Clinical significance of the tumour markers CA 125 II and CA 72-4 in ovarian carcinoma

Abstract

In a retrospective study we compared the usefulness of the tumour marker CA 72-4 with the established marker CA 125 II (both EIA on Cobas-Core, Hoffmann LaRoche, Basel Switzerland) at the time of primary diagnosis of ovarian carcinoma (n = 123) in order to discriminate between ovarian carcinomas of different histological type. We compared their diagnostic value, behaviour in follow-up care and evaluated possible combinations. Fixing specificity at 95% vs. benign gynaecological diseases (n = 37) as the clinically relevant reference group, we found cut-off values of 160 U/mL far CA 125 II and 3.0 U/mL for CA 72-4. On the basis of this specificity, we found comparable sensitivity for CA 125 II and CA 72-4 for all kinds of ovarian carcinoma at the time of primary diagnosis. With regard to histology, we found best sensitivity for CA 125 II in serous ovarian cancer and for CA 72-4 in mucinous ovarian cancer. Additional sensitivities were found in ovarian carcinoma in general but: little in serous ones. No additive sensitivity was found in mucinous ovarian carcinomas with CA 72-4 as leading marker. In follow-up care, CA 72-4 was the leading marker in I I cases and CA 125 II in 16, while in one case both markers were negative. In 6 cases the change of values reflecting clinical follow-up-care was within the so-called reference range. According to our results, at the time of primary diagnosis because of lack of histological findings the combined determination of CA 125 II and CA 72-4 can be recommended. In follow-up care and control of efficacy of therapy the preoperative positive or leading marker is generally sufficient. The determination of both markers in follow-up care is indicated only if they both are negative at primary diagnosis and until one of them becomes clearly positive.