论文部分内容阅读
目的:通过分析血清中CA125、CA199、CEA的联合检测和单项检测,探讨临床卵巢上皮癌有效的诊断及疗效判断指标。方法:选择2008-02/2010-05我院62例卵巢上皮癌患者、卵巢良性肿瘤患者64例,同期在我院健康体检者65例作为对照组收集其清晨静脉血检测血清中的CA125、CA199、CEA水平含量,4个月疗程内连续测定卵巢上皮癌患者3个血清指标。CA125、CA199采用酶联免疫吸附法,CEA检测采用微粒子免疫发光法检测;比较患者治疗前后及不同疗效患者血清中CA125、CA199、CEA表达水平及其变化。结果:血清中CA125、CA199、CEA水平在三组间比较均表明卵巢上皮癌患者组>卵巢良性肿瘤组>对照组,并且差异具有统计学意义(P<0.01)。卵巢上皮癌Ⅲ期和Ⅳ期患者的CA125、CA199、CEA水平均高于Ⅰ期和Ⅱ期患者的,并且差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。单项检测CA125的灵敏度最高,CEA的特异度最高;联合检测提高了卵巢上皮癌患者诊断的灵敏性。与治疗前比较,4个月疗程后全部缓解组和部分缓解组的CA125、CA199和CEA水平下降,并且差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05);稳定型组变化不大,差异无统计学意义;病情进展型组治疗后CA125、CA199及CEA水平升高并且差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:血清中CA125、CA199和CEA三者联合检测在一定程度上提高了卵巢上皮癌诊断的灵敏度,也是疗效判断灵敏指标。
OBJECTIVE: To explore the effective diagnosis and therapeutic effect indicators of clinical ovarian cancer by analyzing the combined detection of CA125, CA199 and CEA in serum and single detection. Methods: Sixty-two patients with epithelial ovarian cancer and 64 patients with benign ovarian tumor in our hospital from February 2008 to May 2010 were enrolled in this study. Sixty-five healthy subjects in our hospital were selected as control group to collect CA125 and CA199 , CEA levels, three consecutive serum samples from patients with epithelial ovarian cancer within 4 months. CA125, CA199 by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, CEA detection by microparticle immuno-luminescence method; before and after treatment and patients with different curative effect of serum CA125, CA199, CEA expression levels and changes. Results: Serum levels of CA125, CA199 and CEA in all three groups showed that ovarian epithelial cancer group> benign ovarian tumor group> control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P <0.01). The levels of CA125, CA199 and CEA in patients with stage Ⅲ and Ⅳ ovarian cancer were significantly higher than those in patients with stage Ⅰ and Ⅱ, and the difference was statistically significant (P <0.05). The highest sensitivity of single detection of CA125, CEA highest specificity; combined detection of ovarian epithelial cancer patients to improve the diagnostic sensitivity. Compared with those before treatment, the levels of CA125, CA199 and CEA decreased in all remission group and partial remission group after 4 months of treatment, and the difference was statistically significant (P <0.05); the stable group did not change much, the difference was not statistically significant The levels of CA125, CA199 and CEA in progressive disease group after treatment were significantly higher than those in control group (P <0.05). Conclusion: The combined detection of CA125, CA199 and CEA in serum can improve the diagnostic sensitivity of ovarian epithelial cancer to a certain extent, and it is also a sensitive index to judge the curative effect.