4.7 Article

Prognostic Value of Tumor Markers, NSE, CA125 and SCC, in Operable NSCLC Patients

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR SCIENCES
Volume 14, Issue 6, Pages 11145-11156

Publisher

MDPI AG
DOI: 10.3390/ijms140611145

Keywords

tumor marker; CA125; NSE; SCC; lung cancer

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to investigate the prognostic value of tumor markers in operable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. A total of 481 NSCLC patients were enrolled in the present study. High levels of neuron-specific enolase (NSE), carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA125) and squamous cell carcinoma antigen (SCC) were detected in 306 (63.6%), 89 (18.5%) and 125 (26.0%) patients, respectively. Seventy-eight of 481 patients died of disease progression, and the median disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were 16.0 and 21.0 months, respectively. The three-year DFS rate was 56.7%, and the OS rate was 75.3%. For serum NSE, the three-year cumulative DFS rate for the normal and elevated group was 67.7% and 51.8% (p = 0.007). The OS in patients with high and normal levels of NSE was 34.0 months and 48.0 months, respectively. The median DFS was 46.0 months versus 32.0 months (p = 0.001), and the OS was 48.0 months versus 44.0 months (p = 0.001) in patients with normal and high levels of CA125. For patients with squamous cell carcinoma, the overall survival was significantly shorter in patients with elevated levels of SCC (p = 0.041). In the multivariate analysis high levels of NSE, CA125 and clinical stage were significantly correlated with worse prognosis (p < 0.05). Patients with all three tumor markers elevated presented the worst prognosis (p < 0.05). In our analysis, high levels of preoperative serum NSE and CA125 are correlated with worse survival in operable NSCLC patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available