Diagnostic value of serum tumor markers for adnexal masses

• Authors: Milan Terzic , Jelena Dotlic , Ivana Likic , Branka Nikolic , Natasa Brndusic , Igor Pilic , Jovan Bila , Sanja Maricic , Nebojsa Arsenovic
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Keywords

EN

Tumor markers; Preoperative evaluation; Adnexal masses

• Publisher: De Gruyter Open
• Journal: Open Medicine
• Year: 2014
• Volume: 9
• Issue: 3
• Pages: 417-423

Dates

published

1 - 6 - 2014

online

8 - 7 - 2014

Contributors

author

Milan Terzic

author

Jelena Dotlic

• Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Clinical Center of Serbia, Dr Koste Todorovića 26, Belgrade, Serbia

author

Ivana Likic

author

Branka Nikolic

author

Natasa Brndusic

• Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Clinical Center of Serbia, Dr Koste Todorovića 26, Belgrade, Serbia

author

Igor Pilic

• Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Clinical Center of Serbia, Dr Koste Todorovića 26, Belgrade, Serbia

author

Jovan Bila

author

Sanja Maricic

• Occupational Health Department, General Health Center “Savski Venac”, Pasterova 1, Belgrade, Serbia

author

Nebojsa Arsenovic

• Department of Cellular Pathology, PathLinks Pathology Services, Lincoln County Hospital, Greetwell Road, Lincoln, LN2 5QY, UK

References

• [1] Rivas-Corchado LM, González-Geroniz M, Hernández-Herrera RJ. Epidemiological profile of ovarian cancer. Ginecol Obstet Mex 2011; 79:558–564
• [2] Sehouli J, Henrich W, Braicu I, Lichtenegger W. Preoperative diagnostics in ovarian cancer. What do we really need? Gynäkologe 2006; 39:428–437 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00129-006-1839-9[Crossref]
• [3] Ameye L, Valentin L, Testa A. C, Van Holsbeke C, Domali E, Van Huffel S, et al. A scoring system to differentiate malignant from benign masses in specific ultrasound-based subgroups of adnexal tumors. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2009; 33:92–101 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.6273[Crossref][WoS]
• [4] American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee Opinion No. 477. The role of the obstetrician-gynecologist in the early detection of epithelial ovarian cancer. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 117:742–746 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e31821477db[Crossref]
• [5] Menon U, Gentry-Maharaj A, Hallett R, Ryan A, Burnell M, Sharma A, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of multimodal and ultrasound screening for ovarian cancer, and stage distribution of detected cancers: results of the prevalence screen of the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS). Lancet Oncol 2009; 10:327–340 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70026-9[Crossref][WoS]
• [6] Joyner AB, Runowicz CD. Ovarian cancer screening and early detection. Womens Health 2009; 5:693–699
• [7] Khan A, Sultana K. Presenting signs and symptoms of ovarian cancer at a tertiary care hospital. J Pak Med Assoc 2010; 60:260–262
• [8] Donach M, Yu Y, Artioli G, Banna G, Feng W, Bast RC Jr, et al. Combined use of biomarkers for detection of ovarian cancer in high-risk women. Tumour Biol 2010; 31:209–215 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13277-010-0032-x[Crossref]
• [9] Chan JK, Tian C, Monk BJ, Herzog T, Kapp DS, Bell J, et al. Prognostic factors for high-risk earlystage epithelial ovarian cancer: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Cancer 2008; 112:2202–2210 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.23390[Crossref][WoS]
• [10] Terzic M, Dotlic J, Likic I, Ladjevic N, Brndusic N, Arsenovic N, Maricic S, Mihailovic T, Andrijasevic S. Current diagnostic approach to patients with adnexal masses: Which tools are relevant in routine praxis? Chin J Cancer Res 2012 in press
• [11] Edgell T, Martin-Roussety G, Barker G, Autelitano DJ, Allen D, Grant P, et al. Phase II biomarker trial of a multimarker diagnostic for ovarian cancer. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2010; 136:1079–1088 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00432-009-0755-5[Crossref][WoS]
• [12] Visintin I, Feng Z, Longton G, Ward DC, Alvero AB, Lai Y, et al. Diagnostic markers for early detection of ovarian cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2008; 14:1065–1072 http://dx.doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-07-1569[Crossref]
• [13] Chia YN, Marsden DE, Robertson G, Hacker NF. Triage of ovarian masses. Aust NZ J Obstet Gynaecol 2008; 48:322–328 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1479-828X.2008.00825.x[Crossref]
• [14] Rong-Huan H, Wei-Miao Y, Li-Yan W, Yu-Yan M. Highly elevated serum CA-125 levels in patients with non-malignant gynecological diseases. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2011; 283:S107–S110 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00404-010-1717-5
• [15] Vorgias G, Iavazzo C, Savvopoulos P, Myriokefalitaki E, Katsoulis M, Kalinoglou N, et al. Can the preoperative Ca-125 level predict optimal cytoreduction in patients with advanced ovarian carcinoma? A single institution cohort study. Gynecol Oncol 2009; 112:11–15 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.09.020[WoS]
• [16] Terzic M, Dotlic J, Likic Ladjevic I, Atanackovic J, Ladjevic N. Evaluation of the risk malignancy index diagnostic value in patients with adnexal masses. Vojnosanit Pregl 2011; 68:589–593 http://dx.doi.org/10.2298/VSP1107589T[WoS][Crossref]
• [17] Dotlic J, Terzic M, Likic I, Atanackovic J, Ladjevic N. Evaluation of adnexal masses: correlation of clinical stage, ultrasound and hystopathological findings. Vojnosanit Pregl 2011; 68:861–866 http://dx.doi.org/10.2298/VSP1110861D[Crossref][WoS]
• [18] Van Calster B, Valentin L, Van Holsbeke C, Zhang J, Jurkovic D, Lissoni AA, et al. A novel approach to predict the likelihood of specific ovarian tumor pathology based on serum CA-125: a multicenter observational study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2011; 20:2420–2422 http://dx.doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-11-0422[Crossref][WoS]
• [19] Langmar Z, Nemeth M, Vlesko G, Kiraly M, Hornyak L, Bosze P. HE4-a novel promising serum marker in the diagnosis of ovarian carcinoma. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 2011; 32:605–610
• [20] Granato T, Midulla C, Longo F, Colaprisca B, Frati L, Anastasi E. Role of HE4, CA72.4, and CA125 in monitoring ovarian cancer. Tumour Biol. 2012 DOI: 10.1007/s13277-012-0381-8 [Crossref]
• [21] Anastasi E, Marchei GG, Viggiani V, Gennarini G, Frati L, Reale MG. HE4: a new potential early biomarker for the recurrence of ovarian cancer. Tumour Biol 2010; 31:113–119 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13277-009-0015-y[Crossref]
• [22] Zheng H, Gao Y. Serum HE4 as a Useful Biomarker in Discriminating Ovarian Cancer From Benign Pelvic Disease. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2012 DOI: 10.1097/IGC.0b013e318249bee7 [Crossref]
• [23] Ayhan A, Guven S, Guven ES, Kucukali T. Is there a correlation between tumor marker panel and tumor size and histopathology in well staged patients with borderline ovarian tumors? Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2007; 86:484–90 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00016340701226138[Crossref][WoS]
• [24] Ugur MG, Ozturk E, Balat O, Dikensoy E, Teke S, Aydin A. Do high levels of CA 19-9 in women with mature cystic teratomas of the ovary warrant further evaluation? Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2012; 33:207–210
• [25] van Haaften-Day C, Shen Y, Xu F, Yu Y, Berchuck A, Havrilesky LJ, et al. OVX1, macrophage-colony stimulating factor, and CA-125-II as tumor markers for epithelial ovarian carcinoma: a critical appraisal. Cancer 2001; 92:2837–2844 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(20011201)92:11<2837::AID-CNCR10093>3.0.CO;2-5[Crossref]
• [26] Mabrouk M, Elmakky A, Caramelli E, Farina A, Mignemi G, Venturoli S, et al. Performance of peripheral (serum and molecular) blood markers for diagnosis of endometriosis. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2011 DOI: 10.1007/s00404-011-2122-2124 [WoS][Crossref]
• [27] Sørensen SS, Mosgaard BJ. Combination of cancer antigen 125 and carcinoembryonic antigen can improve ovarian cancer diagnosis. Dan Med Bull. 2011; 58:A4331

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/s11536-013-0234-x