| 1. |
- Duffy, M. J., et al.
(författare)
-
Tumour markers in colorectal cancer : European Group on Tumour Markers (EGTM) guidelines for clinical use
- 2007
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Cancer. - : Elsevier BV. - 0959-8049 .- 1879-0852. ; 43:9, s. 1348-1360
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The aim of this article is to present updated guidelines for the use of serum, tissue and faecal markers in colorectal cancer (CRC). Lack of specificity and sensitivity preclude the use of all existing serum markers for the early detection of CRC. For patients with stage Il or stage III CRC who may be candidates for either liver resection or systemic treatment should recurrence develop, CEA should be measured every 2-3 months for at least 3 years after diagnosis. insufficient evidence exists to recommend routine use of tissue factors such as thymidylate synthase, microsatellite instability (MSI), p53, K-ras and deleted in colon cancer (DCC) for either determining prognosis or predicting response to therapy in patients with CRC. Microsatellite instability, however, may be used as a pre-screen for patients with suspected hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer. Faecal occult blood testing but not faecal DNA markers may be used to screen asymptomatic subjects 50 years or older for early CRC.
|
|
| 2. |
- Soletormos, Gyorgy, et al.
(författare)
-
Clinical Use of Cancer Biomarkers in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Updated Guidelines From the European Group on Tumor Markers
- 2016
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Gynecological Cancer. - 1048-891X .- 1525-1438. ; 26:1, s. 43-51
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective:To present an update of the European Group on Tumor Markers guidelines for serum markers in epithelial varian cancer. Methods: Systematic literature survey from 2008 to 2013. The articles were evaluated by level of evidence and strength of recommendation. Results: Because of its low sensitivity (50-62% for early stage epithelial ovarian cancer) and limited specificity (94-98.5%), cancer antigen (CA) 125 (CA125) is not recommended as a screening test in asymptomatic women. The Risk of Malignancy Index, which includes CA125, transvaginal ultrasound, and menopausal status, is recommended for the differential diagnosis of a pelvic mass. Because human epididymis protein 4 has been reported to have superior specificity to CA125, especially in premenopausal women, it may be considered either alone or as part of the risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm, in the differential diagnosis of pelvic masses, especially in such women. CA125 should be used to monitor response to first-line chemotherapy using the previously published criteria of the Gynecological Cancer Intergroup, that is, at least a 50% reduction of a pretreatment sample of 70 kU/L or greater. The value of CA125 in posttherapy surveillance is less clear. Although a prospective randomized trial concluded that early administration of chemotherapy based on increasing CA125 levels had no effect on survival, European Group on Tumor Markers state that monitoring with CA125 in this situation should occur, especially if the patient is a candidate for secondary cytoreductive surgery. Conclusions: At present, CA125 remains the most important biomarker for epithelial ovarian cancer, excluding tumors of mucinous origin.
|
|
| 3. |
- Soletormos, Gyorgy, et al.
(författare)
-
Design of Tumor Biomarker-Monitoring Trials : A Proposal by the European Group on Tumor Markers
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Clinical Chemistry. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0009-9147 .- 1530-8561. ; 59:1, s. 52-59
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- A major application of tumor biomarkers is in serial monitoring of cancer patients, but there are no published guidelines on how to evaluate biomarkers for this purpose. The European Group on Tumor Markers has convened a multidisciplinary panel of scientists to develop guidance on the design of such monitoring trials. The panel proposes a 4-phase model for biomarker-monitoring trials analogous to that in use for the investigation of new drugs. In phase I, biomarker kinetics and correlation with tumor burden are assessed. Phase II evaluates the ability of the biomarker to identify, exclude, and/or predict a change in disease status. In phase III, the effectiveness of tumor biomarker guided intervention is assessed by measuring patient outcome in randomized trials. Phase IV consists of an audit of the long-term effects after biomarker monitoring has been included into standard patient care. Systematic well-designed evaluations of biomarkers for monitoring may provide a stronger evidence base that might enable their earlier use in evaluating responses to cancer therapy.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
