Assessment of levels of the tumor markers HE4 and CA125 considering staging, grading and histological types of endometrial cancer.

Nabil Abdalla, Robert Piórkowski, Paweł Stanirowski, Anna Słomka, Krzysztof Cendrowski, Włodzimierz Sawicki
Author Information
  1. Nabil Abdalla: Chair and Clinic of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Oncology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Medical University of Warsaw, Poland.
  2. Robert Piórkowski: Chair and Clinic of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Oncology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Medical University of Warsaw, Poland.
  3. Paweł Stanirowski: Chair and Clinic of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Oncology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Medical University of Warsaw, Poland.
  4. Anna Słomka: Chair and Clinic of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Oncology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Medical University of Warsaw, Poland.
  5. Krzysztof Cendrowski: Chair and Clinic of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Oncology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Medical University of Warsaw, Poland.
  6. Włodzimierz Sawicki: Chair and Clinic of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Oncology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Medical University of Warsaw, Poland.

Abstract

AIM OF THE STUDY: Aim of the study was to assess statistical differences of serum levels of HE4 and CA125 between certain endometrial cancer stages, grading and histological types.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective study of 52 patients admitted to our clinic for a surgical operation because of endometrial cancer was performed. HE4 and CA125 were measured for each patient. The staging was done according to FIGO. The statistical difference of serum levels of tumor markers was analyzed considering different stages, grading and histological types.
RESULTS: Most of the patients (92.31%) were post-menopausal. Serum levels of tumor markers were significantly higher among patients with stage IB-IIIC than stage IA, among patients with stages II-III than stage I and among patients with stage IIIC than stage IA-IIIB. Only HE4 was significantly higher among patients with stage IB than stage IA and among patients with grading G2 and G3 than those with G1. Only CA125 was significantly higher among patients with stage IIIA and IIIB than those with stages I and II. There was no statistically significant difference in level of either tumor marker in differentiation of endometrioid from other histological endometrial cancer.
CONCLUSIONS: Both tumor markers HE4 and CA125 can be useful additional tools for pre-surgical differentiation between different stages of endometrial cancer. HE4 can predict advanced histological grades. Neither HE4 nor CA125 can differentiate endometrioid from other histological types of endometrial cancer.

Keywords

References

  1. Ann Nucl Med. 2016 Feb;30(2):104-13 [PMID: 26546334]
  2. Obstet Gynecol. 1997 Sep;90(3):441-7 [PMID: 9277659]
  3. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2015 Oct;41(10 ):1644-52 [PMID: 26223178]
  4. World J Surg Oncol. 2014 May 29;12:169 [PMID: 24885319]
  5. Br J Cancer. 2011 Apr 26;104(9):1418-25 [PMID: 21468050]
  6. Biol Reprod. 1991 Aug;45(2):350-7 [PMID: 1686187]
  7. Gynecol Oncol. 2010 Sep;118(3):283-8 [PMID: 20541245]
  8. Gynecol Oncol. 2012 Feb;124(2):270-5 [PMID: 22037318]
  9. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2006;85(12):1501-5 [PMID: 17260229]
  10. Lancet. 2005 Aug 6-12;366(9484):491-505 [PMID: 16084259]
  11. N Engl J Med. 1983 Oct 13;309(15):883-7 [PMID: 6310399]
  12. Anticancer Res. 1998 May-Jun;18(3B):1897-902 [PMID: 9677441]
  13. BMC Cancer. 2015 May 12;15:396 [PMID: 25964114]
  14. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2012 Oct;164(2):191-5 [PMID: 22727919]
  15. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:437468 [PMID: 26539494]
  16. Tumour Biol. 2013 Feb;34(1):571-6 [PMID: 23179397]
  17. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2013 Nov;92(11):1313-22 [PMID: 24032654]
  18. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2006 Jan-Feb;16(1):385-90 [PMID: 16445663]
  19. Oncol Rep. 2016 Jan;35(1):163-70 [PMID: 26497244]
  20. Clin Chem. 2011 Nov;57(11):1534-44 [PMID: 21933899]
  21. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Aug;209(2):142.e1-6 [PMID: 23583212]
  22. Int J Cancer. 2012 Aug 15;131(4):885-90 [PMID: 21918977]
  23. Radiologe. 2015 Dec;55(12):1117-30; quiz 1131 [PMID: 26610683]
  24. Tumour Biol. 2016 Apr;37(4):4973-8 [PMID: 26531723]
  25. Tumour Biol. 2015 Jun;36(6):4151-6 [PMID: 25577252]
  26. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Mar;47(3):374-9 [PMID: 26033568]
  27. Tumour Biol. 2012 Feb;33(1):141-8 [PMID: 22105734]
  28. Gynecol Oncol. 2014 Jan;132(1):159-65 [PMID: 24211402]
  29. Gynecol Oncol. 2002 Jul;86(1):28-33 [PMID: 12079296]
  30. Adv Med Sci. 2016 Mar;61(1):23-7 [PMID: 26344910]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0HE4patientsstageCA125endometrialcancerhistologicalamongstagesgradingtumorlevelstypesmarkersstagingsignificantlyhighercanstudystatisticalserumdifferenceconsideringdifferentIAdifferentiationendometrioidAIMOFTHESTUDY:AimassessdifferencescertainMATERIALANDMETHODS:retrospective52admittedclinicsurgicaloperationperformedmeasuredpatientdoneaccordingFIGOanalyzedRESULTS:9231%post-menopausalSerumIB-IIICII-IIIIIICIA-IIIBIBG2G3G1IIIAIIIBIIstatisticallysignificantleveleithermarkerCONCLUSIONS:usefuladditionaltoolspre-surgicalpredictadvancedgradesNeitherdifferentiateAssessment

Similar Articles

Cited By (4)