Survival analysis showed that large tumor size (>5 cm), elevated preoperative serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level, advanced TNM stage and high CXCR6 expression indicated worse overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) in GC, and CXCR6 was an independent predictor for both OS and DFS in GC.
To detect adenocarcinoma cells in the circulating peripheral blood, we "analyzed the presence of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) mRNA in the peripheral blood obtained from patients with pancreatic carcinoma (PC) or with gastric carcinoma (GC) and also, as controls, from pancreatitis or gastritis patients without carcinomas, a gastric lymphoma patient and four healthy volunteers.
Whereas NLR, PLR and CEA are known to help distinguish GC from benign gastric lesions, combining CEA with PLR or NLR offers better diagnostic value for GC than any of them used alone.
There were significant differences in age, gender, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), carbohydrate antigen (CA) 153 between gastric cancer and healthy controls (<i>P</i><0.05).
Compared with CEA, CA19-9, CA72-4 and CA50, CFD may prove to be a better biomarker for the screening of GC, thus providing a sensitive biomarker for screening and monitoring progression of GC.
This review systematically summarizes the three most commonly used biomarkers of GC (e.g., CEA, CA19-9, and CA72-4) and addresses two categories of potential molecular biomarkers for the diagnosis of GC: microRNA and methylated DNA.
Furthermore, the expression of miR‑130a in plasma in gastric cancer patients was upregulated and diagnostic value for gastric cancer of miR-130a is more effective than the tumor markers carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and CA-199. miR-130a directly targeted runt‑related transcription factor 3 (RUNX3) and promoted gastric cancer tumorigenesis by targeting RUNX3. miR-130a may therefore be a useful marker for the diagnosis and prognosis of gastric cancer.
Thus, REG4 may be not only a prognostic indicator but also a better serum marker than carcinoembryonic antigen and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 for early diagnosis of gastric cancer.
However, peritoneal recurrence-free survival was not different between CEA (CK20) mRNA-positive and -negative CRC patients, in quite contrast to GC cases.
Multivariate survival analysis showed that CEA (OR = 4.924), and T category (OR = 2.214) were significant prognostic factors for stage pN<sub>0</sub> GC (all <i>P</i> < 0.05).
Combined measurement of SYT13 and CEA mRNA levels in peritoneal lavage fluid could serve as a promising approach to predict peritoneal recurrence of GC.
We developed a dual-label time-resolved fluoroimmunoassay (TRFIA) to simultaneously detect carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA125) and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in human serum to aid the diagnosis and prognosis of gastric cancer.
This study aims to evaluate and compare the diagnostic accuracy of 5 common tumor biomarkers (CA19-9, CA125, PG, IncRNA, and DNA methylation) and CEA and their combinations for diagnosing gastric cancer through network meta-analysis method, and to rank these tests using a superiority index.
For 15 cases of peritoneal dissemination (seven cases were cytologically positive), DDC was positive in 13 cases (87% sensitivity), but CEAfailed to detect micrometastases in four cases (73% sensitivity), indicating that DDC is in some cases superior to CEA for the detection of peritoneal micrometastases of gastric cancer in terms of sensitivity as well as specificity, especially for poorly differentiated adenocarcinomas.