No abstract

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.

BackgroundMicroRNAs biomarkers have shown value for diagnosis and prognosis of various cancers. Combination with established tumor markers has rarely been done.ResultsBreast cancer patients had significantly higher serum RNA loads (AUC 0.665), lower miR-34a (AUC 0.772), higher CEA and CA 15-3 levels (AUCs 0.717 and 0.721) than healthy controls. miR-34a correlated with tumor stage and hormone receptor status. There was no significant difference between groups for all other miRNAs. Combination of miR-34a with CEA or CA 15-3 led to improved AUCs of 0.844 and 0.800, respectively. Sensitivity of miR-34a and CA 15-3 reached 56.1% at 95% specificity. When compared with benign breast diseases, combination of miR-34a (AUC 0.719) and CEA (0.623) or CA 15-3 (0.619) resulted in improved performances (0.794 and 0.741). Sensitivity of miR-34a and CA 15-3 reached 53.7% at 95% specificity.ConclusionWhile miR-34a provides valuable information for diagnosis and staging, combination with tumor markers CA15-3 or CEA improves the sensitivity for breast cancer detection.Patients and MethodsThe diagnostic relevance of the miR-21, miR-34a, miR-92a, miR-155, miR-222 and miR-let-7c was tested in sera of 103 individuals (55 breast cancer, 20 benign breast diseases, 28 healthy controls). MiRNAs were detected by quantitative rt-PCR after extraction and reverse transcription. Cel-miR-39 and miR-16 were used for normalization. Established tumor markers CEA, CA 15-3, CA 19-9 and CA 125 were measured by automatized immunoassays. Diagnostic performance was tested by areas under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and sensitivities at 90% and 95% specificity.

The continued search for intermediate hosts and potential reservoirs for SARS-CoV2 makes it clear that animal surveillance is critical in outbreak response and prevention. Real-time RT-PCR assays for SARS-CoV2 detection can easily be adapted to different host species. U.S. veterinary diagnostic laboratories have used the CDC assays or other national reference laboratory methods to test animal samples. However, these methods have only been evaluated using internal validation protocols. To help the laboratories evaluate their SARS-CoV2 test methods, an interlaboratory comparison (ILC) was performed in collaboration with multiple organizations. Forty-four sets of 19 blind-coded RNA samples in Tris-EDTA (TE) buffer or PrimeStore transport medium were shipped to 42 laboratories. Results were analyzed according to the principles of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 16140-2:2016 standard. Qualitative assessment of PrimeStore samples revealed that, in approximately two-thirds of the laboratories, the limit of detection with a probability of 0.95 (LOD95) for detecting the RNA was ≤20 copies per PCR reaction, close to the theoretical LOD of 3 copies per reaction. This level of sensitivity is not expected in clinical samples because of additional factors, such as sample collection, transport, and extraction of RNA from the clinical matrix. Quantitative assessment of Ct values indicated that reproducibility standard deviations for testing the RNA with assays reported as N1 were slightly lower than those for N2, and they were higher for the RNA in PrimeStore medium than those in TE buffer. Analyst experience and the use of either a singleplex or multiplex PCR also affected the quantitative ILC test results.

Endocrine-active substances can adversely impact the aquatic ecosystems. A special emphasis is laid, among others, on the effects of estrogens and estrogen mimicking compounds. Effect-based screening methods like in vitro bioassays are suitable tools to detect and quantify endocrine activities of known and unknown mixtures. This study describes the validation of the Arxula-Yeast Estrogen Screen (A-YES®) assay, an effect-based method for the detection of the estrogenic potential of water and waste water. This reporter gene assay, provided in ready to use format, is based on the activation of the human estrogen receptor alpha. The user-friendly A-YES® enables inexperienced operators to rapidly become competent with the assay. Fourteen laboratories from four countries with different training levels analyzed 17β-estradiol equivalent concentrations (EEQ) in spiked and unspiked waste water effluent and surface water samples, in waste water influent and spiked salt water samples and in a mixture of three bisphenols. The limit of detection (LOD) for untreated samples was 1.8ng/L 17β-estradiol (E2). Relative repeatability and reproducibility standard deviation for samples with EEQ above the LOD (mean EEQ values between 6.3 and 20.4ng/L) ranged from 7.5 to 21.4% and 16.6 to 28.0%, respectively. Precision results are comparable to other frequently used analytical methods for estrogens. The A-YES® has been demonstrated to be an accurate, precise and robust bioassay. The results have been included in the ISO draft standard. The assay was shown to be applicable for testing of typical waste water influent, effluent and saline water. Other studies have shown that the assay can be used with enriched samples, which lower the LOD to the pg/L range. The validation of the A-YES® and the development of a corresponding international standard constitute a step further towards harmonized and reliable bioassays for the effect-based analysis of estrogens and estrogen-like compounds in water samples.