The Pitfalls of CA19-9

  • Passerini R
  • Cassatella M
  • Boveri S
  • et al.
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

We evaluated CA19-9 as a marker of various malignancies and compared the results of 2 commercial immunoassays. The Abbott ARCHITECT i2000 and Roche cobas 410 immunoassays were used on 500 consecutive samples to evaluate the frequency of positive results by cancer type and the correlation between assays. The patients were tested before or after surgery and/or during chemotherapy. The rate of results exceeding conventional thresholds was 92.3% in pancreatic cancer, 36.8% in gastric cancer, and ranged from 3.0% to 35.9% in other tumors. Agreement (90.6%) and correlation (R(2) = 0.865) between the 2 assays were good and the frequency of highly discordant results was low (6/500). In some cases, interference by heterophilic antibodies was demonstrated. The 2 methods were comparable in diagnostic accuracy and had good correlation but are not interchangeable. Patients should always be monitored for CA19-9 with the same method and it should be indicated in the report.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Passerini, R., Cassatella, M. C., Boveri, S., Salvatici, M., Radice, D., Zorzino, L., … Sandri, M. T. (2012). The Pitfalls of CA19-9. American Journal of Clinical Pathology, 138(2), 281–287. https://doi.org/10.1309/ajcpopnpllcyr07h

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free