CA-15.3 Assay in Effusions

Pinto, Marguerite M.

doi:10.1159/000333895

Cited by 9 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In 1996, Pinto MM etc. reported the levels of CA153 in BS from BC were higher than that from healthy controls [ 13 ]. Subsequently, it was first reported that CA153 in BS can differentiate malignant breast cancers from benign breast diseases and is a more valuable biomarker for diagnosing BC compared with mammography [ 14 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

CA153 in Breast Secretions as a Potential Molecular Marker for Diagnosing Breast Cancer: A Meta Analysis

Tang¹,

Wei²,

Sun³

et al. 2016

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeMany studies have reported that carbohydrate antigen 153 (CA153) in breast secretions (BS) can discriminate breast cancer (BC) patients from healthy individuals, indicating CA153 in BS as a potential index for BC. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the actual diagnostic value of CA153 in BS.MethodsRelated papers were obtained from Pubmed, Embase, Scopus, Ovid, Sciverse, the Cochrane library, Chinese Biomedical literature Database (CBM), Technology of Chongqing (VIP), Wan Fang Data, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI). Pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of CA153 in BS for BC diagnosis were analyzed with the random effect model. SROC and the area under the curve (AUC) were applied to assess overall diagnostic efficiency.ResultsThis meta-analysis included five studies with a total of 329 BC patients and 381 healthy subjects. For CA153 in BS, the summary sensitivity, specificity, and DOR to diagnose BC were 0.63 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.57∼0.68), 0.82 (95% CI: 0.78∼0.86), and 9.18 (95% CI: 4.22∼19.95), respectively. Furthermore, the AUC of BS CA153 in the diagnosis of BC was 0.8614.ConclusionsCA153 in BS is a valuable molecular marker in diagnosing BC and should be applied in standard clinical practices of BC screening upon confirmation of our findings in a larger prospective study.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

CA153 in Breast Secretions as a Potential Molecular Marker for Diagnosing Breast Cancer: A Meta Analysis

Tang¹,

Wei²,

Sun³

et al. 2016

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Diagnostic accuracy of effusion cytology

et al. 1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Are we ready to develop a tiered scheme for the effusion cytology? A comprehensive review and analysis of the literature

Farahani

Baloch

2019

Diagnostic Cytopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Cytology is widely utilized in the initial evaluation of fluid accumulation in the body cavities. The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of cytology in distinguishing between benign and malignant (MAL) effusions. Methods:A comprehensive and systematic review of the literature was conducted to evaluate the accuracy of serous effusion cytology (SEC) against tissue biopsy/resection histology, imaging, or clinical follow-up as the reference test. Risk of publication bias and level of heterogeneity in the included studies was assessed. Meta-regression was performed to assess the effect of various variables on the accuracy of SEC. Results: Eighty studies met the inclusion criteria for meta-analysis comprising of 34 941 samples; of which 52 (0.2%), 22 202 (72.7%), 194 (0.6%), 711 (2.3%), and 6507 (21.3%) could be reclassified as nondiagnostic (ND), negative for malignancy (NFM), atypical (atypia of uncertain significance-AUS), suspicious for malignancy (SFM), and malignant (MAL), respectively. On follow-up, the mean risk of malignancy for ND, NFM, AUS, SFM, MAL was 17.4%, 20.7%, 65.9%, 81.8%, and 98.9%, respectively. A total of 73 studies were included in estimating the diagnostic accuracy of SEC. The bivariate mixed-effect model estimated the SEC sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio as 73.1%, 99.9%, 7850.6%, 2112.2%, and 0.27%, respectively. Conclusion: Serous effusion cytology shows high specificity and moderate sensitivity in the evaluation of serous effusions. A tiered classification scheme can improve the consistency of terminology for reporting SEC results, thus improving communication between the pathologists and clinical team, and quality of patient care. K E Y W O R D S analysis, classification scheme, comprehensive review, risk of malignancy, serous effusion cytology 1 | INTRODUCTION Serous effusion cytology (SEC) has been widely utilized in the initial evaluation of the etiology of fluid accumulation in the body cavities. Serous fluid can form in body cavities due to various inflammatory, infectious, and benign or malignant neoplasms. Malignancy is the underlying cause of serous effusion in 10% to 61% cases. 1,2 A majority of malignant effusions are caused by metastasis from adenocarcinoma of lung, breast, gastrointestinal, and female genital tract. 2,3 Malignant mesothelioma caninitially present as a serous effusion in up to 10% to 53% cases. 4-8

show abstract

CA-15.3 Assay in Effusions

Cited by 9 publications

References 12 publications

CA153 in Breast Secretions as a Potential Molecular Marker for Diagnosing Breast Cancer: A Meta Analysis

CA153 in Breast Secretions as a Potential Molecular Marker for Diagnosing Breast Cancer: A Meta Analysis

Diagnostic accuracy of effusion cytology

Are we ready to develop a tiered scheme for the effusion cytology? A comprehensive review and analysis of the literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About