Detection of cervical cancer recurrence during follow-up: A multivariable comparison of 9 frequently investigated serum biomarkers

Preoperative measurement of serum CA-125 levels: is it useful in the risk assessment of low volume lymph node disease in cervical cancer?

“…However, when a method does not work at the beginning of a disease, it does not mean it will not support its monitoring or treatment of disease consequences. Hoogendam et al stated that in the case of SCC relapses, SCC-Ag and high sensitive C-reactive protein (hsCRP) are the best biomarkers [28]. In our study no recurrence, but a risk of metastases to the lymph nodes, in any form -ITC, MIC or MAC, was assessed.…”

Follow-Up for Cervical Cancer: A Program in Evidence-Based Care Systematic Review and Clinical Practice Guideline Update

“…Six individual studies that assessed various methods of follow-up [11][12][13][14][15][16] were included; two of them looked at hpv dna testing 15,16 , one addressed the role of serum biomarkers in detecting recurrence 11 , and three addressed the role of vaginal vault cytology [12][13][14] . No studies were found that addressed the following methods of detection that were considered in the previous version of the guideline: chest radiography, ultrasonography, pet or magnetic resonance imaging as stand-alone modalities, or intravenous pyelography.…”

“…No studies were found that addressed the following methods of detection that were considered in the previous version of the guideline: chest radiography, ultrasonography, pet or magnetic resonance imaging as stand-alone modalities, or intravenous pyelography. Studies included in this update were conducted in India 12,15 , Korea 16 , the United States 13,14 , and the Netherlands 11 (Table iii). Study sample size ranged from 56 15 to more than 1500 patients 12 .…”

“…Most studies were retrospective; two looked at prospective cohorts 15,16 . A variety of data sources, including hospital records, cancer registries, patient databases, and a biobank (for the tumour marker study 11 ) were used. Follow-up timelines ranged from a few days 11 to more than 5 years 13 .…”

“…A variety of data sources, including hospital records, cancer registries, patient databases, and a biobank (for the tumour marker study 11 ) were used. Follow-up timelines ranged from a few days 11 to more than 5 years 13 . Funding, where reported, was provided by government sources 15,16 .…”