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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: de Haas, Robbert J., Wicherts, Dennis A., Flores, Eduardo, Ducreux, Michel, Lévi, Francis, Paule, Bernard, Azoulay, Daniel, Castaing, Denis, Lemoine, Antoinette, Adam, René
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