Preliminary evaluation of clinical utility of CYFRA 21-1, CA 72-4, NSE, CA19-9 and CEA in stomach cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although various tumor markers have been utilized in management of stomach cancer (SC), only a few reports have described relevance of examples such as CYFRA 21-1 and neuron-specific enolase (NSE). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the potential diagnostic performance of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), CA 19-9, CA72-4, CYFRA 21-1 and NSE in patients with SC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-six SC patients with pathologic confirmation between 2012 and 2013 were enrolled. Serum levels of five tumor markers were analyzed using a solid-phase immunoradiometric assay. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted for the five tumor markers to investigate their diagnostic powers and adjusted cutoff values derived from analysis of ROC curves were evaluated to calculate the sensitivity of each for SC with recommended cutoff values. RESULTS: Based on two different cutoff values (recommended and adjusted), CYFRA 21-1 (≥2.0 and 1.2 ng/ml) had a respective sensitivity of 50% and 78.1%, compared with 8.3% and 18.8% for CEA (≥7.0 and 3.9 ng/ml), 15.6% and 18.8% for CA 19-9 (≥37 and 26.7 ng/ml), 28.1% and 9.6% for CA 72-4 (≥4.0 and 13 ng/ml) and 7.3% and 7.3% for NSE (≥14.7 and 15.0 ng/ml) in the initial staging of primary SC. The area under the curve (AUC) for CYFRA 21-1, with a value of 0.978 (95% confidence interval, 0.964-0.991) was comparatively the highest. Univariate analysis revealed significant relationships between tumor marker level and lymph node involvement, metastasis and staging with CYFRA 21-1, CA 72-4 and NSE. CONCLUSIONS: CYFRA 21-1 was the most sensitive tumor marker and showed the most powerful diagnostic performance among the five SC tumor markers. NSE and CA 72-4 are significantly related to lymph node involvement, metastasis or stage. Further evaluations are warranted to clarify the clinical usefulness and prognostic prediction of these markers in SC.

Extrahepatic bile duct cancers: surgery alone versus surgery plus postoperative radiation therapy.

PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to determine the role of radiotherapy after curative-intent surgery in the management of extrahepatic bile duct (EHBD) cancers. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From 1997 through 2005, 78 patients with EHBD cancer were surgically staged. These patients were stratified by the absence of adjuvant radiation (n = 47, group I) versus radiation (n = 31, group II) after resection. Pathology examination showed 27 cases in group I and 20 cases in group II had microscopically positive resection margins. The patients in group II received 45 to 54 Gy of external beam radiotherapy. The primary endpoints of this study were overall survival, disease-free survival, and prognostic factors. RESULTS: There were no differences between the 5-year overall survival rates for the two groups (11.6% in group I vs. 21% in group II). However, the patients with microscopically positive resection margins who received adjuvant radiation therapy had higher median disease-free survival rates than those who underwent surgery alone (21 months vs. 10 months, respectively, p = 0.042). Decreasing local failure was found in patients who received postoperative radiotherapy (61.7% in group I and 35.6% in group II, p = 0.02). Outcomes of the patients with a positive resection margin and lymph node metastasis who received postoperative radiation therapy were doubled compared to those of patients without adjuvant radiotherapy. Resection margin status, lymph node metastasis, and pathology differentiation were significant prognostic factors in disease-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant radiotherapy might be useful in patients with EHBD cancer, especially for those patients with microscopic residual tumors and positive lymph nodes after resection for increasing local control.