Biomarkers in medicine · 2026
Evaluating the diagnostic value of tumor markers in patients with suspected malignant pleural effusions.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yu Yanxia, Wang Zhen, Xu Lili, Wu Yanbing, Wang Feng, Tong Zhaohui
Аннотация
AIM: The diagnostic significance of pleural effusion (PE) tumor markers in malignant pleural effusions (MPEs) was determined.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 65 cases were pathologically diagnosed with MPEs and 49 cases with tuberculous pleural effusions (TPEs) based on the results of medical thoracoscopic pleural biopsies. The concentrations of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9), cancer antigen 125 (CA-125), specific enolase (NSE), and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) antigen were compared between the two groups.
RESULTS: The concentrations of PE CEA and CA 19-9 in the MPE group were significantly higher than the TPE group (p < 0.001). The optimal thresholds for diagnosis of an MPE with a PE CEA and CA 19-9 were 5.80 ng/ml and 12.52 U/ml, respectively, and specificities of 100% and 93.88%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The PE CEA and CA 19-9 combination is not superior to CEA alone in diagnosing an MPE. CA-125, NSE, and SCC antigen have no diagnostic value for diagnosing an MPE.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 65 cases were pathologically diagnosed with MPEs and 49 cases with tuberculous pleural effusions (TPEs) based on the results of medical thoracoscopic pleural biopsies. The concentrations of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9), cancer antigen 125 (CA-125), specific enolase (NSE), and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) antigen were compared between the two groups.
RESULTS: The concentrations of PE CEA and CA 19-9 in the MPE group were significantly higher than the TPE group (p < 0.001). The optimal thresholds for diagnosis of an MPE with a PE CEA and CA 19-9 were 5.80 ng/ml and 12.52 U/ml, respectively, and specificities of 100% and 93.88%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The PE CEA and CA 19-9 combination is not superior to CEA alone in diagnosing an MPE. CA-125, NSE, and SCC antigen have no diagnostic value for diagnosing an MPE.