Cargando…
Tumor Marker Evolution: Comparison with Imaging for Assessment of Response to Chemotherapy in Patients with Colorectal Liver Metastases
BACKGROUND: As the real clinical significance of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen 19.9 (CA19.9) evolution during preoperative chemotherapy for colorectal liver metastases (CLM) is still unknown, we explored the correlation between biological and radiological response to chemot...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer-Verlag
2010
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2840671/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20052553 http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-009-0887-5 |
_version_ | 1782179009751154688 |
---|---|
author | de Haas, Robbert J. Wicherts, Dennis A. Flores, Eduardo Ducreux, Michel Lévi, Francis Paule, Bernard Azoulay, Daniel Castaing, Denis Lemoine, Antoinette Adam, René |
author_facet | de Haas, Robbert J. Wicherts, Dennis A. Flores, Eduardo Ducreux, Michel Lévi, Francis Paule, Bernard Azoulay, Daniel Castaing, Denis Lemoine, Antoinette Adam, René |
author_sort | de Haas, Robbert J. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: As the real clinical significance of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen 19.9 (CA19.9) evolution during preoperative chemotherapy for colorectal liver metastases (CLM) is still unknown, we explored the correlation between biological and radiological response to chemotherapy, and their comparative impact on outcome after hepatectomy. METHODS: All patients resected for CLM at our hospital between 1990 and 2004 with the following eligibility criteria were included in the study: (1) preoperative chemotherapy, (2) complete resection of CLM, (3) no extrahepatic disease, and (4) elevated baseline tumor marker values. A 20% change of tumor marker levels while on chemotherapy was used to define biological response (decrease) or progression (increase). Correlation between biological and radiological response at computed tomography (CT) scan, and their impact on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) after hepatectomy were determined. RESULTS: Among 119 of 695 consecutive patients resected for CLM who fulfilled the inclusion criteria, serial CEA and CA19.9 were available in 113 and 68 patients, respectively. Of patients with radiological response or stabilization, 94% had similar biological evolution for CEA and 91% for CA19.9. In patients with radiological progression, similar biological evolution was observed in 95% of cases for CEA and in 64% for CA19.9. On multivariate analysis, radiological response (but not biological evolution) independently predicted OS. However, progression of CA19.9, but not radiological response, was an independent predictor of PFS. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CLM and elevated tumor markers, biological response is as accurate as CT imaging to assess “clinical” response to chemotherapy. With regards to PFS, CA19.9 evolution has even better prognostic value than does radiological response. Assessment of tumor markers could be sufficient to evaluate chemotherapy response in a nonsurgical setting, limiting the need of repeat imaging. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2840671 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2010 |
publisher | Springer-Verlag |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-28406712010-03-24 Tumor Marker Evolution: Comparison with Imaging for Assessment of Response to Chemotherapy in Patients with Colorectal Liver Metastases de Haas, Robbert J. Wicherts, Dennis A. Flores, Eduardo Ducreux, Michel Lévi, Francis Paule, Bernard Azoulay, Daniel Castaing, Denis Lemoine, Antoinette Adam, René Ann Surg Oncol Hepatobiliary Tumors BACKGROUND: As the real clinical significance of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen 19.9 (CA19.9) evolution during preoperative chemotherapy for colorectal liver metastases (CLM) is still unknown, we explored the correlation between biological and radiological response to chemotherapy, and their comparative impact on outcome after hepatectomy. METHODS: All patients resected for CLM at our hospital between 1990 and 2004 with the following eligibility criteria were included in the study: (1) preoperative chemotherapy, (2) complete resection of CLM, (3) no extrahepatic disease, and (4) elevated baseline tumor marker values. A 20% change of tumor marker levels while on chemotherapy was used to define biological response (decrease) or progression (increase). Correlation between biological and radiological response at computed tomography (CT) scan, and their impact on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) after hepatectomy were determined. RESULTS: Among 119 of 695 consecutive patients resected for CLM who fulfilled the inclusion criteria, serial CEA and CA19.9 were available in 113 and 68 patients, respectively. Of patients with radiological response or stabilization, 94% had similar biological evolution for CEA and 91% for CA19.9. In patients with radiological progression, similar biological evolution was observed in 95% of cases for CEA and in 64% for CA19.9. On multivariate analysis, radiological response (but not biological evolution) independently predicted OS. However, progression of CA19.9, but not radiological response, was an independent predictor of PFS. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CLM and elevated tumor markers, biological response is as accurate as CT imaging to assess “clinical” response to chemotherapy. With regards to PFS, CA19.9 evolution has even better prognostic value than does radiological response. Assessment of tumor markers could be sufficient to evaluate chemotherapy response in a nonsurgical setting, limiting the need of repeat imaging. Springer-Verlag 2010-01-06 2010 /pmc/articles/PMC2840671/ /pubmed/20052553 http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-009-0887-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2010 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Hepatobiliary Tumors de Haas, Robbert J. Wicherts, Dennis A. Flores, Eduardo Ducreux, Michel Lévi, Francis Paule, Bernard Azoulay, Daniel Castaing, Denis Lemoine, Antoinette Adam, René Tumor Marker Evolution: Comparison with Imaging for Assessment of Response to Chemotherapy in Patients with Colorectal Liver Metastases |
title | Tumor Marker Evolution: Comparison with Imaging for Assessment of Response to Chemotherapy in Patients with Colorectal Liver Metastases |
title_full | Tumor Marker Evolution: Comparison with Imaging for Assessment of Response to Chemotherapy in Patients with Colorectal Liver Metastases |
title_fullStr | Tumor Marker Evolution: Comparison with Imaging for Assessment of Response to Chemotherapy in Patients with Colorectal Liver Metastases |
title_full_unstemmed | Tumor Marker Evolution: Comparison with Imaging for Assessment of Response to Chemotherapy in Patients with Colorectal Liver Metastases |
title_short | Tumor Marker Evolution: Comparison with Imaging for Assessment of Response to Chemotherapy in Patients with Colorectal Liver Metastases |
title_sort | tumor marker evolution: comparison with imaging for assessment of response to chemotherapy in patients with colorectal liver metastases |
topic | Hepatobiliary Tumors |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2840671/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20052553 http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-009-0887-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dehaasrobbertj tumormarkerevolutioncomparisonwithimagingforassessmentofresponsetochemotherapyinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastases AT wichertsdennisa tumormarkerevolutioncomparisonwithimagingforassessmentofresponsetochemotherapyinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastases AT floreseduardo tumormarkerevolutioncomparisonwithimagingforassessmentofresponsetochemotherapyinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastases AT ducreuxmichel tumormarkerevolutioncomparisonwithimagingforassessmentofresponsetochemotherapyinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastases AT levifrancis tumormarkerevolutioncomparisonwithimagingforassessmentofresponsetochemotherapyinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastases AT paulebernard tumormarkerevolutioncomparisonwithimagingforassessmentofresponsetochemotherapyinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastases AT azoulaydaniel tumormarkerevolutioncomparisonwithimagingforassessmentofresponsetochemotherapyinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastases AT castaingdenis tumormarkerevolutioncomparisonwithimagingforassessmentofresponsetochemotherapyinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastases AT lemoineantoinette tumormarkerevolutioncomparisonwithimagingforassessmentofresponsetochemotherapyinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastases AT adamrene tumormarkerevolutioncomparisonwithimagingforassessmentofresponsetochemotherapyinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastases |