RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Nowadays there still is no sufficient screening tool for ovarian and uterine cancer. OBJECTIVE: The current study aimed to investigate whether cancer antigen 125 (CA-125), tissue polypeptide antigen (TPA) or the combination of both markers are able to act as screening tools for ovarian or uterine cancer. METHODS: A total of 275 blood samples from different cohorts (ovarian cancer, uterine cancer, benign control group) were prospectively drawn and analyzed. RESULTS: Established biomarkers TPA and CA-125 showed elevated serum concentrations in patients with malignant tumors as compared to healthy women and women with benign diseases. In ROC curve analyses, both biomarkers were well able to discriminate between malignant and healthy, benign or overall non-malignant cases in the whole sample, with AUCs of 0.842 and above. While TPA was the best diagnostic marker in patients with uterine cancer, CA 125 was the best in patients with ovarian cancer. CONCLUSIONS: TPA and CA-125 both showed promising results for the detection of gynecologic malignancies. The combination of CA-125 and TPA did not improve sensitivity in comparison to single markers.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: High mobility group box 1 (HMGB1), soluble receptor of advanced glycation end products (sRAGE) and programmed cell death markers PD-1 and PD-L1 are immunogenic serum biomarkers that may serve as novel diagnostic tools for cancer diagnosis. METHODS: We investigated the four markers in sera of 231 women, among them 76 with ovarian cancer, 87 with benign diseases and 68 healthy controls, using enzyme immunoassays. Discrimination between groups was calculated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and sensitivities at fixed 90% and 95% specificities. RESULTS: HMGB1 levels were significantly elevated and sRAGE levels were decreased in cancer patients as compared to benign and healthy controls. In consequence, the ratio of HMGB1 and sRAGE discriminated best between diagnostic groups. The areas under the curve (AUCs) of the ROC curves for differentiation of cancer vs. healthy were 0.77 for HMGB1, 0.65 for sRAGE and 0.78 for the HMGB1/sRAGE ratio, and slightly lower for the differentiation of cancer vs. benigns with 0.72 for HMGB1, 0.61 for sRAGE and 0.74 for the ratio of both. The highest sensitivities for cancer detection at 90% specificity versus benign diseases were achieved using HMGB1 with 41.3% and the HMGB1/sRAGE ratio with 39.2%, followed by sRAGE with 18.9%. PD-1 showed only minor and PD-L1 no power for discrimination between ovarian cancer and benign diseases. CONCLUSION: HMGB1 and sRAGE have differential diagnostic potential for ovarian cancer detection and warrant inclusion in further validation studies.
