Background:This meta-analysis evaluated whether pretherapy serum levels of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and cytokeratin-19 fragments (CYFRA 21-1) are predictive of response to therapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and whether changes in these markers during vs pretherapy are indicative of response.Methods:Original peer-reviewed studies enrolling adults with untreated advanced NSCLC were identified using PubMed. Two reviewers independently extracted data from eligible studies and assessed study heterogeneity and the risk of study bias.Results:Fourteen studies were eligible; 11 had objective response as an end point and three evaluated clinical benefit (i.e., response and stable disease). Study bias was relatively low. Both markers showed comparable modest predictive value across studies, with baseline CYFRA 21-1 numerically better in predicting treatment benefit. A good performance in identifying objective response during treatment was seen (AUC 0.724 (95% CI 0.667–0.785) for CYFRA 21-1 and 0.728 (95% CI, 0.599–0.871) for CEA). A decline in CYFRA 21-1 levels during treatment was highly indicative for objective response (sensitivity 79.1% (95% CI 71.5–85.1)).Conclusions:Comprehensive analysis of study heterogeneity and bias provides a high level of evidence for the clinical utility of CEA and CYFRA 21-1 for the prediction and monitoring of response in NSCLC.

Increased stability of the Elecsys® ProGRP assay in serum and plasma offers clear benefits over existing assays. This first evaluation of a ProGRP assay in China demonstrated comparable differentiation potential among different ethnicities.

The biomarkers cytokeratin 19 fragment (CYFRA 21-1) and human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) are useful in the diagnosis, prognosis, and monitoring of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but their combination has not been investigated yet. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the ability of CYFRA 21-1 and HE4 to predict recurrence as part of follow-up monitoring in patients with adenocarcinoma (ADC) of the lung. Materials and methods: Serum samples were collected from patients with stage I-IIIA ADC preoperatively and during follow-up at 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months and then every 6-12 months up to 5 years post-R0 resection. Samples were analyzed for CYFRA 21-1 and HE4 via electrochemiluminescence immunoassay. All cases of disease recurrence were verified by imaging. The diagnostic performance of CYFRA 21-1, HE4, and their combination to predict recurrence was assessed by Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) and corresponding area under the curve (AUC). Results: 115 patients with ADC were included (N = 612 biomarker measurements); median age was 63 years; most had stage I-II disease (n = 97; 84.3%). All patients underwent surgical resection; 44 patients (38%) also received adjuvant chemotherapy and 16 (14%) received radiation therapy. At the median timepoint for the last blood sample collection (37 months), 31 patients (27%) had experienced recurrence. Both CYFRA 21-1 and HE4 were able to detect recurrence (AUC and 95% confidence interval [CI]): 75.9% (66.0-85.8%) and 75.4% (65.9-84.8%), respectively, but this increased with the combination (78.8% [69.0-88.6%]). At a sensitivity of 80%, the respective specificities (95% CI) for CYFRA 21-1, HE4, and the combination were 57.1% (53.0-61.2%), 57.1% (53.0-61.2%), and 69.7% (65.8-73.4%). Conclusion: Serial measurements of serum CYFRA 21-1 and HE4 levels could provide a valuable method for follow-up monitoring of patients with ADC to detect recurrence.

Baseline CYFRA 21-1 and CEA levels may provide further information to help clinicians decide which patients with SCC should receive adjuvant CTx. Further evaluation of these biomarkers is warranted.

This study aimed to investigate whether changes in progastrin-releasing peptide (ProGRP) levels correlate with treatment response and can be used to optimize clinical management of patients with small-cell lung cancer. Patients with small-cell lung cancer (any stage) receiving chemotherapy were eligible. ProGRP was measured in serum/plasma at baseline and after each chemotherapy cycle using the Elecsys® ProGRP assay (Roche Diagnostics). Treatment response was assessed by computed tomography scan. The primary objective was to examine whether changes in ProGRP levels correlated with computed tomography scan results after two cycles of chemotherapy. The prognostic value of ProGRP among patients receiving first-line chemotherapy was also assessed. Overall, 261 patients from six centers were eligible. Among patients with elevated baseline ProGRP (>100 pg/mL), a ProGRP decline after Cycle 2 was associated with nonprogression (area under the curve: 84%; 95% confidence interval: 72.8–95.1; n = 141). ProGRP changes from baseline to end of Cycle 1 were predictive of response, as determined by computed tomography scan 3 weeks later (area under the curve: 87%; 95% confidence interval: 74.1−99.2; n = 137). This was enhanced by repeat measurements, with a 92% area under the curve (95% confidence interval: 85.3−97.8) among patients with ProGRP data after both Cycles 1 and 2 (n = 123); if a patient experienced a ≥25% decline in ProGRP after Cycle 1, and ProGRP remained stable or decreased after Cycle 2, the probability of finding progression on the interim computed tomography scan at the end of Cycle 2 was almost zero (sensitivity: 100%, specificity: 71%). Both ProGRP levels at baseline and at the end of first-line chemotherapy were prognostic; the latter provided a moderately improved hazard ratio of 2.43 (95% confidence interval: 1.33–4.46; n = 110) versus 1.87 (95% confidence interval: 1.04–3.37; n = 216). In summary, for patients with small-cell lung cancer and elevated baseline ProGRP levels, ProGRP may be a simple, reliable, and repeatable tool for monitoring response to chemotherapy and provide valuable prognostic information.