Levels of carcinoembryonic antigen and CA 19-9 in the sera and peritoneal washing of patients undergoing surgical treatment for gastric carcinoma

Crepaldi-Filho, René; Palma, Rogério Tadeu; Giusti, Marcelo Franchini; Bueno, Marina de Assis Galvão; Silva, Paulo Sérgio Lucas da; Waisberg, Jaques

doi:10.1590/s0004-28032008000300010

Cited by 13 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It was reported that serum concentrations of CEA and carbohydrate antigen 19‐9 were significantly higher in patients with positive cytology 21. Crepaldi‐Filho et al 22 showed that CEA levels in the sera were significantly higher in patients at more advanced stages. Serum levels of CEA were clearly influenced by tumor stage and tumor size, but not by histological classifications or tumor grade 23.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Long‐term results and prognostic factors of gastric cancer patients with only positive peritoneal lavage cytology

Bae

et al. 2011

Journal of Surgical Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Long‐term results and prognostic factors of gastric cancer patients with only positive peritoneal lavage cytology

Bae

et al. 2011

Journal of Surgical Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The intraperitoneal finding was similar, but there were more negative patients in stages I and II (Figure 8). cytology despite various detection rates [14][15][16][17][18] .…”

Section: Gastric Cancermentioning

confidence: 99%

Levels of CEA and Ca 19 - 9 in the sera and peritoneal cavity in patients with gastric and pancreatic cancers

Hoskovec¹,

Varga²,

Konecna³

et al. 2012

Acta Cir. Bras.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSE:Tumor markers are substances found in blood and other biological fluids if tumor is present in the body. They can be produced by tumor itself or can be results of cancer -body relation. They may be used in the follow-up of cancer patients to identify tumor recurrence. Pre-treatment levels have prognostic tool and could signalize persistence of minimal residual disease despite radical surgery. METHODS:We operated on 52 patients with upper GI malignancy (32 with gastric cancer and 20 with pancreatic cancer). Blood samples were taken before surgery and peritoneal samples immediately after laparotomy before any manipulation with tumor. All samples were examined by standard biochemical technique and the level was compared with a stage of the disease. RESULTS:Patients suffering from gastric carcinoma of stage I and II had higher level of both markers in sera then in the peritoneal cavity, however most of them were within physiological range. Patients in stage III and IV had average marker levels in the peritoneal cavity higher than in sera. Number of positive findings was increasing according to the stage of the disease. The peritoneal levels of both markers varied extremely in higher stages. In patients suffering from pancreatic carcinoma the CEA levels both in sera and peritoneal cavity were parallel but peritoneal levels were slightly higher in stages III and IV. Ca 19 -9 was more sensitive for pancreatic cancer.The percentage of positive findings was higher in sera but the level of Ca 19 -9 was higher in the peritoneal cavity. The number of positive findings again correlated with the stage of the disease. CONCLUSIONS: Levels of tumor markers in sera could signalize inoperability of tumor (Ca 19 -9 in cases of pancreatic carcinoma); peritoneal levels could predict R1 resection especially in gastric cancer patients and risk of early peritoneal recurrence of the disease.Difference between the levels in the peritoneum and sera may signalize the route of dissemination (hematogenous and intraperitoneal).

show abstract

“…The solution volume is the most important factor in determining the tumor marker concentration. We found very varied data on the volume in published studies, from 10 to 1000 ml [7, 9, 20, 21]. In order to elucidate the influence of solution volume on tumor marker concentrations, we compared the results acquired with two different volumes (20 in 50 ml), while the time and areas of washing were always the same.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Control values of ovarian cancer tumor markers and standardisation of a protocol for sampling peritoneal fluid and performing washing during laparoscopy

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDetermination of the tumor marker concentration in peritoneal fluid (PF) may help to assess its potential to detect small concentration changes between benign ovarian pathology and early stage ovarian cancer. Peritoneal washing, which can also be obtained when PF is absent, is already included in the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging classification for ovarian cancer but sampling has not yet been standardized. Since our aim was to evaluate the relationship between marker concentration in PF and washing, standardization of the sampling protocol was a prerequisite to ensure reliable results.MethodsThirty-three women with non-malignant pathology of the reproductive organs were included in the study. We used three promising tumor markers for evaluation of the marker concentration in local fluid: osteopontin (sOPN), splice variant 6 of sCD44 (sCD44-v6) and vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 (sVCAM-1). After aspiration of PF, washing of the uterus, ovaries and pelvic peritoneum was performed with saline solution. Patients were divided into two groups based on the solution volume: A-20 ml and B-50 ml. To determine the efficiency of washing in relation to solution volume, washing was repeated three times. Concentrations of markers in samples were determined using flow cytometry.ResultsMean concentrations of markers were significantly higher (P <0.001) in PF than in the first washing. We demonstrated a significant positive correlation between marker concentrations in PF and first washing (sOPN: r = 0.447, P = 0.048; sCD44-v6: r = 0.660, P = 0.002; sVCAM-1: r = 0.526, P = 0.017). When using a smaller solution volume for washing, significantly higher (sVCAM-1: 2.5-fold, P = 0.021; sOPN: 3-fold, P = 0.024) or equal (sCD44-v6) mean concentrations of tumor markers were obtained.ConclusionsOur work demonstrates for the first time that concentrations of sOPN, sCD44-v6 and sVCAM-1 in PF correlate with peritoneal washing in women with non-malignant pathology of the reproductive organs. This indicates that, for selected tumor markers, washing can replace PF when PF is absent. A standardized protocol for sampling PF and performing washing during laparoscopy was established.

show abstract

Levels of carcinoembryonic antigen and CA 19-9 in the sera and peritoneal washing of patients undergoing surgical treatment for gastric carcinoma

Cited by 13 publications

References 26 publications

Long‐term results and prognostic factors of gastric cancer patients with only positive peritoneal lavage cytology

Long‐term results and prognostic factors of gastric cancer patients with only positive peritoneal lavage cytology

Levels of CEA and Ca 19 - 9 in the sera and peritoneal cavity in patients with gastric and pancreatic cancers

Control values of ovarian cancer tumor markers and standardisation of a protocol for sampling peritoneal fluid and performing washing during laparoscopy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About