Abstract
Objective
The significance of serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and CA 15-3 in monitoring advanced breast cancer is still controversial. To clarify this issue, the Tumor Marker Study Group of the Japanese Breast Cancer Society conducted a large-scaled retrospective study.
Methods
The findings from four clinical trials and seven institutes of 528 patients with advanced breast cancer were collected. Three-hundred forty-eight patients, in whom both serum CEA and CA 15-3 were measured during therapy, were selected for analysis.
Results
The pretreatment positivity rate of CA 15-3 was significantly higher than that of CEA (p < 0.0001). Time-to-progression (TTP) in CEA- and CA 15-3-positive patients was significantly shorter than TTP in negative patients. The changes in either marker level correlated well with response to therapy in marker-positive patients but not in negative patients. TTP in the marker-positive patients with a greater than 20%-reduction in either marker level during therapy was significantly longer than that in positive patients without such a reduction (p < 0.01 for CEA and CA 15-3).
Conclusion
CA 15-3 is more useful for monitoring advanced breast cancer than CEA and a greater than 20%-reduction in marker levels suggests longer TTP in pretreatment marker-positive patients.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Abbreviations
- CEA:
-
Carcinoembryonic antigen
- TTP:
-
Time-to-progression
- CR:
-
Complete response
- PR:
-
Partial response
- NC:
-
No change
- PD:
-
Progressive disease
References
Bast RC Jr, Ravdin P, Hayes DF,et al: American Society of Clinical Oncology Tumor Markers Expert Panel: 2000 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast and colorectal cancer: clinical practice guidelines of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.J Clin Oncol 19: 1865–1878, 2001.
Hayes DF, Bast RC, Desch CE,et al: Tumor marker utility grading system: a framework to evaluate clinical utility of tumor markers.J Natl Cancer Inst 88: 1456–1466, 1996.
Stearns V, Yamauchi H, Hayes DF: Circulating tumor markers in breast cancer: accepted utilities and novel prospects.Breast Cancer Res Treat 52: 239–259, 1998.
Narita T, Funahashi H, Satoh Y,et al: Serum and immunohistochemical studies of NCC-ST-439 in breast cancer.J Surg Oncol 54: 5–8, 1993.
Iwase H, Kobayashi S, Itoh Y,et al: Evaluation of serum tumor markers in patients with advanced or recurrent breast cancer.Breast Cancer Res Treat 33: 83–88, 1995.
Ogawa Y, Ishikawa T, Ikeda K,et al: Evaluation of serum KL-6, a mucin-like glycoprotein, as a tumor marker for breast cancer.Clin Cancer Res 6: 4069–4072, 2000.
Nakata B, Ogawa Y, Ishikawa T,et al: Serum CYFRA 21-1 is one of the most reliable tumor markers for breast carcinoma.Cancer 89: 1285–1290, 2000.
Cheung KL, Graves CR, Robertson JF: Tumour marker measurements in the diagnosis and monitoring of breast cancer.Cancer Treat Rev 26: 91–102, 2000.
Tondini C, Hayes DF, Gelman R,et al: Comparison of CA15-3 and carcinoembryonic antigen in monitoring the clinical course of patients with metastatic breast cancer.Cancer Res 48: 4107–4112, 1988.
Colomer R, Ruibal A, Salvador L: Circulating tumor marker levels in advanced breast carcinoma correlate with the extent of metastatic disease.Cancer 64: 1674–1681, 1989.
Vizcarra E, Lluch A, Cibrian R,et al: Value of CA 15.3 in breast cancer and comparison with CEA and TPA: a study of specificity in disease-free follow-up patients and sensitivity in patients at diagnosis of the first metastasis.Breast Cancer Res Treat 37: 209–216, 1996.
Guadagni F, Ferroni P, Carlini S,et al: A re-evaluation of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) as a serum marker for breast cancer: a prospective longitudinal study.Clin Cancer Res 7: 2357–2362, 2001.
Williams MR, Turkes A, Pearson D,et al: The use of serum carcinoembryonic antigen to assess therapeutic response in locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer: a prospective study with external review.Eur J Surg Oncol 14: 417–422, 1988.
Williams MR, Turkes A, Pearson D,et al: An objective biochemical assessment of therapeutic response in metastatic breast cancer: a study with external review of clinical data.Br J Cancer 61: 126–132, 1990.
Robertson JF, Whynes DK, Dixon A,et al: Potential for cost economies in guiding therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer.Br J Cancer 72: 174–177, 1995.
Sonoo H, Kurebayashi J: Serum tumor marker kinetics and the clinical course of patients with advanced breast cancer.Surg Today 26: 250–257, 1996.
Cheung KL, Pinder SE, Paish C,et al: The role of blood tumor marker measurement (using a biochemical index score and c-erbB2) in directing chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer.Int J Biol Markers 15: 203–209, 2000.
Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA,et al: New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada.J Natl Cancer Inst 92: 205–216, 2000.
Hayward JL, Carbone PP, Heusen JC,et al: Assessment of response to therapy in advanced breast cancer.Br J Cancer 35: 292–298, 1977.
Hayes DF, Yamauchi H, Broadwater G,et al: Cancer and Leukemia Group B: Circulating HER-2/erbB-2/cneu (HER-2) extracellular domain as a prognostic factor in patients with metastatic breast cancer: Cancer and Leukemia Group B Study 8662.Clin Cancer Res 7: 2703–2711, 2001.
Berruti A, Tampellini M, Torta M,et al: Prognostic value in predicting overall survival of two mucinous markers: CA 15-3 and CA 125 in breast cancer patients at first relapse of disease.Eur J Cancer 30A: 2082–2084, 1994.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Reprint requests to Junichi Kurebayashi, Department of Breast and Thyroid Surgery, Kawasaki Medical School,577 Matsushima, Kurashiki, Okayama 701-0192, Japan.
About this article
Cite this article
Kurebayashi, J., Yamamoto, Y., Tanaka, K. et al. Significance of serum carcinoembryonic antigen and CA 15-3 in monitoring advanced breast cancer patients treated with systemic therapy: A large-scale retrospective study. Breast Cancer 10, 38–44 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02967624
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02967624