomas (60 patients) were included, and clinical symptoms, laboratory findings, and radiological findings were analyzed. (3) Results: There were no significant differences in age, parity, last menstrual cycle days, or median size of endometrioma between two groups (group A: ruptured; group B: unruptured). The median serum level of CA 125 was 345.1 U/mL in group A and 49.8 U/mL in group B (p = 0.000). The median serum levels of CA 19-9 in group A and B were 46.0 U/mL and 19.1 U/mL, respectively (p = 0.005). The median serum level of CRP in group A was 1.2 g/dL, whereas it was 0.3 in group B (p = 0.000). ROC analysis showed that the optimal CA 125 cutoff value was 100.9 U/mL; the optimal CA 19-9 cutoff value was 27.7 U/mL; and the optimal CRP cutoff value was 1.0 g/dL. (4) Conclusions: Ruptured endometrioma can be diagnosed preoperatively using a combination of clinical symptoms, laboratory findings, and radiological findings. If a physician suspects a ruptured endometrioma, surgery should be performed to ensure optimal prognosis.

Repurposing Drugs in Controlling Recurrent Platinum-Resistant Clear-Cell Ovarian Cancer

Background

Recurrent platinum-resistant clear-cell ovarian cancer has a low overall survival duration of 7-8 months, making it a fatal disease. Currently, chemotherapy is the major kind of treatment, but it offers little advantage. Repurposed conventional drugs have recently been found to offer the ability to control cancer with few side effects and at a reasonable cost to healthcare organizations. Case Presentation. In this case report, we present the case of a 41-year-old Thai female patient diagnosed with recurrent platinum-resistant clear-cell ovarian cancer (PRCCC) in the year 2020. After undergoing chemotherapy for two courses and failing to respond to treatment, she began alternative medicine with repurposing drugs in November 2020. Simvastatin, metformin, niclosamide, mebendazole, itraconazole, loratadine, and chloroquine were also administered. Two months after therapy, a computerized tomography (CT) scan revealed a conflict between a decline in tumor marker levels (CA 125, CA 19-9) and an increase in the number of lymph nodes. However, after continuing all medications for 4 months, the CA 125 level decreased from 303.6 to 54 U/ml, and the CA 19-9 level decreased from 1210.3 to 386.10 U/ml. The patient's EQ-5D-5L score increased from 0.631 to 0.829 (abdominal pain and depression), indicating improved quality of life. Overall survival was 8.5 months, and progression-free survival was 2 months.

Conclusion

The response to drug repurposing is demonstrated by a four-month-long improvement in symptoms. This work introduces a novel strategy for the management of recurrent platinum-resistant clear-cell ovarian cancer that needs further evaluation in large-scale studies.

Past, Present, and Future of Serum Tumor Markers in Management of Ovarian Cancer: A Guide for the Radiologist

The ability to accurately detect early ovarian cancer and subsequently monitor treatment response is essential to improving survival for patients with ovarian malignancies. Several serum tumor markers (STMs)-including cancer antigen 125 (CA-125), human epididymis protein 4 (HE4), cancer antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9), and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA)-have been used as a noninvasive method of identifying ovarian cancer in conjunction with imaging. Although current guidelines do not recommend use of STMs as screening tools for ovarian cancer, these markers have clinical utility in both diagnosis and surveillance for women with ovarian cancer. CA-125 is the most commonly used STM; its level may be elevated in several types of ovarian cancer, including epithelial cell tumors, carcinosarcoma, teratomas, and secondary ovarian malignancies. An elevated level of CA 19-9 is associated with clear cell tumors, teratomas, and secondary malignancies. CEA is most commonly associated with mucinous ovarian cancers. Finally, HE4 is being increasingly used to identify certain subtypes of epithelial ovarian cancers, particularly serous and endometrioid tumors. Diagnosis of ovarian cancers relies on a combination of CA-125 levels and US findings, which include a large adnexal mass or high-risk features, including septa and increased vascularity. CT is preferred for staging and is used along with PET and STM monitoring for surveillance. Increasingly, MRI is being used to characterize ovarian lesions that are indeterminate at US or CT. The future of STM testing involves development of "liquid biopsies," in which plasma samples are analyzed for evidence of tumors, including circulating tumor DNA or tumor cells and tumor micro-RNA. When combined with traditional imaging techniques, liquid biopsies may lead to earlier diagnosis and improved survival. An invited commentary by Shinagare is available online. ^©RSNA, 2021.

ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE Consensus Statement on preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors

The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG), the International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) group and the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE) jointly developed clinically relevant and evidence-based statements on the preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors, including imaging techniques, biomarkers and prediction models. ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE nominated a multidisciplinary international group, including expert practising clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors and management of patients with ovarian cancer (19 experts across Europe). A patient representative was also included in the group. To ensure that the statements were evidence-based, the current literature was reviewed and critically appraised. Preliminary statements were drafted based on the review of the relevant literature. During a conference call, the whole group discussed each preliminary statement and a first round of voting was carried out. Statements were removed when consensus among group members was not obtained. The voters had the opportunity to provide comments/suggestions with their votes. The statements were then revised accordingly. Another round of voting was carried out according to the same rules to allow the whole group to evaluate the revised version of the statements. The group achieved consensus on 18 statements. This Consensus Statement presents these ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE statements on the preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors and the assessment of carcinomatosis, together with a summary of the evidence supporting each statement.

Guideline No. 403: Initial Investigation and Management of Adnexal Masses

OBJECTIVES

To aid primary care physicians, emergency medicine physicians, and gynaecologists in the initial investigation of adnexal masses, defined as lumps that appear near the uterus or in or around ovaries, fallopian tubes, or surrounding connective tissue, and to outline recommendations for identifying women who would benefit from a referral to a gynaecologic oncologist for further management.

INTENDED USERS

Gynaecologists, obstetricians, family physicians, general surgeons, emergency medicine specialists, radiologists, sonographers, nurses, medical learners, residents, and fellows.

TARGET POPULATION

Adult women 18 years of age and older presenting for the evaluation of an adnexal mass.

OPTIONS

Women with adnexal masses should be assessed for personal risk factors, history, and physical findings. Initial evaluation should also include imaging and laboratory testing to triage women for management of their care either by a gynaecologic oncologist or as per SOGC guideline no. 404 on the initial investigation and management of benign ovarian masses.

EVIDENCE

A search of PubMed, Cochrane Wiley, and the Cochrane systematic reviews was conducted in January 2018 for English-language materials involving human subjects published since 2000 using three sets of terms: (i) ovarian cancer, ovarian carcinoma, adnexal disease, ovarian neoplasm, adnexal mass, fallopian tube disease, fallopian tube neoplasm, ovarian cyst, and ovarian tumour; (ii) the above terms in combination with predict neoplasm staging, follow-up, and staging; and (iii) the above two sets of terms in combination with ultrasound, tumour marker, CA 125, CEA, CA19-9, HE4, multivariable-index-assay, risk-of-ovarian-malignancy-algorithm, risk-of-malignancy-index, diagnostic imaging, CT, MRI, and PET. Relevant evidence was selected for inclusion in descending order of quality of evidence as follows: meta-analyses, systematic reviews, guidelines, randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, observational studies, non-systematic reviews, case series, and reports. Additional articles were identified through cross-referencing the identified reviews. The total number of studies identified was 2350, with 59 being included in this review.

VALIDATION METHODS

The content and recommendations were drafted and agreed upon by the authors. The Executive and Board of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology of Canada reviewed the content and submitted comments for consideration. The Board of Directors of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada approved the final draft for publication. The quality of evidence was rated using the criteria described in the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology framework (Table A1 of Online Appendix A). See Table A2 of Online Appendix A for the interpretation of strong and weak recommendations. The summary of findings is available upon request.

BENEFITS, HARMS, COSTS

Adnexal masses are common, and guidelines on how to triage them and manage the care of patients presenting with adnexal masses will continue to guide the practice of primary care providers and gynaecologists. Ovarian cancer outcomes are improved when initial surgery is performed by a gynaecologic oncologist, likely as a result of complete surgical staging and optimal cytoreduction. Given these superior outcomes, guidelines to assist in the triage of adnexal masses and the referral and management of the care of patients with an adnexal mass are critical.

SUMMARY STATEMENTS (GRADE RATINGS IN PARENTHESES)

RECOMMENDATIONS (GRADE RATINGS IN PARENTHESES).

ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE Consensus Statement on pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian tumors

The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG), the International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) group, and the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE) jointly developed clinically relevant and evidence-based statements on the pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian tumors, including imaging techniques, biomarkers, and prediction models. ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE nominated a multidisciplinary international group, including expert practising clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian tumors and management of patients with ovarian cancer (19 experts across Europe). A patient representative was also included in the group. To ensure that the statements were evidence-based, the current literature was reviewed and critically appraised. Preliminary statements were drafted based on the review of the relevant literature. During a conference call, the whole group discussed each preliminary statement and a first round of voting was carried out. Statements were removed when a consensus among group members was not obtained. The voters had the opportunity to provide comments/suggestions with their votes. The statements were then revised accordingly. Another round of voting was carried out according to the same rules to allow the whole group to evaluate the revised version of the statements. The group achieved consensus on 18 statements. This Consensus Statement presents these ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE statements on the pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian tumors and the assessment of carcinomatosis, together with a summary of the evidence supporting each statement.

ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE Consensus Statement on preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumours

The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG), the International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) group and the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE) jointly developed clinically relevant and evidence-based statements on the preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumours, including imaging techniques, biomarkers and prediction models. ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE nominated a multidisciplinary international group, including expert practising clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumours and management of patients with ovarian cancer (19 experts across Europe). A patient representative was also included in the group. To ensure that the statements were evidence-based, the current literature was reviewed and critically appraised. Preliminary statements were drafted based on the review of the relevant literature. During a conference call, the whole group discussed each preliminary statement and a first round of voting was carried out. Statements were removed when a consensus among group members was not obtained. The voters had the opportunity to provide comments/suggestions with their votes. The statements were then revised accordingly. Another round of voting was carried out according to the same rules to allow the whole group to evaluate the revised version of the statements. The group achieved consensus on 18 statements. This Consensus Statement presents these ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE statements on the preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumours and the assessment of carcinomatosis, together with a summary of the evidence supporting each statement.

[Borderline Ovarian Tumours: CNGOF Guidelines for Clinical Practice - Value of Tumor Markers]

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the diagnostic value of serum biomarkers in the management strategy of borderline ovarian tumours (BOT) to make management recommendations.

METHODS

English and French review of literature from 1990 to 2019 based on publications from Pubmed, Medline, Cochrane, with keywords: borderline ovarian tumors, tumour markers, CA125, CA19 9, ACE, CA72 4, TAG72, HE4, ROMA, mucinous, serous, mucinous, endometrioid ovarian tumours, peritoneal implants, recurrence, overall survival, follow-up. Among 1000 references, 400 were selected and only 30 were screened for this work.

RESULTS

Literature review: there is low evidence in literature concerning the discriminating value of serum tumour biomarkers (CA125, CA19-9, CEA, CA72-4, HE4) and specific score between presumed benign ovarian tumour/BOT/ovarian cancer (LE4). Serum CA125 antigen is higher in case of serous borderline ovarian tumour (LE4), increase with the tumor height, the FIGO stage, notably in case of serous borderline ovarian tumor. However, a normal value rate of serum CA125 antigen does not rule out a BOT (LE4). The preoperative positivity rate of CA19 9 in case of TFO is relatively lower than that of CA125 and is higher in mucinous TFO. The preoperative rate of serum CA19 9 antigen increases with the tumour height and the FIGO stage (LE4) and are higher in case of mucinous BOT (LE4). Preoperative rates of serum HE4 are not different between histologic type of BOT. A high level of serum biomarkers (CA125) is a predictive factor of peritoneal implants (LE4) and an independent predictive factor of recurrence (CA125) (LE4).

RECOMMENDATIONS

no recommendation can be made about the use of serum tumour biomarkers (CA125, CA19-9, CEA, CA72-4, HE4) or specific score in order to distinguish benign ovarian tumor/borderline ovarian tumor/ovarian cancer in case of indeterminate mass. In case of suspicion of mucinous ovarian tumour on imaging, the systematic dosage of serum CA19-9 antigen can be proposed (grade C). In case of an ovarian indeterminate mass on imaging; dosage of serum HE4 and C125 is recommended. If preoperative dosage of serum tumor biomarkers is normal, their systematic dosage is not recommended in the follow-up of BOT (grade C). If preoperative dosage of CA125 is high, the systematic dosage of CA125 is recommended in the follow-up of BOT with no precisions about the rhythm and the duration of the follow-up (grade B).

Is There a Role of Elevated CA 19-9 Levels in the Evaluation of Clinical Characteristics of Mature Cystic Ovarian Teratomas? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

The role of preoperative CA 19-9 levels in patients with ovarian mature cystic teratoma (MCT) and the association of elevated levels of the biomarker with patients’ and tumor characteristics were evaluated. Four electronic databases were searched for articles published up to September 2019. Trials that evaluated the significance of elevated CA 19-9 in patients with ovarian MCTs and publications with > 20 patients were considered eligible for inclusion. Seven studies that included 995 patients with an ovarian MCT who were evaluated with elevated (n = 364) or normal (n = 631) CA 19-9 levels were included. Mean tumor size was significantly increased in patients with elevated CA 19-9 levels (p = 0.038). The rate of ovarian torsion was significantly increased in the elevated CA 19-9 group (p = 0.04). The present study highlights the importance of CA 19-9 as a marker in the diagnosis of MCT, and a meta-analysis supports that it could raise a high degree of clinical suspicion of early recognition of torsion and early surgical management due to complications related to increased size. Nonetheless, the diagnostic value of CA 19-9 is still limited and CA 19-9 can still serve only as a supplementary diagnostic tool in patients with MCTs.

Usefulness of Carbohydrate Antigen 19-9 Test in Healthy People and Necessity of Medical Follow-up in Individuals with Elevated Carbohydrate Antigen 19-9 Level

Background

Carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9) is a tumor marker whose level is elevated in many types of cancers and other benign conditions. CA 19-9 levels are frequently found to be elevated in individuals during general health examinations. This study aimed to investigate the clinical characteristics of such individuals and to determine the need for medical follow-up.

Methods

We investigated individuals who underwent a health inspection, including a serum CA 19-9 test, at our center. Their CA 19-9 levels, age, sex, body mass index (BMI), and personal and past histories were investigated. Additionally, subgroup analyses were performed for those who underwent follow-up study for the elevated CA 19-9 levels.

Results

Of 58,498 subjects, 581 (1.0%) had elevated CA 19-9 levels. Multivariate analyses revealed that older age, female sex, lower BMI, and diabetes were independent predisposing factors for elevated CA 19-9 level. A subgroup analysis revealed that the causative conditions were identified in 129 of 351 subjects (36.8%). Among them, the causative conditions in 31 subjects (8.8%, including four cases of cancer and 15 of benign tumors) were not detected at the initial check-up and were found during the follow-up period.

Conclusion

The use of CA 19-9 as a marker for cancer in healthy individuals is inappropriate. However, medical follow-up in individuals with elevated CA 19-9 levels may be useful because some causative diseases may be detected during follow-up.

[Diagnostic and prognostic value of tumor markers, scores (clinical and biological) algorithms, in front of an ovarian mass suspected of an epithelial ovarian cancer: Article drafted from the French Guidelines in oncology entitled "Initial management of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer" developed by FRANCOGYN, CNGOF, SFOG, GINECO-ARCAGY under the aegis of CNGOF and endorsed by INCa]

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the diagnostic value of serum/urinary biomarkers and the operability diagnosis strategy to make management recommendations.

METHODS

Bibliographical search in French and English languages by consultation of Pubmed, Cochrane and Embase databases.

RESULTS

For the diagnosis of a suspicious adnexal mass on imaging: Serum CA125 antigen is recommended (grade A). Serum CAE is not recommended (grade C). The low evidence in literature concerning diagnostic value of CA19.9 does not allow any recommendation concerning its use. Serum Human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) is recommended (grade A). Comparison of data concerning diagnosis value of CA125 and HE4 show similar results for the prediction of malignancy in case of a suspicious adnexal mass on imaging (NP1). Urinary HE4 is not recommended (grade A). The use of circulating tumor DNA is not recommended (grade A). Tumor associated antigen-antibodies (AAbs) is not recommended (grade B). The use of ROMA score (Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm) is recommended (grade A). The use of Copenhagen index (CPH-I), R-OPS score, OVA500 is not recommended (grade C). For the prediction of resectability of an ovarian cancer with peritoneal carcinomatosis in the context of a primary debulking surgery: It is not recommendend to use serum CA125 (grade A). The low evidence in literature concerning diagnostic value of HE4 does not allow any recommendation concerning its use in this context. No recommendation can be given concerning CA19.9 and CAE. For the prediction of resectability of an ovarian cancer with peritoneal carcinomatosis in the context of surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: the low evidence in literature concerning diagnostic value of serum markers in this context does not allow any recommendation concerning their use in this context. Place of laparoscopy for the prediction of resectability in case of upfront surgery of an ovarian cancer with peritoneal carcinomatosis robust data shows that the use of laparoscopy significantly reduce futile laparotomies (LE1). Laparoscopy is recommended in this context (grade A). Fagotti score is a reproducible tool (LE1) permitting the evaluation of feasibility of an optimal upfront debulking (NP4), its use is recommended (grade C). A Fagotti score≥8 is correlated to a low probability of complete or optimal debulking surgery (LE4) (grade C). There is no sufficient evidence to recommend the use of the modified Fagotti score or any other laparoscopic score (LE4). In case of laparotomy for an ovarian cancer with peritoneal carcinomatosis, the use of Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI) is recommended (grade C). For the prediction of overall survival, disease free survival and the prediction of postoperative complications, the clinical and statistical of actually available tools do not allow any recommendation.

High CA-125 and CA19-9 levels in spontaneous ruptured ovarian endometriomas

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the clinical significance of serum CA-125 and CA19-9 in women with spontaneous ruptured ovarian endometriomas.

METHODS

From January 2006 to April 2015, a total of 1653 women were diagnosed with ovarian endometriomas, and 43 women were diagnosed with the spontaneous rupture of their ovarian endometrioma. In addition, 70 women diagnosed with unruptured ovarian endometriomas were chosen to serve as control subjects. Serum CA-125 and CA19-9 levels, together with the clinical materials, were collected.

RESULTS

Serum CA-125, CA19-9, and the combined biomarkers were shown to be obviously elevated in the spontaneous ruptured ovarian endometrioma group (p=0.001, p=0.001, p=0.001, respectively). The AUC value for the combined biomarkers was 0.992 (95% CI, 0.981-1.000), with a high sensitivity and specificity of nearly 100% and 93.6%, respectively. Moreover, the maximum diameter of the mass was significantly (p=0.001) increased in the ruptured group.

CONCLUSIONS

Serum CA-125 and CA19-9 were significantly increased in patients with spontaneous ruptured ovarian endometriomas. Moreover, the combined biomarkers were better than either CA-125 or CA19-9 alone in the diagnosis of a spontaneous rupture of the ovarian endometrioma.