Search

BACKGROUND: Despite successful response to first line therapy, patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) often suffer from early relapses and disease progression. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relevance of serum tumor markers for estimation of prognosis at several time points during the course of disease. METHODS: In a prospective, single-center study, serial assessments of progastrin-releasing peptide (ProGRP), neuron-specific enolase (NSE), cytokeratin-19 fragments (CYFRA 21-1) and carcino-embryogenic antigen (CEA) were performed during and after chemotherapy in 232 SCLC patients, and correlated with therapy response and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: ProGRP, NSE and CYFRA 21-1 levels decreased quickly after the first chemotherapy cycle and correlated well with the radiological response. Either as single markers or in combination they provided valuable prognostic information regarding OS at all timepoints investigated: prior to first-line therapy, after two treatment cycles in patients with successful response to first-line therapy, and prior to the start of second-line therapy. Furthermore, they were useful for continuous monitoring during and after therapy and often indicated progressive disease several months ahead of radiological changes. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate the great potential of ProGRP, NSE and CYFRA 21-1 for estimating prognosis and monitoring of SCLC patients throughout the course of the disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer is a major burden to global health and is still among the most frequent and most lethal malignant diseases. Macrophage migration inhibitory factor (MIF) is a proinflammatory cytokine involved in a variety of processes including tumorigenesis, formation of a tumor microenvironment and metastasis. It is therefore a potential prognostic biomarker in malignant diseases. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we investigated the applicability of MIF in serum samples as a biomarker in lung cancer. METHODS: In a retrospective approach, we analyzed the sera of 79 patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and 14 patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) before the start of chemotherapy, as well as before the second and third chemotherapy cycle, respectively. Serum MIF levels were measured using a sandwich immunoassay with a sulfo-tag-labelled detection antibody, while pro-gastrin releasing peptide (proGRP) levels were determined with an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. RESULTS: No difference in serum MIF levels between responders and non-responders to chemotherapy was observed at all time points, while proGRP levels were significantly lower in responders before the second chemotherapy cycle (p = 0.012). No differences in biomarker levels depending on the histopathological classification of NSCLC patients was found. Moreover, in ROC curve analyses MIF was not able to distinguish between responders and non-responders to therapy. proGRP could differentiate between responders and non-responders before the second chemotherapy cycle (p = 0.015) with sensitivities of 43% at 90% and 95% specificity, respectively. Likewise, proGRP yielded significantly longer survival times of patients with low proGRP concentrations before the second chemotherapy cycle (p = 0.015) in Kaplan-Meier analyses, yet MIF showed no significant differences in survival times at all time points. Comparison with the biomarkers CEA and CYFRA 21-1 in the same cohort showed that these established biomarkers clearly performed superior to MIF and proGRP. CONCLUSIONS: From the present results, there is no indication that serum MIF may serve as a biomarker in prognosis and monitoring of response to therapy in lung cancer. Limitations of this study include its retrospective design, the inclusion of a larger NSCLC and a smaller SCLC subgroup, the classical chemotherapeutic treatment, the use of a non-diagnostic immunoassay (RUO-test) for MIF measurement and the lack of a validation cohort. Strengths of the study are its highly standardized procedures concerning sample collection, preanalytic treatment, measurements and quality control of the laboratory assays. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Differential diagnosis of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC) in hospitalized patients is crucial for appropriate treatment choice. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relevance of serum tumor markers (STMs) and their combinations for the differentiation of NSCLC and SCLC subtypes. METHODS: Between 2000 and 2003, 10 established STMs were assessed retrospectively in 311 patients with NSCLC, 128 with SCLC prior systemic first-line therapy and 51 controls with benign lung diseases (BLD), by automatized electrochemiluminescence immunoassay technology. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of both individual and multiple STMs with corresponding sensitivities at 90% specificity. Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD guidelines) were followed. RESULTS: CYFRA 21-1 (cytokeratin-19 fragment), CEA (carcinoembryonic antigen) and NSE (neuron specific enolase) were significantly higher in all lung cancers vs BLD, reaching AUCs of 0.81 (95% CI 0.76–0.87), 0.78 (0.73–0.84), and 0.88 (0.84–0.93), respectively. By the three marker combination, the discrimination between benign and all malignant cases was improved resulting in an AUC of 0.93 (95% CI 0.90–0.96). In NSCLC vs. BLD, CYFRA 21-1, CEA and NSE were best discriminative STMs, with AUCs of 0.86 (95% CI 0.81–0.91), 0.80 (0.74–0.85), and 0.85 (0.79–0.91). The three marker combination also improved the AUC: 0.92; 95% CI 0.89–0.96). In SCLC vs. BLD, ProGRP (pro-gastrin-releasing peptide) and NSE were best discriminative STMs, with AUCs of 0.89 (95% CI 0.84–0.94) and 0.96 (0.93–0.98), respectively, and slightly improved AUC of 0.97 (95% CI 0.95–0.99) when in combination. Finally, discrimination between SCLC and NSCLC was possible by ProGRP (AUC 0.86; 95% CI 0.81–0.91), NSE (AUC 0.83; 0.78–0.88) and CYFRA 21-1 (AUC 0.69; 0.64–0.75) and by the combination of the 3 STMs (AUC 0.93; 0.91–0.96), with a sensitivity of 88% at 90% specificity. CONCLUSIONS: The results confirm the power of STM combinations for the differential diagnosis of lung cancer from benign lesions and between histological lung cancer subtypes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic possibilities for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have considerably increased during recent decades. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the prognostic relevance of serum tumor markers (STM) for early and late-stage NSCLC patients treated with classical chemotherapies, novel targeted and immune therapies. METHODS: A PubMed database search was conducted for prognostic studies on carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), cytokeratin-19 fragment (CYFRA 21-1), neuron-specific enolase, squamous-cell carcinoma antigen, progastrin-releasing-peptide, CA125, CA 19-9 and CA 15-3 STMs in NSCLC patients published from 2008 until June 2022. RESULTS: Out of 1069 studies, 141 were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria. A considerable heterogeneity regarding design, patient number, analytical and statistical methods was observed. High pretherapeutic CYFRA 21-1 levels and insufficient decreases indicated unfavorable prognosis in many studies on NSCLC patients treated with chemo-, targeted and immunotherapies or their combinations in early and advanced stages. Similar results were seen for CEA in chemotherapy, however, high pretherapeutic levels were sometimes favorable in targeted therapies. CA125 is a promising prognostic marker in patients treated with immunotherapies. Combinations of STMs further increased the prognostic value over single markers. CONCLUSION: Protein STMs, especially CYFRA 21-1, have prognostic potential in early and advanced stage NSCLC. For future STM investigations, better adherence to comparable study designs, analytical methods, outcome measures and statistical evaluation standards is recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to investigate whether changes in progastrin-releasing peptide (ProGRP) levels correlate with treatment response and can be used to optimize clinical management of patients with small-cell lung cancer. Patients with small-cell lung cancer (any stage) receiving chemotherapy were eligible. ProGRP was measured in serum/plasma at baseline and after each chemotherapy cycle using the Elecsys® ProGRP assay (Roche Diagnostics). Treatment response was assessed by computed tomography scan. The primary objective was to examine whether changes in ProGRP levels correlated with computed tomography scan results after two cycles of chemotherapy. The prognostic value of ProGRP among patients receiving first-line chemotherapy was also assessed. Overall, 261 patients from six centers were eligible. Among patients with elevated baseline ProGRP (>100 pg/mL), a ProGRP decline after Cycle 2 was associated with nonprogression (area under the curve: 84%; 95% confidence interval: 72.8–95.1; n = 141). ProGRP changes from baseline to end of Cycle 1 were predictive of response, as determined by computed tomography scan 3 weeks later (area under the curve: 87%; 95% confidence interval: 74.1−99.2; n = 137). This was enhanced by repeat measurements, with a 92% area under the curve (95% confidence interval: 85.3−97.8) among patients with ProGRP data after both Cycles 1 and 2 (n = 123); if a patient experienced a ≥25% decline in ProGRP after Cycle 1, and ProGRP remained stable or decreased after Cycle 2, the probability of finding progression on the interim computed tomography scan at the end of Cycle 2 was almost zero (sensitivity: 100%, specificity: 71%). Both ProGRP levels at baseline and at the end of first-line chemotherapy were prognostic; the latter provided a moderately improved hazard ratio of 2.43 (95% confidence interval: 1.33–4.46; n = 110) versus 1.87 (95% confidence interval: 1.04–3.37; n = 216). In summary, for patients with small-cell lung cancer and elevated baseline ProGRP levels, ProGRP may be a simple, reliable, and repeatable tool for monitoring response to chemotherapy and provide valuable prognostic information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Chinese Journal of Lung Cancer is the property of Chinese Journal of Lung Cancer and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background We performed a multicenter evaluation of the Elecsys® progastrin-releasing peptide (ProGRP) immunoassay in Europe and China. Methods The assay was evaluated at three European and two Chinese sites by imprecision, stability, method comparison and differentiation potential in lung cancer. Results Intermediate imprecision across five analyte concentrations ranged from 2.2% to 6.0% coefficient of variation. Good stability for plasma and serum samples was shown for various storage conditions. There was excellent correlation between the Elecsys® and ARCHITECT assays in plasma (slope 1.02, intercept − 2.72 pg/mL). The Elecsys® assay also showed good correlation between serum and plasma samples (slope 0.93, intercept 2.35 pg/mL; correlation coefficient 0.97). ProGRP differentiated small-cell and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC; area under the curve 0.90, 95% CI 0.87–0.93; 78.3% sensitivity, 95% specificity; at 84 pg/mL), with no relevant effects of ethnicity, age, gender or smoking. Median ProGRP concentrations were low in benign diseases (38 pg/mL), other malignancies (40 pg/mL) or NSCLC (39 pg/mL), except chronic kidney disease above stage 3 (> 100 pg/mL). Conclusions Increased stability of the Elecsys® ProGRP assay in serum and plasma offers clear benefits over existing assays. This first evaluation of a ProGRP assay in China demonstrated comparable differentiation potential among different ethnicities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Differential diagnosis of suspicious lung masses is essential for the selection of the appropriate therapy strategy. While non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in early stages and single lung metastases from other cancers mostly are resected by surgery, late stage NSCLC, small cell lung cancers (SCLC) and multiple lung metastases are treated by systemic chemo- and/or radiotherapeutic approaches. In many patients, biopsies for the histopathological subtyping can not be taken due to multimorbidity and instable clinical conditions of the patient or unfavourable localisation of the tumor. In addition, heterogeneity of lung tumors may imply the presence of different malignant cell types in one suspicious lesion. As tumor-related biomarkers in blood reflect the biochemical properties of cancer cells, their release or non-release may be helpful to support the clinical decision making. This review summarizes the current knowledge about the potential and the role of serum-based biomarkers for the differential diagnosis of lung cancer which is also mirrored in the new recommendations of the National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry (NACB). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article looks at developments in the study of lung cancer biomarkers. According to the authors, circulating biochemical markers are important and informative tools for managing lung cancer. Biomarkers are considered vital for follow-up investigations because biochemical changes in the blood manifest early the possibility of increasing tumor activity. Information on the release of biochemical markers by various benign and malignant diseases has been limited.