Advertisement

Tumor Biology

, Volume 35, Issue 10, pp 10237–10248 | Cite as

Evaluation of preoperative serum markers for individual patient prognosis in stage I–III rectal cancer

  • Clemens Giessen
  • Dorothea Nagel
  • Maria Glas
  • Fritz Spelsberg
  • Ulla Lau-Werner
  • Dominik Paul Modest
  • Marlies Michl
  • Volker Heinemann
  • Petra Stieber
  • Christoph Schulz
Research Article

Abstract

Several independent serum biomarkers have been proposed as prognostic and/or predictive markers for colorectal cancer (CRC). To this date, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) remains the only recommended serological CRC biomarker. The present retrospective analysis investigates the prognostic value of several serum markers. A total of 256 patients with rectal cancer underwent surgery for curative intent in a university cancer center between January 1988 and June 2007. Preoperative serum was retrospectively analyzed for albumin, alkaline phosphatase (aP), beta-human chorionic gonadotropin, bilirubin, CA 125, cancer antigen 19-9, cancer antigen 72-4 (CA 72-4), CEA, CRP, CYFRA 21-1, ferritin, gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase, glutamate oxaloacetate transanunase, glutamate pyruvate transaminase, hemoglobin, haptoglobin, interleukin-6, interleukin-8, creatinine, lactate-dehydrogenase, serum amyloid A (SAA), and 25-hydroxyvitamin D. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were estimated. Median follow-up time was 8.4 years. Overall 3- and 5-year CSS was 88.6 and 78.9 %, respectively. DFS rates were 72.8 % (3 years) and 67.5 % (5 years). Univariate analysis of CSS indicated aP, CA 72-4, CEA, and SAA as prognostic factors, while aP, CEA, and SAA were also prognostic with regard to DFS. Multivariate analysis confirmed SAA together with T and N stage as prognostic factors. According to UICC stage, CEA and SAA add prognostic value in stages II and III with regard to DFS and CSS, respectively. The combined use of CEA and SAA is able to identify patients with favorable and poor prognosis. In addition to tumor baseline parameters, routine analysis of SAA together with CEA provided markedly improved prognostic value on CSS and DFS in resected rectal cancer.

Keywords

Colorectal cancer Tumor marker SAA CEA Acute-phase proteins Prognostic factors 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Matthias Wolff for expert secretarial assistance. No direct or indirect funding was received for this study.

Conflicts of interest

None

References

  1. 1.
    Ferlay J et al. Cancer incidence and mortality patterns in Europe: estimates for 40 countries in 2012. Eur J Cancer. 2013;49(6):1374–403.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Duffy MJ et al. Tumour markers in colorectal cancer: European Group on Tumour Markers (EGTM) guidelines for clinical use. Eur J Cancer. 2007;43(9):1348–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Locker GY et al. ASCO 2006 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in gastrointestinal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(33):5313–27.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yamashita K, Watanabe M. Clinical significance of tumor markers and an emerging perspective on colorectal cancer. Cancer Sci. 2009;100(2):195–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Van Cutsem E et al. Advanced colorectal cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for treatment. Ann Oncol. 2010;21 suppl 5:v93–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Locker GY et al. ASCO 2006 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in gastrointestinal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(33):5313–27.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Behbehani AI et al. Prognostic significance of CEA and CA 19-9 in colorectal cancer in Kuwait. Int J Biol Markers. 2000;15(1):51–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Reiter W et al. Multivariate analysis of the prognostic value of CEA and CA 19-9 serum levels in colorectal cancer. Anticancer Res. 2000;20(6D):5195–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hofmann, D., et al., Prognosis in non-metastatic colorectal cancer: multivariate evaluation of preoperative levels of six tumor markers in addition to clinical parameters, in LaboratoriumsMedizin2007. p. 76.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Louhimo J et al. Serum HCG beta, CA 72-4 and CEA are independent prognostic factors in colorectal cancer. Int J Cancer. 2002;101(6):545–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Webb A et al. The prognostic value of CEA, beta HCG, AFP, CA125, CA19-9 and C-erb B-2, beta HCG immunohistochemistry in advanced colorectal cancer. Ann Oncol. 1995;6(6):581–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Holdenrieder S et al. Cytokeratin serum biomarkers in patients with colorectal cancer. Anticancer Res. 2012;32(5):1971–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Biran H et al. Serum amyloid A (SAA) variations in patients with cancer: correlation with disease activity, stage, primary site, and prognosis. J Clin Pathol. 1986;39(7):794–7.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bystrom P et al. Evaluation of predictive markers for patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Acta Oncol. 2012;51(7):849–59.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Glojnaric I et al. Serum amyloid A protein (SAA) in colorectal carcinoma. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2001;39(2):129–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hansen, M.T., et al., A link between inflammation and metastasis: serum amyloid A1 and A3 induce metastasis, and are targets of metastasis-inducing S100A4. Oncogene, 2014.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    McShane LM et al. REporting recommendations for tumour MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK). Eur J Cancer. 2005;41(12):1690–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Modest DP et al. Outcome of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer depends on the primary tumor site (midgut vs. hindgut): analysis of the FIRE1-trial (FuFIRI or mIROX as first-line treatment). Anti-Cancer Drugs. 2014;25(2):212–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Schmoll HJ et al. ESMO Consensus Guidelines for management of patients with colon and rectal cancer. a personalized approach to clinical decision making. Ann Oncol. 2012;23(10):2479–516.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Harrell Jr FE et al. Regression modelling strategies for improved prognostic prediction. Stat Med. 1984;3(2):143–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Park YJ et al. Prognostic factors in 2230 Korean colorectal cancer patients: analysis of consecutively operated cases. World J Surg. 1999;23(7):721–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Park YJ et al. Experience of 1446 rectal cancer patients in Korea and analysis of prognostic factors. Int J Color Dis. 1999;14(2):101–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Malle E, Sodin-Semrl S, Kovacevic A. Serum amyloid A: an acute-phase protein involved in tumour pathogenesis. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2009;66(1):9–26.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Shiels, M.S., et al., Circulating inflammation markers and prospective risk of lung cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2013;105(24):1871-80.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Toriola AT et al. Biomarkers of inflammation are associated with colorectal cancer risk in women but are not suitable as early detection markers. Int J Cancer. 2013;132(11):2648–58.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Stotz M et al. The preoperative lymphocyte to monocyte ratio predicts clinical outcome in patients with stage III colon cancer. Br J Cancer. 2014;110(2):435–40.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Spencer SK et al. Prognostic/predictive value of 207 serum factors in colorectal cancer treated with cediranib and/or chemotherapy. Br J Cancer. 2013;109(11):2765–73.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mehrkhani F et al. Prognostic factors in survival of colorectal cancer patients after surgery. Color Dis. 2009;11(2):157–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Stocchi L et al. Impact of surgical and pathologic variables in rectal cancer: a United States community and cooperative group report. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(18):3895–902.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ng K et al. Circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin d levels and survival in patients with colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(18):2984–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zgaga, L., et al., Plasma vitamin D concentration influences survival outcome after a diagnosis of colorectal cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2014.Jul 7. pii: JCO.2013.54.5947. [Epub ahead of print]Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society of Oncology and BioMarkers (ISOBM) 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Clemens Giessen
    • 1
  • Dorothea Nagel
    • 2
  • Maria Glas
    • 1
  • Fritz Spelsberg
    • 3
  • Ulla Lau-Werner
    • 3
  • Dominik Paul Modest
    • 1
  • Marlies Michl
    • 1
  • Volker Heinemann
    • 1
  • Petra Stieber
    • 2
  • Christoph Schulz
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Medical Oncology, Klinikum Grosshadern and Comprehensive Cancer CenterUniversity of MunichMunichGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Laboratory Medicine, Klinikum GrosshadernUniversity of MunichMunichGermany
  3. 3.Department of Surgery, Klinikum GrosshadernUniversity of MunichMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations