» Articles » PMID: 17116247

Intensive Post-operative Follow-up of Breast Cancer Patients with Tumour Markers: CEA, TPA or CA15.3 Vs MCA and MCA-CA15.3 Vs CEA-TPA-CA15.3 Panel in the Early Detection of Distant Metastases

Overview
Journal BMC Cancer
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty Oncology
Date 2006 Nov 23
PMID 17116247
Citations 20
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: In breast cancer current guidelines do not recommend the routine use of serum tumour markers. Differently, we observed that CEA-TPA-CA15.3 (carcinoembryonic (CEA) tissue polypeptide (TPA) and cancer associated 115D8/DF3 (CA15.3) antigens) panel permits early detection and treatment for most relapsing patients. As high sensitivity and specificity and different cut-off values have been reported for mucin-like carcinoma associated antigen (MCA), we compared MCA with the above mentioned tumour markers and MCA-CA15.3 with the CEA-TPA-CA15.3 panel.

Methods: In 289 breast cancer patients submitted to an intensive post-operative follow-up with tumour markers, we compared MCA (cut-off values, > or = 11 and > or = 15 U/mL) with CEA or CA15.3 or TPA for detection of relapse. In addition, we compared the MCA-CA15.3 and CEA-TPA-CA15.3 tumour marker panels.

Results: Distant metastases occurred 19 times in 18 (6.7%) of the 268 patients who were disease-free at the beginning of the study. MCA sensitivity with both cut-off values was higher than that of CEA or TPA or CA15.3 (68% vs 10%, 26%, 32% and 53% vs 16%, 42%, 32% respectively). With cut-off > or = 11 U/mL, MCA showed the lowest specificity (42%); with cut-off > or = 15 U/mL, MCA specificity was similar to TPA (73% vs 72%) and lower than that of CEA and CA15.3 (96% and 97% respectively). With > or = 15 U/mL MCA cut-off, MCA sensitivity increased from 53% to 58% after its association with CA15.3. Sensitivity of CEA-TPA-CA15.3 panel was 74% (14 of 19 recurrences). Eight of the 14 recurrences early detected with CEA-TPA-CA15.3 presented as a single lesion (oligometastatic disease) (5) or were confined to bony skeleton (3) (26% and 16% respectively of the 19 relapses). With > or = 11 U/mL MCA cut-off, MCA-CA15.3 association showed higher sensitivity but lower specificity, accuracy and positive predictive value than the CEA-TPA-CA15.3 panel.

Conclusion: At both the evaluated cut-off values serum MCA sensitivity is higher than that of CEA, TPA or CA15.3 but its specificity is similar to or lower than that of TPA. Overall, CEA-TPA-CA15.3 panel is more accurate than MCA-CA15.3 association and can "early" detect a few relapsed patients with limited metastatic disease and more favourable prognosis. These findings further support the need for prospective randomised clinical trial to assess whether an intensive post-operative follow-up with an appropriate use of serum tumour markers can significantly improve clinical outcome of early detected relapsing patients.

Citing Articles

Salivary Transmembrane Mucins of the MUC1 Family (CA 15-3, CA 27.29, MCA) in Breast Cancer: The Effect of Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2).

Dyachenko E, Belskaya L Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(20).

PMID: 39456554 PMC: 11506585. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16203461.


Blood endocan as a biomarker for breast cancer recurrence.

Daiki K, Kanada Y, Nagata A, Taruno K, Igarashi K, Yamochi T Cancer Biomark. 2024; 41(2):145-154.

PMID: 39331092 PMC: 11495321. DOI: 10.3233/CBM-240034.


The Influence of Tumor-Specific Markers in Breast Cancer on Other Blood Parameters.

Varzaru V, Eftenoiu A, Vlad D, Vlad C, Moatar A, Popescu R Life (Basel). 2024; 14(4).

PMID: 38672729 PMC: 11051489. DOI: 10.3390/life14040458.


Carcinoembryonic Antigen, Carbohydrate Antigen 19-9, Cancer Antigen 125, Prostate-Specific Antigen and Other Cancer Markers: A Primer on Commonly Used Cancer Markers.

Desai S, Guddati A World J Oncol. 2023; 14(1):4-14.

PMID: 36895994 PMC: 9990734. DOI: 10.14740/wjon1425.


Appropriateness and Economic Analysis of Conventional Circulating Biomarkers Assessment in Early Breast Cancer: A Real-World Experience from the E.Pic.A Study.

Maltoni R, Balzi W, Rossi T, Fabbri F, Bravaccini S, Montella M Curr Oncol. 2022; 29(2):433-438.

PMID: 35200539 PMC: 8870402. DOI: 10.3390/curroncol29020039.


References
1.
Nicolini A, Carpi A . Postoperative follow-up of breast cancer patients: overview and progress in the use of tumor markers. Tumour Biol. 2000; 21(4):235-48. DOI: 10.1159/000030129. View

2.
Clark G, Wenger C, Beardslee S, Owens M, Pounds G, Oldaker T . How to integrate steroid hormone receptor, flow cytometric, and other prognostic information in regard to primary breast cancer. Cancer. 1993; 71(6 Suppl):2157-62. DOI: 10.1002/1097-0142(19930315)71:6+<2157::aid-cncr2820711606>3.0.co;2-o. View

3.
Hortobagyi G . Can we cure limited metastatic breast cancer?. J Clin Oncol. 2002; 20(3):620-3. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2002.20.3.620. View

4.
Nieto Y, Nawaz S, Jones R, Shpall E, Cagnoni P, McSweeney P . Prognostic model for relapse after high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell transplantation for stage IV oligometastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2002; 20(3):707-18. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2002.20.3.707. View

5.
Rivera E, Holmes F, Buzdar A, Asmar L, Kau S, Fraschini G . Fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide followed by tamoxifen as adjuvant treatment for patients with stage IV breast cancer with no evidence of disease. Breast J. 2002; 8(1):2-9. DOI: 10.1046/j.1524-4741.2002.08002.x. View