Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

A Comparative Study of Bone Scan Findings and Serum Levels of Tumor Marker CA15-3 in Patients with Breast Carcinoma

  • Brief Communication
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Clinical Biochemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Breast cancer is one of the most frequent malignancies in the world. Available staging procedures to detect breast cancer are bone scan, chest X-ray, liver ultrasonography, computerized tomography, estimation of tumor markers like carbohydrate antigen (CA15-3) and carcino embryonic antigen. These procedures are expensive and may not be required in all cases. Out of 70 patients studied, 55 had normal CA15-3 and 15 had elevated levels of Ca15-3. Eight (14.5%) of the 55 patients with normal CA15-3 had abnormal bone scan. Fifteen patients had CA15-3 levels above the normal range and among these 9 (60%) had abnormal bone scan. While prime facie it would appear that a high level of CA15-3 correlate with abnormal bone scan, it is also true that the numbers are small at present and conclusions about the validity of CA15-3 as marker of bone metastasis may be premature.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  1. Koizumi M, Yoshimoto M, Kasumi F, Ogata E. What do breast cancer patients benefit from staging bone scintigraphy? Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2001;31:263–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Kitchen PRB, Andrews JT, Buckley JD, Russell IS, Lichtenstein M, Mc Lean K, et al. An analysis of bone scintigraphy in early (operable) breast cancer. ANZ J Surg. 2008;49(3):313–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Yildiz M, Oral B, Bozkurt M, Cobaner A. Relationship between bone scintigraphy and tumor markers in patients with breast cancer. Ann Nucl Med. 2004;18(6):15–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Derimanov SG. ‘For’ or ‘against’ bone scintigraphy of patients with breast cancer. Nucl Med Commun. 1987;8(2):79–86.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Yip CH, Paramsothy M. Value of routine 99mTc-MDP bone scintigraphy in the detection of occult skeletal metastases in women with primary breast cancer. Breast. 1999;8(5):267–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Jager PL. Bone scintigraphy in oncology. J Postgrad Med [serial online] 2004;50:183–4.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kominsky SL, Davidson NE. A “bone” fide predictor of metastasis? Predicting breast cancer metastasis to bone. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(15):2227–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Rajtar M, Esik O, Almasi L, Csernay L. Bone scintigraphy in breast cancer: a ten-year follow up study. Orvosi hetilap 1990;131(35):1907–8, 1911–2.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Niccolini A, Carpi A. Postoperative follow up of breast cancer patients: overview and progress in the use of tumor markers. Tumor Biol. 2000;21:235–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Body JJ, Bartl R, Burckhardt P, Delmas PD, Diel IJ, Fleisch H, et al. Current use of bisphosphonates in oncology. International Bone and Cancer Study Group. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:3890–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Solomayer EF, Diel IJ, Meyberg GC, Gollan C, Batter G. Metastatic breast cancer: clinical course, prognosis and therapy related to the first site of metastasis. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2000;59:271–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Reginster JY, Henrotin Y, Christiansen C, Gamwell–Henriksen E, Bruyere O, Collette J, et al. Bone resorption in post menopausal women with normal and low BMD assessed with biochemical markers specific for telopeptide derived degradation products of collagen type I. Calcif Tissue Int. 2001;69:130–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Cicek M, Oursler MJ. Breast cancer bone metastasis and current small therapeutics. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2006;25(4):635–44.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Kozlow W, Guise TA. Breast cancer metastasis to bone: mechanisms of osteolysis and implications for therapy. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia. 2005;10(2):169–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Coleman RE, Rubens RD, Fogelman I. Reappraisal of the baseline bone scan in breast cancer. J Nucl Med. 1998;29:1045–9.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kinders RJ, Hass GM. Interference in immunoassays by human antimouse antibodies. Eur J Cancer. 1990;26:647–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Passing H, Bablok W. A new biometrical procedure for testing the equality of measurements from two different analytical methods. J Clin Chem Clin Biochem. 1983;21:709–20.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Mohammadzadeh M, Alikhah H, Zareh AGA. Comparison of bone scan with CA15–3 for evaluation of bone metastasis of breast cancer. Pak J Biol Sci. 2010;13(4):175–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Rame Miftari, Hashani V, Bicaj Xh, Gjikolli B, Fejza F, Xhafa B, et al. Application of bone scintigraphy before surgery can completely change the treatment procedures in patients with breast cancer. AIM. 2009;17(4):221–5.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Meera S. Ghadge.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ghadge, M.S., Naik, P.P., Tiwari, B.P. et al. A Comparative Study of Bone Scan Findings and Serum Levels of Tumor Marker CA15-3 in Patients with Breast Carcinoma. Ind J Clin Biochem 27, 97–99 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12291-011-0168-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12291-011-0168-5

Keywords

Navigation