4.7 Article

Value of serum human epididymis secretory protein 4 as a marker for differential diagnosis of malignant and benign gynecological diseases of patients in southern China

期刊

CLINICA CHIMICA ACTA
卷 459, 期 -, 页码 170-176

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.cca.2016.06.010

关键词

HE4; Diagnostic; Gynecological diseases; Ovarian cancer; Endometrial cancer

资金

  1. Specialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China [20130171120069, 20130171120077]
  2. Science and Technology Department, Guangdong Province [2014A020212477]
  3. Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province, China [2015A030313035]
  4. Science and Technology Department of Guangzhou City, China [201400000004-2]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: This study investigated the clinical value of HE4 in distinguishing malignant and benign gynecological diseases of patients in southern China. Methods: Preoperative serum CA125 and HE4 concentrations were tested in samples of women with malignant or benign gynecological diseases using fully automated methods (Abbott ARCHITECT) and validated cutoff values. Results: For the discrimination of ovarian cancer from benign gynecological diseases, in premenopausal women, the sensitivity and specificity were 89.8% and 67.5% for CA125, 68.5% and 97.8% for HE4, and 88.9% and 78.6% for ROMA, whereas in postmenopausal women, the sensitivity and specificity were 86.6% and 88.9% for CA125,57.3% and 100% for HE4, and 85.4% and 94.4% for ROMA. For the discrimination of endometrial cancer from benign gynecological diseases, in premenopausal women, the sensitivity and specificity were 20.3% and 67.5% for CA125, 56.8% and 97.8% for HE4, and 74.3% and 78.6% for ROMA, whereas in postmenopausal women, the sensitivity and specificity were 17.8% and 88.9% for CA125, 31.5% and 100% for HE4, and 32.9% and 94.4% for ROMA. Conclusions: We showed that HE4 had better specificity than CA125 in discriminating ovarian cancer, and endometrial cancer from benign gynecological diseases in southern China population. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据