Auxiliary diagnostic value of tumor biomarkers in pleural fluid for lung cancer-associated malignant pleural effusion

被引:29
作者
Zhang, Hai [1 ]
Li, Changhui [1 ]
Hu, Fang [1 ]
Zhang, Xueyan [1 ]
Shen, Yinchen [1 ]
Chen, Yuqing [1 ]
Li, Feng [1 ]
机构
[1] Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Shanghai Chest Hosp, Dept Pulm & Crit Care Med, 241 West Huaihai Rd, Shanghai 200030, Peoples R China
关键词
Tumor markers; Lung cancer; Pleural effusion; Serum; CEA; NEURON-SPECIFIC ENOLASE; CARCINOEMBRYONIC ANTIGEN; CYFRA; 21-1; CEA LEVELS; SERUM; MARKERS; UTILITY; THORACOSCOPY; MANAGEMENT;
D O I
10.1186/s12931-020-01557-z
中图分类号
R56 [呼吸系及胸部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Background Pleural effusion (PE) can be divided into benign pleural effusion (BPE) and malignant pleural effusion (MPE). There is no consensus on the identification of lung cancer-associated MPE using the optimal cut-off levels from five common tumor biomarkers (CEA, CYFRA 21-1, CA125, SCC-Ag, and NSE). Therefore, we aimed to find indicators for the auxiliary diagnosis of lung cancer-associated MPE by analyzing and then validating the optimal threshold levels of these biomarkers in pleural fluid (PF) and serum, as well as the PF/serum ratio. Patients and method The study has two sets of patients, i.e. the training set and the test set. In the training set, 348 patients with PE, between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2017, were divided into BPE and MPE based on the cytological diagnosis. Subsequently, the optimal cut-off levels of tumor biomarkers were analyzed. In the test set, the diagnostic compliance rate was verified with 271 patients with PE from January 1, 2018 to July 31, 2019 to evaluate the auxiliary diagnostic value of the aforementioned indicators. Result In the training set, PF CEA at the cut-off value of 5.23 ng/ml was the most effective indicator for MPE compared with other tumor biomarkers (all p < 0.001). In the test set, PF CEA at the cut-off value of 5.23 ng/ml showed the highest sensitivity, specificity and accuracy, positive and negative predictive value among other tumor biomarkers, which were 99.0%, 69.1%, 91.6%, 90.7%, and 95.9%, respectively. Conclusion PF CEA at the cut-off level of 5.23 ng/ml was the most effective indicator for identifying lung cancer-associated MPE among the five common tumor biomarkers.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 29 条
[1]   Analysis of tumor markers in pleural effusion and serum to verify the correlations between serum tumor markers and tumor size, TNM stage of lung adenocarcinoma [J].
Chen, Zhongqing ;
Wang, Ying ;
Fang, Min .
CANCER MEDICINE, 2020, 9 (04) :1392-1399
[2]   Diagnostic value of tumor markers for lung adenocarcinoma-associated malignant pleural effusion: a validation study and meta-analysis [J].
Feng, Mei ;
Zhu, Jing ;
Liang, Liqun ;
Zeng, Ni ;
Wu, Yanqiu ;
Wan, Chun ;
Shen, Yongchun ;
Wen, Fuqiang .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2017, 22 (02) :283-290
[3]  
Ferrer J, 1999, CANCER-AM CANCER SOC, V86, P1488, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19991015)86:8<1488::AID-CNCR15>3.0.CO
[4]  
2-Y
[5]   CYFRA21-1 tests in the diagnosis of non-small cell lung cancer: A meta-analysis [J].
Fu, Lei ;
Wang, Rong ;
Yin, Ling ;
Shang, Xiaopu ;
Zhang, Runtong ;
Zhang, Pengjun .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL MARKERS, 2019, 34 (03) :251-261
[6]  
GAO Y, 2020, PHYS MED BIOL
[7]   Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) as tumor marker in lung cancer [J].
Grunnet, M. ;
Sorensen, J. B. .
LUNG CANCER, 2012, 76 (02) :138-143
[8]   Performance of CEA and CA19-9 in identifying pleural effusions caused by specific malignancies [J].
Hackbarth, Jennifer S. ;
Murata, Kazunori ;
Reilly, William M. ;
Algeciras-Schimnich, Alicia .
CLINICAL BIOCHEMISTRY, 2010, 43 (13-14) :1051-1055
[9]   Ratio of carcinoembryonic antigen in pleural fluid and serum for the diagnosis of malignant pleural effusion [J].
Hackner, Klaus ;
Errhalt, Peter ;
Handzhiev, Sabin .
THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES IN MEDICAL ONCOLOGY, 2019, 11
[10]   Investigation of a unilateral pleural effusion in adults: British Thoracic Society pleural disease guideline 2010 [J].
Hooper, Clare ;
Lee, Y. C. Gary ;
Maskell, Nick .
THORAX, 2010, 65 :4-17