Elevated Tumor Markers in the Different Breast Cancer Subtypes; Percentage and Correlation with Outcome.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: Tumor markers (TMs) are widely used in breast cancer to monitor patients with metastatic disease during active treatment in conjunction with diagnostic imaging, history and physical examination. Studies of CA15-3 and CEA in metastatic disease have yielded positivity rates of approximately 80% and 40%, respectively. There is less information regarding CA-125 and breast carcinoma. Recently, there has been a renewed interest in tumor markers and their potential as therapeutic targets, including vaccine development, in various cancers. Early studies have reported an association between CA 15-3 levels and ER positivity. As far as we are aware, this is the first study to report elevated TM levels in the different breast subtypes and their correlation with outcome in each subtype. Aim: To document the rate of elevated tumor markers (CEA, CA15-3, CA-125) in the different subtypes and correlate TM with outcome. Methods: Women with breast cancer diagnosed between 1986 and 1992 and referred to the British Columbia Cancer Agency with M1 disease at presentation or who later developed a distant relapse were included. Archival paraffin tissue blocks were used to construct a tissue microarray. Breast cancer subtypes were defined as Luminal A (ER/PR+, HER2- and Ki67 <14%), Luminal B (ER/PR+ and HER2- and Ki67 ≥14%), Luminal HER2 (HER2+ and ER/PR+), HER2 (HER2+ and ER-and PR-), and Basal {HER2-, ER-PR- and (CK 5/6+ and/or EGFR+)} using immunohistochemical staining. In addition, we examined the triple negative (ER-, PR-, HER2-) non-basal subgroup. Levels of TM values (CA-15-3, CEA, CA-125) within 3 months of distant relapse date or anytime after were captured and percentage of elevated values (CA15-3>28, CEA>4, CA-125> 35) among the different subtypes were reported. Kaplan Meier (KM) plots were created for cases with elevated TM versus non-elevated TM cases. Results: 1,656 cases with distant metastases were potentially eligible for inclusion. Excluded cases: 428 cases without any linkage to TM data, 16 cases with subsequent contaralateral breast cancer (CBC) and no TM between the time of distant relapse and CBC, 127 cases with TM >3 months before distant relapse, and 187 cases where breast cancer subtype could not be determined. The percentage of TMs among the different breast cancer subtypes is shown in the table. Median duration of survival from time of diagnosis with metastatic disease was significantly shorter for patients with elevated TMs vs. those with normal TM values, p=0.003. Similar results were found when stratifying the results by subtype, with only Lum A and B attaining statistical significance, p=0.002 and p=0.016 respectively.Conclusion: Elevated TMs are documented in all breast cancer subtypes, with a significantly higher percentage of elevated TMs in luminal versus non-luminal groups. The lowest frequency of elevated TMs was documented in the non-basal TN cases. Elevated TMs in the metastatic setting predict worse outcome for Lum A/B subtypes.Table 1 : Percentage of elevated TMs among the different breast cancer subtypesSubtypeany TM %CA 15-3 %CEA %CA-125 %Lum A87816448Lum B88836054Lum Her2+86766339Her2+,ER-78705443Basal70642764Non Basal, Triple negative61582540p value<0.0010.001<0.0010.71 Citation Information: Cancer Res 2009;69(24 Suppl):Abstract nr 2125.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».