Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Detection of perioperative cancer antigen 72-4 in gastric juice pre- and post-distal gastrectomy and its significances

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Medical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Gastric carcinoma is one of the most common malignancies nowadays, and caner antigen 72-4 (CA 72-4) in gastric juice has been rarely studied. To compare CA 72-4 in gastric juice pre- and post-distal gastrectomy (DG) and analyze its possible significances, we selected 64 patients diagnosed with gastric carcinoma who underwent DG and collected their perioperative gastric juice samples whose contents of CA 72-4 were detected. We found that CA 72-4 in gastric juice pre-gastrectomy is significantly higher among patients in advanced stages and correlated with tumor TNM classification (P < 0.01), within which tumor size, levels of gastric wall invaded, and number of metastatic lymph nodes are significant influencing factors (P < 0.05); CA 72-4 in gastric juice post-gastrectomy is significantly higher than that pre-surgery (P < 0.01), and it is significantly correlated with tumor TNM classification and radical degree (P < 0.01), and regards the sum of distances from tumor to two cutting edges and the classification of cutting edge as significant impact factors (P < 0.05); nine patients whose CA 72-4 in gastric juice rose post-DG show features indicating poor prognosis; the difference of CA 72-4 in gastric juice between pre- and post-gastrectomy is significantly correlated with tumor TNM classification and radical degree (P < 0.05), and regards tumor size, levels of gastric walls invaded, the sum of distances from tumor to two cutting edges and the classification of cutting edge as significant influential factors (P < 0.05). We conclude that CA 72-4 in gastric juice pre- and post-gastrectomy can provide us with much information about tumor and radical gastrectomy and that CA 72-4 in gastric juice post-gastrectomy and the difference of CA 72-4 in gastric juice between pre- and post-gastrectomy may indicate prognosis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Shin HR, Carlos MC, Varghese C. Cancer control in the Asia Pacific region: current status and concerns. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2012;42:867–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, et al. Cancer statistics, 2009. CA Cancer J Clin. 2009;59:225–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Wang W, Li YF, Sun XW, et al. Prognosis of 980 patients with gastric cancer after surgical resection. Chin J Cancer. 2010;29:923–30.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Bertuccio P, Chatenoud L, Levi F, et al. Recent patterns in gastric cancer: a global overview. Int J Cancer. 2009;125:666–73.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Songun I, Putter H, Kranenbarg EM, et al. Surgical treatment of gastric cancer: 15-year follow-up results of the randomised nationwide Dutch D1D2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:439–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Costamagna G, Cesaro P. Early gastric cancer: detection and endoscopic treatment. Ann Ital Chir. 2012;83:183–91.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Moghimi-Dehkordi B, Safaee A, Ghiasi S, Zali MR. Survival in gastric cancer patients: univariate and multivariate analysis. East Afr J Public Health. 2009;6(Suppl):41–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hartgrink HH, Jansen EP, van Grieken NC, van de Velde CJ. Gastric cancer. Lancet. 2009;374:477–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ueda T, Volinia S, Okumura H, et al. Relation between microRNA expression and progression and prognosis of gastric cancer: a microRNA expression analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:136–46.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Abbott DE, Margaryan NV, Jeruss JS, et al. Reevaluating cathepsin D as a biomarker for breast cancer: serum activity levels versus histopathology. Cancer Biol Ther. 2010;9:23–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Yu X, Luo L, Wu Y, et al. Gastric juice miR-129 as a potential biomarker for screening gastric cancer. Med Oncol. 2013;30:365.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Posner MR, Mayer RJ. The use of serologic tumor markers in gastrointestinal malignancies. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am. 1994;8:533–53.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Kornek GV, Depisch D, Rosen HR, et al. Comparative analysis of CA72-4, CA195 and carcinoembryonic antigen in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 1992;118:318–20.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Guadagni F, Roselli M, Amato T, et al. CA 72-4 measurement of tumor-associated glycoprotein 72 (TAG-72) as a serum marker in the management of gastric carcinoma. Cancer Res. 1992;52:1222–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Hamazoe R, Maeta M, Matsui T, et al. CA72-4 compared with carcinoembryonic antigen as a tumour marker for gastric cancer. Eur J Cancer. 1992;28A:1351–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Rapellino M, Piantino P, Pecchio F, et al. Disappearance curves of tumor markers after radical surgery. Int J Biol Markers. 1994;9:33–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Tocchi A, Costa G, Lepre L, et al. The role of serum and gastric juice levels of carcinoembryonic antigen, CA19.9 and CA72.4 in patients with gastric cancer. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 1998;124:450–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Chen XZ, Zhang WK, Yang K, et al. Correlation between serum CA724 and gastric cancer: multiple analyses based on Chinese population. Mol Biol Rep. 2012;39:9031–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Emoto S, Ishigami H, Yamashita H, et al. Clinical significance of CA125 and CA72-4 in gastric cancer with peritoneal dissemination. Gastric Cancer. 2012;15:154–61.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Kim DH, Oh SJ, Oh CA, et al. The relationships between perioperative CEA, CA 19-9, and CA 72-4 and recurrence in gastric cancer patients after curative radical gastrectomy. J Surg Oncol. 2011;104:585–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Li Y, Yang Y, Lu M, Shen L. Predictive value of serum CEA, CA19-9 and CA72.4 in early diagnosis of recurrence after radical resection of gastric cancer. Hepatogastroenterology. 2011;58:2166–70.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Emanuel EJ. Reconsidering the declaration of Helsinki. Lancet. 2013;381:1532–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hopewell S, Ravaud P, Baron G, Boutron I. Effect of editors’ implementation of CONSORT guidelines on the reporting of abstracts in high impact medical journals: interrupted time series analysis. BMJ. 2012;344:e4178.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Washington K. 7th edition of the AJCC cancer staging manual: stomach. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:3077–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Chen S, Feng XY, Li YF, et al. The prognosis of gastric cancer patients with marginally elevated carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) values after D2 radical gastrectomy. J Surg Oncol. 2013;107:641–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hakama M, Stenman UH, Knekt P, et al. Tumour markers and screening for gastrointestinal cancer: a follow up study in Finland. J Med Screen. 1994;1:60–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Suh YS, Han DS, Kong SH, et al. Laparoscopy-assisted pylorus-preserving gastrectomy is better than laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy for middle-third early gastric cancer. Ann Surg. 2013. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e318294d142.

  28. Eom DW, Kang GH, Han SH, et al. Gastric micropapillary carcinoma: a distinct subtype with a significantly worse prognosis in TNM stages I and II. Am J Surg Pathol. 2011;35:84–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Li F, Zhang R, Liang H, et al. The pattern of lymph node metastasis and the suitability of 7th UICC N stage in predicting prognosis of remnant gastric cancer. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2012;138:111–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank College of Basic Medicine in Anhui Medical University and Department of Clinical Laboratory and the Information Center in the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University for their contributions to our study. Our study was funded by Anhui Science and Technology Agency (fund code: 12070403061).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Anhui Medical University, Hefei, China

    Lei Huang, Aman Xu, Tuanjie Li, Wenxiu Han, Shanshan Wu & Yangyi Wang

  2. Department of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, No. 218, Jixi Rd, Hefei, 230022, China

    Lei Huang, Aman Xu, Tuanjie Li, Wenxiu Han, Shanshan Wu & Yangyi Wang

Authors
  1. Lei Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aman Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tuanjie Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Wenxiu Han
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Shanshan Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yangyi Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aman Xu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Huang, L., Xu, A., Li, T. et al. Detection of perioperative cancer antigen 72-4 in gastric juice pre- and post-distal gastrectomy and its significances. Med Oncol 30, 651 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-013-0651-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-013-0651-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation