European journal of gynaecological oncology · 2015
Serum human epididymis protein 4 can be a useful tumor marker in the differential diagnosis of adnexal masses during pregnancy: a pilot study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Gucer F, Kiran G, Canaz E, Kilinc M, Ekerbicer H C, Avci F, Kiran H, Coskun A, Arikan D C
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate serum concentrations of human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) and cancer antigen 125 (CA 125) in healthy women and their pregnant counterparts to determine the influence of pregnancy on these biomarkers.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Serum concentrations of CA 125 and HE4 were measured in 27 healthy non-pregnant women and 26 healthy pregnant women in the first and second trimesters.
RESULTS: Higher concentration of CA 125 was found in pregnants than in non-pregnant women (p = 0.002). There was no difference in CA 125 concentrations between first and second trimesters (p = 0.13). Serum HE4 concentration was not different in pregnant group compared to non-pregnant women (p = 0.510). Likewise, no difference was found in HE4 levels between the trimesters (p = 0.485). There was a positive correlation between increasing parity and CA 125 (p = 0.023), but not HE4 (p = 1.0).
CONCLUSION: HE4 serum biomarker is unaffected by pregnancy status and may be useful for evaluation of doubtful pelvic masses in pregnancy. Contrarily, increased serum levels of CA 125 could yield increased number of false-positive results.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Serum concentrations of CA 125 and HE4 were measured in 27 healthy non-pregnant women and 26 healthy pregnant women in the first and second trimesters.
RESULTS: Higher concentration of CA 125 was found in pregnants than in non-pregnant women (p = 0.002). There was no difference in CA 125 concentrations between first and second trimesters (p = 0.13). Serum HE4 concentration was not different in pregnant group compared to non-pregnant women (p = 0.510). Likewise, no difference was found in HE4 levels between the trimesters (p = 0.485). There was a positive correlation between increasing parity and CA 125 (p = 0.023), but not HE4 (p = 1.0).
CONCLUSION: HE4 serum biomarker is unaffected by pregnancy status and may be useful for evaluation of doubtful pelvic masses in pregnancy. Contrarily, increased serum levels of CA 125 could yield increased number of false-positive results.