代偉偉,劉正新,徐寶宏
·肝癌·
肝硬化和肝癌患者血清CA125、CA199、AFP和CEA水平變化
代偉偉,劉正新,徐寶宏
目的 研究肝硬化和肝癌患者血清癌抗原(CA)125、CA199、甲胎蛋白(AFP)和癌胚抗原(CEA)的變化。方法采用ELISA法檢測223例肝硬化患者、97例肝癌患者和120例健康人血清CA125、CA199、AFP和CEA水平。結(jié)果肝硬化和肝癌患者血清CA125分別為(261.64±32.47)U/ml和(265.80±30.44)U/ml,CA199分別為(25.73±3.39)U/ml和(30.54±3.29)U/ml,CEA分別為(4.03±0.36)ng/ml和(3.87±0.21)ng/ml,均顯著高于健康人[(21.25±7.66)U/ml、(18.57±8.11)U/ml和(3.08±1.05)ng/ml,P<0.05];肝癌患者AFP(【20000.00±453.07)ng/ml】顯著高于肝硬化患者[(7.52±2.01)ng/ml,P<0.05];肝硬化Child-Pugh C級患者CA125【(474.52±59.80)U/ml】、CA199【(27.80±5.94)U/ml】和CEA(【5.80±0.63)ng/ml】均顯著高于Child-Pugh A級患者[分別為(55.65± 8.82)U/ml、(18.81±0.46)U/ml和(3.20±0.10)ng/ml,P<0.05];腹水患者CA125為(385.16±36.09)U/ml、CA199為(26.55±2.87)U/ml、AFP為(13.63±1.82)ng/ml和CEA為(4.85±0.39)ng/ml,均顯著高于無腹水患者[分別為(62.75±15.45)U/ml、(19.58±0.75)U/ml、(9.39±1.26)ng/ml和(3.54±0.16)ng/ml,P<0.05];酒精性肝硬化患者血清CA125【(318.48±48.80)U/ml】和CA199【(26.63±3.22)U/ml】顯著高于病毒性[(215.77±26.26)U/ml和(19.06±0.64)U/ml,P<0.05]或原發(fā)性膽汁性肝硬化患者[(129.73±28.55)U/ml和(18.00±0.00)U/ml,P<0.05];病毒性肝炎肝硬化患者血清AFP(【56.41±26.75)ng/ml】顯著高于酒精性或膽汁性肝硬化患者[分別為(5.44±0.30)ng/ml和(7.35±1.47)ng/ml,均為P<0.05],血清CEA【(3.53±0.17)ng/ml】則顯著低于酒精性或膽汁性肝硬化患者[分別為(5.19±0.35)n g/ml和(5.73±0.98)ng/ml,均為P<0.05]。結(jié)論 肝硬化和肝癌患者CA125、CA199、AFP和CEA水平存在差異,肝硬化患者CA125、CA199、AFP、CEA水平與Child-Pugh分級、腹水和病因有關(guān)。
肝癌;肝硬化;糖類抗原125;糖類抗原199;甲胎蛋白;癌胚抗原
檢測血清腫瘤標(biāo)志物水平可反映腫瘤細(xì)胞在惡性轉(zhuǎn)化過程中各個階段細(xì)胞表型及基因型的內(nèi)在特性[1~3],從而直接反映患者病情進展?fàn)顩r[4,5]。癌抗原125(cancer antigen 125,CA125)是一種糖鏈抗原,為卵巢癌等腫瘤的標(biāo)記物,同時在臨床觀察中,肝硬化尤其是腹水患者存在一定程度的血清CA125升高[6]。癌抗原199(CA199)是胰腺癌的腫瘤標(biāo)記物,甲胎蛋白(alpha fetoprotein,AFP)為肝癌的腫瘤標(biāo)記物,癌胚抗原(carcino-embryonic antigen,CEA)為存在于結(jié)腸癌、正常胚胎腸道、胰腺的一種蛋白多糖復(fù)合物[7,8]。上述四種腫瘤標(biāo)記物的檢測水平對腫瘤的早期診斷、治療效果、預(yù)后判斷等有重要的臨床意義[9]。本研究選擇肝硬化、肝癌患者和健康人進行上述四種腫瘤標(biāo)記物的檢測并進行其水平差異比較,旨在為肝臟疾病臨床分析和判斷病情提供一定的依據(jù)。
1.1 一般資料 2011年1月~2015年12月首都醫(yī)科大學(xué)附屬北京朝陽醫(yī)院和附屬北京潞河醫(yī)院住院的肝硬化患者223例,男性136例,女性87例;平均年齡53.0±3.4歲。肝癌患者97例,男性59例,女性38例;平均年齡56.0±2.6歲。肝硬化和肝癌均符合第七版《內(nèi)科學(xué)》[10]診斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn),剔除合并有結(jié)核性腹膜炎、腎功能不全的患者,并排除胃腸道腫瘤、膽胰、生殖系統(tǒng)及其他系統(tǒng)惡性腫瘤患者。肝硬化患者按Child-Pugh分級法A級≤6分,B級7~9分,C級≥10分[11],其中A級 96例,B級91例,C級36例。另外,肝硬化合并腹水115例;乙型肝炎肝硬化117例,酒精性肝硬化79例,原發(fā)性膽汁性肝硬化27例。另選取健康人120例作為對照組,均無心肺疾病及其他腫瘤病史。
1.2 檢測方法 采用ELISA法檢測血清腫瘤標(biāo)記物(南京新瑞生物技術(shù)公司)。四種腫瘤標(biāo)記物參考值范圍分別為 CA125:0~35 U/ml,CA199:0~37 U/ml,AFP:0~8.75 ng/ml,CEA:0~5 ng/dl,以高出臨界值上限為陽性。
1.3 統(tǒng)計分析方法 應(yīng)用SPSS 18.0統(tǒng)計軟件進行分析,腫瘤標(biāo)記物水平經(jīng)對數(shù)轉(zhuǎn)換后符合正態(tài)分布,以(±s)表示,多組間比較采用方差分析,組間兩兩比較采用t檢驗。采取雙側(cè)檢驗,P<0.05為差異具有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義。
2.1 三組人群血清四種腫瘤標(biāo)記物水平比較 肝硬化患者血清CA125、CA199和CEA水平與肝癌患者無顯著性差異,而肝癌患者血清AFP水平顯著高于肝硬化患者,差異具有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(t=5.74,P<0.05);組間兩兩比較提示,肝硬化組血清CA125、CA199和CEA水平顯著高于健康人(t=7.07,t=2.68,t=4.401,P<0.05),肝癌組腫瘤標(biāo)記物水平也顯著高于健康人(t=8.94,t=3.89,t=4.17,3.36,P<0.05,表1)。
2.2 不同肝功能分級肝硬化患者血清四種腫瘤標(biāo)志物水平比較 肝硬化Child-Pugh B級和C級患者血清四種腫瘤標(biāo)記物水平顯著高于A級患者(P<0.05),Child-Pugh C級肝硬化患者CA199水平顯著高于B級患者,且具有統(tǒng)計學(xué)差異(P<0.05,表2)。
表1 三組人群血清腫瘤標(biāo)記物水平(±s)比較
表1 三組人群血清腫瘤標(biāo)記物水平(±s)比較
與健康人比,①P<0.05;與肝硬化患者比,②P<0.05
例數(shù) CA125(U/ml) CA199(U/ml) AFP(ng/ml) CEA(ng/ml)肝硬化 223 261.64±32.47① 25.73±3.39① 7.52±2.01 4.03±0.36肝癌 97 265.80±30.44① 30.54±3.29① 20000.00±453.07② 3.87±0.21健康人 120 21.25±7.66 18.57±8.11 4.17±2.14 3.0875±1.05
表2 不同肝功能分級肝硬化患者血清腫瘤標(biāo)記物水平(±s)比較
表2 不同肝功能分級肝硬化患者血清腫瘤標(biāo)記物水平(±s)比較
與A級比,①P<0.05;與B級比,②P<0.05
肝功能分級 例數(shù) CA125(U/ml) CA199(U/ml) AFP(ng/ml) CEA(ng/ml)A級 96 55.65±8.82 18.81±0.46 6.42±0.49 3.20±0.10 B級 91 267.87±33.21① 25.78±3.71 10.65±2.48 4.24±0.27 C級 36 474.52±59.80①② 27.80±5.94① 5.75±0.42 5.80±0.63①
2.3 有腹水與無腹水肝硬化患者血清腫瘤標(biāo)志物水平比較 有腹水的肝硬化患者血清CA125、CA199、AFP和CEA水平顯著高于無腹水的肝硬化患者,差異具有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P<0.05,表3)。
2.4 不同病因肝硬化患者血清四種腫瘤標(biāo)志物水平比較 酒精性肝硬化患者血清CA125和CA199水平顯著高于病毒性或原發(fā)性膽汁性肝硬化患者,差異有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P<0.05),病毒性肝炎肝硬化患者血清AFP水平顯著高于,而血清CEA水平則顯著低于酒精性或膽汁性肝硬化患者(P<0.05,表4)。
表3 腹水與無腹水肝硬化患者血清腫瘤標(biāo)記物水平(±s)比較
表3 腹水與無腹水肝硬化患者血清腫瘤標(biāo)記物水平(±s)比較
與腹水患者比,①P<0.05
例數(shù) CA125(U/ml) CA199(U/ml) AFP(ng/ml) CEA(ng/ml)腹水 115 385.16±36.09 26.55±2.87 13.63±1.82 4.85±0.39無腹水 108 62.75±15.45① 19.58±0.75① 9.39±1.26① 3.54±0.16①
表4 不同病因肝硬化患者血清腫瘤標(biāo)記物水平(±s)比較
表4 不同病因肝硬化患者血清腫瘤標(biāo)記物水平(±s)比較
與其他兩組比,①P<0.05
例數(shù) CA125(U/ml) CA199(U/ml) AFP(ng/ml) CEA(ng/ml)病毒性 117 215.77±26.26 19.06±0.64 56.41±26.75① 3.53±0.17①酒精性 79 318.48±48.80① 26.63±3.22① 5.44±0.30 5.19±0.35膽汁性 27 129.73±28.55 18.00±0.00 7.35±1.47 5.73±0.98
CA125是1983年由Bat et al從卵巢癌上皮細(xì)胞中檢測出的一種可被單克隆抗體OC 125結(jié)合的糖蛋白,來源于胚胎發(fā)育期體胚上皮,位于染色體19p13.2區(qū)域,為含有5797個堿基對的跨膜糖蛋白,屬于IgG1[12]。由于CA125的氨基酸序列具有一些黏蛋白分子的特性,故將其命名為CA125,基因為MUC16,相對分子質(zhì)量為20萬~100萬。最常見于上皮性卵巢腫瘤患者血清中,健康成人CA125水平小于35 U/mL[13]。CA125不僅是卵巢癌的特異性腫瘤標(biāo)記物,在輸卵管腺癌、子宮內(nèi)膜癌、宮頸癌、胰腺癌、直腸癌、結(jié)腸癌、肺癌患者血清CA125水平也會升高[14]。在非惡性腫瘤,如子宮內(nèi)膜異位癥、盆腔炎、卵巢囊腫、胰腺炎、病毒性肝炎、肝硬化等雖有不同程度的升高,但其水平不是非常高。另外,CA125是存在腹水患者的常用指標(biāo),對早期診斷腹水具有重要的臨床價值。在本組肝硬化患者,尤其在存在腹水患者,血清CA125水平明顯升高。
CA199在正常胰、膽管細(xì)胞、胃、結(jié)腸和唾液腺上皮細(xì)胞均可表達,是由單克隆抗體116NS19-9識別的抗原成分,是目前臨床上最有診斷價值也是應(yīng)用最多的一種腫瘤相關(guān)抗原[15,16],其血清正常值<37 U/ml。血清CA199明顯升高時,首先應(yīng)考慮為胰腺惡性腫瘤,其升高還見于肝膽系癌、胃癌、結(jié)直腸癌、慢性胰腺炎、膽石癥、肝硬化、腎功能不全、糖尿病等[17]。本組部分肝硬化患者血清CA199也有升高。AFP主要在胎兒肝中合成,其分子量為6.9萬,30周胎齡達最高峰,以后逐漸下降,至周歲時接近成人水平(低于30 μg/L)。在肝細(xì)胞再生時期,血清AFP水平輕度升高,在急、慢性肝炎、肝硬化時會有肝細(xì)胞再生,因而血清AFP水平也可升高[18,19]。在肝細(xì)胞受損以及肝細(xì)胞增生過程中AFP分泌均會增加,并可作為診斷肝癌的主要指標(biāo)。上海瑞金醫(yī)院報告,在急性黃疸型肝炎、急性無黃疸型肝炎、慢性肝炎和肝硬化患者各60例,測得AFP水平在25~40 ng/ml者分別占 13.3%、11.7%、3.5%和41.7%。甲胎蛋白偏高可能見于急、慢性肝炎、肝衰竭恢復(fù)期、肝硬化、先天性膽管閉塞和畸形胎兒等疾病[20,21]。本組肝癌患者血清AFP水平明顯升高,部分肝硬化患者亦有升高。
CEA最初被發(fā)現(xiàn)于結(jié)腸癌和胎兒腸組織中,故名癌胚抗原。CEA升高常見于結(jié)腸癌、胰腺癌、胃癌、乳腺癌、甲狀腺髓樣癌等。但在良性腫瘤、炎癥和退行性疾病,如結(jié)腸息肉、潰瘍性結(jié)腸炎、胰腺炎和酒精性肝硬化患者血清CEA水平也有部分升高,但遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)低于惡性腫瘤,一般小于20 ng/ml。CEA超過20 ng/ml時往往提示有消化道腫瘤。
綜上所述,上述四種腫瘤標(biāo)志物在不同病因肝硬化和不同肝功能分級患者、合并腹水的患者中存在顯著升高,提示預(yù)后差,肝癌患者血清AFP水平明顯升高。臨床上,在病毒性肝炎或肝硬化患者,當(dāng)血清AFP升高時,應(yīng)及時進行影像學(xué)檢查,以期早期發(fā)現(xiàn)腫瘤,以免延誤治療。
[1]Chowdhury MA,Xiubin Z,Wei H,et al.Cancer antigen-125 and ICAM-1 are together responsible for ascites in liver cirrhosis.Clin Lab,2014,60(4):653-658.
[2]Dai H,Liu J,Liang Y,et al.Increased lung cancer risk in patientswith interstitiallung disease and elevated CEA and CA125 serum tumour markers. Respirology,2014,19(5):707-713.
[3]Kayadibi H,Sertoglu E,Uyanik M.Evaluation of relationship between CA-125 levels and ascites in patients with liver cirrhosis.J Coll Physicians Surg Pak,2014,24(11):873.
[4]Chang K,Lu SN.Incidence and associated risk factors of hepatocellularcarcinoma in a duralhepatitisB and C virus endemirarea;a surveillance study.Kaohsiung J Med Sci,2011,27(3):85-90.
[5]Pissaia AJ,Bernard D,Scatton O,et al.Significance of serum tumor markers carcinoembryonic antigen,CA 19-9,CA 125,and CA 15-3 in pre-orthotopic livertransplantation evaluation. Transplant Proc,2013,41(2):682-684.
[6]Trevisani FD,Intino PE,Morselli-Labate AM,et al.Serum alpha2 fetoprotein for diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic liver disease:influence of HBsAg and anti HCV status.J Hepatol,2012,34(4):570-575.
[7]Sorbye H,Dahl O.Carcinoembryonic antigen surge in metastatic colorectal cancer patients respongding to oxaliplatin combination chemotherapy:implications for tumor marker monitoring and guidelines.J Clin Oncol,2013,21(23):4466-4467.
[8]Gazelle GS,Hunink MG,Kuntz KM,et al.Cost-effectiveness of hepaticmetastasectomyin patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma:a state-transition Monte Carlo decision analysis.Ann Surg,2013,237(4):544-555.
[9]Davies JR,Kirkham S,Svitacheva N,et al.MUC16 is produced in tracheal surface epithelium and submucosal glands and is present in secretions from normal human airway and cultured bronchial epithelial cells.Int J Biochem Cell Biol,2014,39:1943-1954.
[10]陸再英,鐘南山.內(nèi)科學(xué).1版,北京:人民衛(wèi)生出版社,2008:437-453.
[11]Wiesner R,Edwards E,F(xiàn)reeman R,et al.Model for end-stage liver disease(MELD)and allocation of donor livers.Gastroenterology,2013,124(1):91-96.
[12]Liu X,Chi X,Gong Q,et al.Association of serum level of growth differentiation factor 15 with liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma.PLoS One,2015,10(5):e0127518.
[13]Yonemori K,Ando M,Shibata T,et al.Tumor marker analysis and verification of prognostic models in patients with cancer of unknown primary,receiving platinum based combination chemotherapy. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol,2016,132(10):635-642.
[14]Smith RA,Cokkinides V,von Eschenbach AC,et al.American cancer society guidelines for the early detection of cancer.CA Cancer J Clin,2012,52(1):8-22.
[15]Liu F,Kong X,Dou Q,et al.Evaluation of tumor markers for the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant ascites.Ann Hepatol,2014,13(3):357-363.
[16]劉丹,朱清靜,萬青松,等.清降鈣素原聯(lián)合C-反應(yīng)蛋白檢測診斷肝硬化并發(fā)自發(fā)性細(xì)菌性腹膜炎價值探討.實用肝臟病雜志,2015,18(1):80-81.
[17]Qureshi MO,Dar FS,Khokhar N.Cancer antigen-125 as a markerofascites in patients with livercirrhosis.J Coll Physicians Surg Pak,2014,24(4):232-235.
[18]李佳紅,付娜,牛學(xué)敏,等.573例原發(fā)性肝癌病因及臨床特點分析.實用肝臟病雜志,2015,18(4):399-402.
[19]Wang M,Devarajan K,Singal AG,et al.The Doylestown algorithm:A test to improve the performance of AFP in the detection of hepatocellular carcinoma.Cancer Prev Res(Phila),2016,9(2):172-179.
[20]Conti F,Dall'Agata M,Gramenzi A,et al.Biomarkers for the early diagnosis of bacterial infection and the surveillance of hepatocellularcarcinoma in cirrhosis.Biomark Med,2015,9(12):1343-1351.
[21]阮林松,許成新,陳世勇.肝硬化患者血清及腹腔積液 CA199、CA125檢測的意義.放射免疫學(xué)雜志,2011,24(1):107-108.
(收稿:2016-07-27)
(本文編輯:陳從新)
Serum CA125,CA199,AFP,CEA in patients with cirrhosis and primary liver cancer
Dai Weiwei1,Liu Zhengxin2,Xu Baohong1
(1.Department of Gastroenterology,Affiliated Beijing Luhe Hospital,Capital Medical University,Beijing 101100,China 2.Department of Gastroenterology,Affiliated Beijing Chaoyang Hospital,Capital Medical University,Beijing 100020,China)
Objective To investigate the changes of serum carbohydrate antigen(CA)125,CA199,alpha-fetoprotein (AFP)and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA)in patients with live cirrhosis and primary liver cancer(PLC).Methods Serum levels of CA125,CA199,AFP and CEA in 440 individuals were detected by ELISA,including 223 patients with liver cirrhosis,97 patients with PLC and 120 healthy persons.Results The levels of CA125 in patients with liver cirrhosis and PLC were(261.64±32.47)U/ml and(265.80±30.44)U/ml,CA199 were(25.73±3.39)U/ml and(30.54±3.29)U/ml,CEA were(4.03±0.36)ng/ml and(3.87±0.21)ng/ml,much higher than those[(21.25±7.66)U/ml,(18.57±8.11)U/ml and (3.08±1.05)ng/ml,P<0.05]in healthy persons;serum AFP levels in patients with PLC were(20000.00±453.07)ng/ml,much higher than[(7.52± 2.01)ng/ml,P<0.05]in patients with liver cirrhosis;The levels of CA125(474.52±59.80)U/ml],CA199[(27.80± 5.94)U/ml]and CEA [(5.80±0.63)ng/ml]in patients with liver cirrhosis of class C were significantly higher than those of class A[(55.65±8.82)U/ml,(18.81±0.46)U/ml and(3.20±0.10)ng/ml,respectively,P<0.05];The levels of CA125[(385.16±36.09)U/ml],CA199[(26.55±2.87)U/ml],AFP[(13.63±1.82)ng/ml]and CEA [(4.85±0.39)ng/ml]in patients with cirrhotic ascites were higher than those without ascites[(62.75±15.45)U/ml,(19.58±0.75) U/ml,(9.39±1.26)ng/ml and(3.54±0.16) ng/ml,P<0.05];The levels ofCA125 [(318.48±48.80)U/ml]and CA199 [(26.63±3.22)U/ml]in patients with alcoholic liver cirrhosis were higher than those in patients with viralcirrhosis[(215.77±26.26)U/ml and(19.06±0.64)U/ml,P<0.05]or in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis[(129.73±28.55)U/ml and(18.00±0.00)U/ml,P<0.05];The level of AFP[(56.41±26.75)ng/ml]in patients with viral cirrhosis was higher than[(5.44±0.30)ng/ml or(7.35±1.47)ng/ml,respectively,P<0.05],while the CEA level[(3.53±0.17)ng/ml]was lower than[(5.19±0.35)ng/ml or(5.73±0.98)ng/ml,P<0.05]in patients with alcoholic liver cirrhosis or primary biliary cirrhosis.Conclusion The serum levels of CA125,CA199,AFP and CEA in patients with liver cirrhosis and PLC were different.The serum levels of CA125,CA199,AFP and CEA in patients with liver cirrhosis were associated with Child-Pugh scores,ascites and etiology.
Primary livercancer;Livercirrhosis;Carbohydrate antigen 125;CA199;Alpha-fetoprotein;Carcinoembryonic antigen
10.3969/j.issn.1672-5069.2017.01.021
101100北京市 首都醫(yī)科大學(xué)附屬北京潞河醫(yī)院消化內(nèi)科(代偉偉,徐寶宏);首都醫(yī)科大學(xué)附屬北京朝陽醫(yī)院消化內(nèi)科(劉正新)
代偉偉,女,30歲,醫(yī)學(xué)碩士,住院醫(yī)師。主要研究方向:胃腸道腫瘤防治
劉正新,E-mail:liuzhengx2003@vip.sina.com