Anticancer research · 2013
Mesothelin is more useful in pleural effusion than in serum in the diagnosis of pleural mesothelioma.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Ferro Paola, Canessa Pier Aldo, Battolla Enrico, Dessanti Paolo, Franceschini Maria Cristiana, Chiaffi Luigi, Morabito Anna, Fontana Vincenzo, Pezzi Riccardo, Fedeli Franco, Pistillo Maria Pia, Roncella Silvio
Аннотация
BACKGROUND/AIM: Soluble mesothelin-related peptide (SMRP) is regarded as a biomarker of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Herein, we compared the diagnostic performances of SMRP in matched pleural effusion (PE-SMRP) and serum (S-SMRP).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Diagnosis on pleural biopsies was performed for all patients including 43 with MPM, 23 with non-MPM pleural metastases (MTS) and 36 with benign (BNG) pleural diseases. SMRP was measured by a MesoMark ELISA (Cis-Bio International Gif/Yvette; France).
RESULTS: Using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, 12.70 and 1.08 nM were detected as cut-off values to optimal discrimination for PE-SMRP and S-SMRP, respectively. PE-SMRP showed a better diagnostic accuracy than S-SMRP in MPM vs. MTS+BNG (area under the ROC curve=81.6 vs. 70.5; sensitivity=69.8% vs. 46.5%; specificity=88.1% vs. 84.7%; diagnostic odds ratio (DOR)=17.1 vs. 4.8). In S-SMRP-negative patients, PE-SMRP maintained an acceptable performance (Sensitivity=47.8%; DOR=8.3; p=0.001), whereas in PE-SMRP-negative patients, S-SMRP performed very poorly (Sensitivity=15.4%; DOR=1.2; p=0.858).
CONCLUSION: PE-SMRP detection has a superior diagnostic accuracy than S-SMRP detection in the diagnosis of MPM.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Diagnosis on pleural biopsies was performed for all patients including 43 with MPM, 23 with non-MPM pleural metastases (MTS) and 36 with benign (BNG) pleural diseases. SMRP was measured by a MesoMark ELISA (Cis-Bio International Gif/Yvette; France).
RESULTS: Using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, 12.70 and 1.08 nM were detected as cut-off values to optimal discrimination for PE-SMRP and S-SMRP, respectively. PE-SMRP showed a better diagnostic accuracy than S-SMRP in MPM vs. MTS+BNG (area under the ROC curve=81.6 vs. 70.5; sensitivity=69.8% vs. 46.5%; specificity=88.1% vs. 84.7%; diagnostic odds ratio (DOR)=17.1 vs. 4.8). In S-SMRP-negative patients, PE-SMRP maintained an acceptable performance (Sensitivity=47.8%; DOR=8.3; p=0.001), whereas in PE-SMRP-negative patients, S-SMRP performed very poorly (Sensitivity=15.4%; DOR=1.2; p=0.858).
CONCLUSION: PE-SMRP detection has a superior diagnostic accuracy than S-SMRP detection in the diagnosis of MPM.