CA 27-29 in Patients with Breast Cancer with Pulmonary Fibrosis

Kurian, Sobha; Khan, Muhammad Taimoor; Grant, Maurice D.

doi:10.3816/cbc.2008.n.067

Cited by 12 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The method enabled the analysis of PKA with a LOD of 3 kU L −1 . 558 breast, lung, pancreas, stomach, colon, ovaries 2.5 μg L −1 in nonsmokers, 5 μg L −1 in smokers α-fetoprotein (AFP) 567 liver, teroblastoma, hepatocellular carcinoma 10 μg L −1 cancer antigen 50 (CA50) 573 pancreas, gastrointestinal 17 kU L −1 cancer antigen 125 (CA125) 574 ovaries 35 kU L −1 cancer antigen 15-3 (CA15-3) 575 breast cancer with distant metastases 25 kU L −1 cancer antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) 576 pancreas, bile duct, stomach, colorectal, liver 37 kU L −1 cancer antigen 27.29 (CA27.29) 577 breast 38 kU L −1 cancer antigen 72-4 (CA72-4) 578 breast, stomach, ovaries 7 kU L −1 cancer antigen 242 (CA242) 579 adenocarcinoma 20 kU L −1 cancer antigen 549 (CA549) 580 breast 10 kU L −1 squamous cell carcinoma antigen (SCCA) 586 cervix, lung, head and neck, melanomas, hepatocellular carcinoma 1.5 μg L −1 neuron-specific enolase (NSE) 588 small cell lung cancer (SCLC), neuroblastoma 12.3 μg L −1 human epididymis-specific protein 4 (HE4) 590 lung, ovaries 0.6 μg L −1 ferritin 592 breast, pancreas, hepatocellular carcinoma, Hodgkin's lymphoma 7−158 μg L −1 for men and 4− 56 μg L −1 for women calcitonin (Ct) 597 medullary thyroid carcinoma (MTC) 8.5 μg L −1 human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) 599 germ cell tumors, choriocarcinoma, testicles 2.2 IU L −1 urokinase plasminogen activator (uPA) 601 breast, prostate, ovaries, squamous cell carcinoma 198−511 μg L −1 glutathione-S-transferase (GST) 603 esophagus, stomach, colon, pancreas, biliary tract, hepatocellular carcinoma 3.2 U L −1 alkaline phosphatase (ALP) 605 leukemia, lymphomas of B cell origin, osteoblastic bone tumors 20−140 IU L −1 lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) 613 lymphoma, melanoma, acute leukemia, germ cell tumors 104−236 U L −1 vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) 616 head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, non-Hodgkin's lymphomas, myeloid leukemia, lymphoid leukemia 256 ng L −1 vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) 620 chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), breast, ovaries 15 ng L −1 epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR or HER1) 624 nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC), breast, head and neck, stomach,…”

Section: Chemical Reviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrochemical Methods for the Analysis of Clinically Relevant Biomolecules

Sargent²,

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rapid progress in identifying biomarkers that are hallmarks of disease has increased demand for high-performance detection technologies. Implementation of electrochemical methods in clinical analysis may provide an effective answer to the growing need for rapid, specific, inexpensive, and fully automated means of biomarker analysis. This Review summarizes advances from the past 5 years in the development of electrochemical sensors for clinically relevant biomolecules, including small molecules, nucleic acids, and proteins. Various sensing strategies are assessed according to their potential for reaching relevant limits of sensitivity, specificity, and degrees of multiplexing. Furthermore, we address the remaining challenges and opportunities to integrate electrochemical sensing platforms into point-of-care solutions.

show abstract

Section: Chemical Reviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrochemical Methods for the Analysis of Clinically Relevant Biomolecules

Sargent²,

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Tumor-associated MUC1 (tMUC1) is a marker of an aggressive phenotype [11, 12] that is cleaved from epithelial cells and released into circulation, allowing detection in the serum [13, 14]. MUC1 antibodies, CA 15-3 and CA 27-29, have been developed and used to detect recurrent breast cancer, monitoring the treatment of patients with advanced breast cancer and as a prognostic marker [15–17]. These tumor markers have not been used for screening since they can be elevated for benign breast lesions as well as other non-cancerous conditions (Patient Guide to Tumor markers, Carolyn Vachani RN, MSN, AOCN, The Abramson Cancer Center of the University of Pennsylvania).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A tumor specific antibody to aid breast cancer screening in women with dense breast tissue

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Screening for breast cancer has predominantly been done using mammography. Unfortunately, mammograms miss 50% cancers in women with dense breast tissue. Multi-modal screenings offer the best chance of enhancing breast cancer screening effectiveness. We evaluated the use of TAB004, an antibody that recognizes the tumor form of the glycoprotein MUC1 (tMUC1), to aid early detection of breast cancer. Our experimental approach was to follow tMUC1 from the tissue into circulation. We found that 95% of human breast cancer tissues across all subtypes stained positive for TAB004. In breast cancer cell lines, we showed that the amount of tMUC1 released from tumor cells is proportional to the cell's tMUC1 expression level. Finally, we showed that TAB004 can be used to assess circulating tMUC1 levels, which when monitored in the context of cancer immunoediting, can aid earlier diagnosis of breast cancer regardless of breast tissue density. In a blinded pilot study with banked serial samples, tMUC1 levels increased significantly up to 2 years before diagnosis. Inclusion of tMUC1 monitoring as part of a multi-modal screening strategy may lead to earlier stage diagnosis of women whose cancers are missed by mammography.

show abstract

“… 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 Despite these clinical observations, the mechanism of benign elevations in tumor markers, like those following COVID‐19 infection, is not known and are hypothesized to stem from the molecular roles of the markers within the pulmonary inflammatory response. 11 , 14 , 17 , 22…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Kurian et al report a series of patients with chronic lung diseases and persistently elevated CA 27–29. 14 However, no data have supported a link between CA 27–29 and COVID‐19.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…9 Prior research has demonstrated that benign elevations in markers are common 5 , 10 and caused by diverse pathologies, 5 , 10 , 11 including pulmonary diseases such as pneumonia, 11 , 12 chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 13 and pulmonary fibrosis. 14 The severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) induces a distinct viral inflammatory response, resulting in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). Clinical data suggest that CEA, CA 19–9, and CA 125 levels might rise in patients with COVID‐19.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Tumor marker response to SARS‐CoV‐2 infection among patients with cancer

Gunn

Tashie²,

Wolf

et al. 2022

Cancer Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Inflammatory responses from benign conditions can cause non‐cancer‐related elevations in tumor markers. The severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) induces a distinct viral inflammatory response, resulting in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). Clinical data suggest carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), carbohydrate antigen 19–9 (CA 19–9), and cancer antigen 125 (CA 125) levels might rise in patients with COVID‐19. However, available data excludes cancer patients, so little is known about the effect of COVID‐19 on tumor markers among cancer patients. Methods We conducted a case series and identified patients with a positive SARS‐CoV‐2 PCR test, diagnosis of a solid tumor malignancy, and a CEA, CA 19–9, CA 125, or CA 27–29 laboratory test. Cancer patients with documented COVID‐19 infection and at least one pre‐ and two post‐infection tumor marker measurements were included. We abstracted the electronic health record for demographics, cancer diagnosis, treatment, evidence of cancer progression, date and severity of COVID‐19 infection, and tumor marker values. Results Seven patients were identified with a temporary elevation of tumor marker values during the post‐COVID‐19 period. Elevation in tumor marker occurred within 56 days of COVID‐19 infection for all patients. Tumor markers subsequently decreased at the second time point in the post‐infectious period among all patients. Conclusion We report temporary elevations of cancer tumor markers in the period surrounding COVID‐19 infection. To our knowledge this is the first report of this phenomenon in cancer patients and has implications for clinical management and future research.

show abstract

CA 27-29 in Patients with Breast Cancer with Pulmonary Fibrosis

Cited by 12 publications

References 11 publications

Electrochemical Methods for the Analysis of Clinically Relevant Biomolecules

Electrochemical Methods for the Analysis of Clinically Relevant Biomolecules

A tumor specific antibody to aid breast cancer screening in women with dense breast tissue

Tumor marker response to SARS‐CoV‐2 infection among patients with cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About