Objective:
@EN Our objective was to compare the usefulness of tumor markers, serum CA125 and CA 130 in differentiating malignant from benign pelvic masses .
@ES Study design:
@EN Serum CA125 and CA130 levels were measured by immunoradiometric assay in total 135 samples which were collected from 91 patients with benign pelvic masses, 21 patients with ovarian cancer, 3 patients with no evidence of disease after
treatment
for
ovarian cancer and 20 apparently healthy women.
@ES Results:
@EN In epithelial ovarian cancer, mean value of serum CA125 and CA130 were 1224.0 U/ml and 891.0 U/ml, respectively. Serum CA125 and CA130 levels were above 35 U/ml in 90.5% and 81.0% of patients with malignant pelvic masses, respectively. Serum
CA130
levels showed lower false positive rate in patients with benign pelvic masses, 34.1%(>35U/ml) than that of serum CA125 levels, 51.6%(>35U/ml).
In control group, serum CA125 and CA130 levels were above 65 U/ml in 13.0% and 0% respectively. Values of both markers correlated each others very well. Regression equation between CA125 and CA130 is following; CA130=10.)+0.673 CA125 and
correlation
coefficient if 0.992. Combining of CA 125 CA 130, a sensitivity was 81.%(35U/ml) similar to CA125 levels alone, 90.5% (>35U/ml) and 85.&%(>65U/ml). In specificity, combining of serum CA125 and CA130, 68.1% (>35U/ml), 76.9%(>65U/ml) were much
higher
than
CA125 alone, 48.4%(>35U/ml), 71.4%(65U/ml). And diagnostic accuracy was higher in the combined use of CA125 and CA130, 69.6%(>35U/ml), 77.7%(>65U/ml)than CA125 alone, 56.3%(>35U/ml), 74.1%(>65U/ml).
@ES Conclusion:
@EN Values of serum CA130 well correlated with those of CA125 and combined use of both markers can acceptable sensitivity and a better specificity than thous of serum CA125 alone in differentiating malignant from benign pelvic masses.
|