|
|
|
| Diagnostic value of pleural fluid EpCAM mRNA and MUC1 mRNA in differentiating benign from malignant pleural effusion |
| SUN Wei 1, LI Jian1, CHEN Yuan-yuan2 |
| （1. Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Affiliated Hospital of Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang Jiangsu 212001; 2. Institute of Basal Medicine Science, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang Jiangsu 212013, China) |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic value of epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM) mRNA and mucin 1(MUC1) mRNA expression levels in the pleural fluids for differentiating benign from malignant pleural effusion. Methods: Quantitative real-time PCR was used to detect the expression levels of EpCAM mRNA and MUC1 mRNA in pleural effusion samples from 51 patients with malignant pleural effusion caused by non-small cell lung cancer and 22 patients with tuberculous pleurisy. Receiver operative characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed to assess diagnostic performance. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of individual or combined detections of EpCAM mRNA and MUC1 mRNA in the diagnosis of malignant pleural effusion were calculated. Results: The levels of pleural fluid EpCAM mRNA and MUC1 mRNA in patients with malignant pleural effusion were significantly higher than those in patients with tuberculous pleurisy(P=0.000). According to the ROC curve analysis, cut-off values for EpCAM mRNA and MUC1 mRNA in pleural fluid from benign pleural effusion were 14.64 and 11.82, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of EpCAM mRNA for malignant pleural effusion diagnosis were 84.3% and 90.9%, respectively. The detection of pleural fluid MUC1 mRNA achieved sensitivity of 86.3% and specificity of 86.4%, respectively. When combined EpCAM mRNA and MUC1 mRNA with a serial test, the sensitivity and specificity were 80.4% and 95.5%, respectively. Combination EpCAM mRNA and MUC1 mRNA with a parallel test yielded the 90.2% sensitivity and 81.8% specificity, respectively. Conclusion: Pleural fluid EpCAM mRNA and MUC1 mRNA were two useful tumor markers in the diagnosis of malignant pleural effusion;combination of both two could improve diagnostic performance for distinguishing benign pleural effusion from malignant pleural effusion.
|
|
Received: 17 April 2014
|
|
|
|
| \[1\]Shitrit D, Zingerman B, Shitrit AB, et al. Diagnostic value of CYFRA 21-1, CEA, CA19-9, CA15-3, and CA125 assays in pleural effusions: analysis of 116 cases and reviewof the literature \[J\]. Oncologist, 2005, 10(7): 501-507.［2］Wobbes T, Thomas CM, Segers MF, et al. Evaluation of seven tumor markers (CA50, CA19-9, CA19-9 TruQuant, CA72-4, CA195, carcinoembryonic antigen, and tissue polypeptideantigen) in the pretreatment sera of patients with gastric carcinoma \[J\]. Cancer, 1992, 69(8): 2036-2041.［3］GarciaPachon E, Padilla-Navas I, Dosda MD, et al. Elevated level of carcinoembryonic antigen in nonmalignant pleural effusions \[J\]. Chest， 1997, 111(3): 643-647.［4］Riantawan P, Sangsayan P, Bangpattanasiri K, et al. Limited additive value of pleural fluid carcinoembryonic antigen level in malignant pleural effusion \[J\]. Respiration,2000, 67(1): 24-29.［5］Paganuzzi M, Onetto M, Marroni P, et al. Diagnostic value of CYFRA 21-1 tumor marker and CEA in pleural effusion due to mesothelioma\[J\]. Chest, 2001, 119(4): 1138-1142.［6］Porcel JM, Vives M, Esquerda A, et al. Use of a panel of tumor markers (carcinoembryonic antigen, cancer antigen 125, carbohydrate antigen 15-3, and cytokeratin 19fragments) in pleural fluid for the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant effusions\[J\]. Chest， 2004, 126(6): 1757-1763.［7］Romero S, Fernández C, Arriero JM, et al. CEA, CA 15-3 and CYFRA 21-1 in serum and pleural fluid of patients with pleural effusions \[J\]. Eur Respir J, 1996, 9(1): 17-23.［8］廖君群. 胸腔积液CEA、CA199、CYFRA21-1、AFP 和 FERR在肺癌诊断中的价值\[J\]. 国际检验医学杂志，2013，34(10): 1216-1218.［9］Khan MS, Tsigani T, Rashid M, et al. Circulating tumor cells and EpCAM expression in neuroendocrine tumor\[J\]. Clin Cancer Res , 2011, 17(2):337-345.［10］Yanamoto S, Kawasaki G, Yoshitomi I, et al. Clinic pathologic significance of EpCAM expression in squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue and its possibility as potentialtarget for tongue cancer gene therapy\[J\]. Oral Oncol, 2007, 43(9): 869-877.［11］Zhang KH, Cao F, Fu QB, et al. Detectionof mRNAs of GA733 genes by RT-PCR in exfoliated cells of pleural and peritoneal effusions and its clinical values\[J\]. InternMed, 2007, 46 (18) :1489-1494．［12］Guddo F, Giatromanolaki A, Patriarca C, et al. Depolarized expression of episialin (EMA, MUC1) in lung adenocarcinoma is associated with tumor progression \[J\].Anticancer Res, 1998, 18(3B):1915-1920.［13］Ringel J, Lhr M. The MUC gene family: their role in diagnosis and early detection of pancreatic cancer\[J\]. Mol Cancer, 2003, 2:9.［14］蔡祖勋，梁庚正，张学完，等. 肺小细胞肺癌组织中P53和MUC1的表达及其意义\[J\]. 肿瘤防治杂志，2004，11(7)：694-696.［15］周龙，李瑶，熊国亮. 胸腔积液中粘蛋白1表达的临床意义\[J\]. 实用中西医结合临床，2008，8(5):52-53. |
|
|
|
2014, Vol. 24 
