Evaluation of Preoperative CA15-3 Level and its Relationship with Clinico-Pathological Characteristics in Primary Breast Cancer Patients

Braihan Hamdi  Hameed; Izzat Abdulsatar  Al-Rayahi; Salwa S.  Muhsin

doi:10.51173/jt.v4i2.480

Authors

Braihan Hamdi Hameed College of Health and Medical Techniques - Baghdad, Middle Technical University, Baghdad, Iraq.
Izzat Abdulsatar Al-Rayahi College of Health and Medical Techniques - Baghdad, Middle Technical University, Baghdad, Iraq
Salwa S. Muhsin Institute of Medical Technology / Baghdad, Middle Technical University, Baghdad, Iraq

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51173/jt.v4i2.480

Keywords:

Breast Cancer, CA15-3, Tumor Marker, Predictive Factor

Abstract

Cancer antigen15-3 (CA15-3) is utilized as a tumor marker in breast cancer. In the metastatic situation, it has been regarded as having a predictive role. However, the usefulness of serum CA15-3 in preoperative breast cancer remains argumentative. Therefore, this study aimed to estimate the association of preoperative serum CA15-3 level with the clinico-pathological characteristics in Iraqi women patients with breast tumor and their efficiency for the prediction of primary breast cancer. Preoperative CA15-3 levels were assessed by ELISA technique in 60 Iraqi women with breast tumor (30 with primary breast cancer and 30 with benign breast tumor) before surgery and treatment, as well as 30 healthy controls. In addition, the clinico-pathological characteristics information of all the patients was reported. CA15-3 level showed a significant difference between its level in the sera of primary breast cancer women in comparison to the benign breast tumor women (p <0.001) and healthy control women one (p <0.001). The area under the curve (AUC) of CA15-3 for discriminating patients with primary breast cancer and healthy control subjects was 0.720 (95% CI: 0.589 to 0.828). Furthermore, the present study showed that higher preoperative CA15-3 level was significantly associated with a larger tumor size and lymph node metastasis. This means that elevated CA15-3 is correlated with an increased tumor burden, suggesting its predictive value.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Sung H., Ferlay I., Siegel R. L., Laversanne M., Soerjomataram I., et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA: a Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 2021; 71(3): 209–249.

Incoronato M., Mirabelli P., Catalano O., Aiello M., Parente, C., et al. CA15-3 is a useful serum tumor marker for diagnostic integration of hybrid positron emission tomography with integrated computed tomography during follow-up of breast cancer patients. BMC Cancer. 2014;14: 356.

Yerushalmi R., Tyldesley S., Kennecke H., Speers C., Woods R., et al. Tumor markers in metastatic breast cancer subtypes: frequency of elevation and correlation with outcome. Ann Oncol. 2012; 23(2): 338–345.

Duffy M.J., Shering S., Sherry F., McDermott E. and Higgins N. O. CA15–3: a Prognostic Marker in Breast Cancer. Int. J. Biol. Markers. 2000; 15(4): 330–333.

Mukhopadhyay P., Chakraborty S., Ponnusamy M. P., Lakshmanan I., Jain M., and Batra S. K.; (2011). Mucins in the pathogenesis of breast cancer: implications in diagnosis, prognosis, and therapy. Biochim. Biophys. Acta. 2011; 1815(2): 224–240.

Taylor-Papadimitriou J., Burchell J., Miles D. W., and Dalziel M. MUC1 and cancer. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta. 1999; 1455(2-3): 301–313.

Nisman B., Maimon O., Allweis T., Kadouri L., Maly B., et al. The prognostic significance of LIAISON(R) CA15-3 assay in primary breast cancer. Anticancer Res. 2013; 33(1):293–299.

Harris L., Fritsche H., Mennel R., Norton L., Ravdin P., et al. American society of clinical oncology 2007 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25(33): 5287-5312

NCCN. NCCN guidelines Version 4. 2018 Breast cancer 2018 [https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physiciangls/pdf/breast block s.pdf]

Molina R., Barak V, Dalen V.A., Duffy M.J., Einarsson R., et al. Tumor markers in breast cancer- European group on tumor markers recommendations. Tumour Biol. 2005; 26(6): 281–293.

Rojas K. and Stuckey A. (2016). Breast cancer epidemiology and risk factors. Clin. Obstet. Gynecol. 2016; 59: 651-672.

Sandri M. T., Salvatici M., Botteri E., Passerini R., Zorzino L., et al. Prognostic role of CA15.3 in 7942 patients with operable breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012; 132(1): 317–326.

Ma W., Wang X., Xu G., Liu Z., Yin Z., et al. Distant metastasis prediction via a multi-feature fusion model in breast cancer. Aging (Albany NY). 2020; 12(18): 18151–18162.

Lian M., Zhang C., Zhang D., Chen P., Yang H., et al.The association of five preoperative serum tumor markers and pathological features in patients with breast cancer. J. Clin. Lab. Anal. 2019; 33(5):e22875.

Lee J. S., Park S., Park J. M., Cho J. H., Kim S. I. and Park B. W. Elevated levels of serum tumor markers CA 15–3 and CEA are prognostic factors for diagnosis of metastatic breast cancers. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2013; 141(3): 477–484.

Schnitt S. J. (2010). Classification and prognosis of invasive breast cancer: from morphology to molecular taxonomy. Modern Pathol. 2010; 2: S60–S64.

Selz J., Stevens D., Jouanneau L., Labib A. and Scodan R. L. Prognostic value of molecular subtypes, ki67 expression and impact of postmastectomy radiation therapy in breast cancer patients with negative lymph nodes after mastectomy. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2012; 84(5):1123–1132

Wu S-G., He Z-Y., Zhou J., Sun J-Y., Li F-Y., et al. Serum levels of CEA and CA15-3 in different molecular subtypes and prognostic value in Chinese breast cancer. Breast. (2014); 23(1): 88–93

Shao Y., Sun X., He Y., Liu C. and Liu H. Elevated levels of serum tumor markers CEA and CA15-3 are prognostic parameters for different molecular subtypes of breast cancer. PLoS One. 2015; 10(7): e0133830,

Zhao W., Li X., Wang W., Chen B., Wang L., et al. Association of Preoperative Serum Levels of CEA and CA15-3 with Molecular Subtypes of Breast Cancer. Dis. Markers. 2021: 5529106.

Mudduwa L. K. B., Wijayaratne G. B., Peiris H. H., Gunasekera S. N., Abeysiriwardhana D., and Liyanage N. Elevated pre-surgical CA15-3: does it predict the short-term disease-free survival of breast cancer patients without distant metastasis?. Int. J. Women's Health.2018; 10: 329–335

Fu Y. and Li H. Assessing clinical significance of serum CA15-3 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels in breast cancer patients: a meta-analysis. Med. Sci. Monit.2016; 22: 3154-62.

Taghizadeh A., Pourali L., Joudi M., Salehi M., Eshghi S., et al. Assessment of elevated serum tumor markers carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and cancer antigen 15-3 (CA15-3) among patients with different subtypes of metastatic. Middle East Journal of Cancer. 2019; 10(1): 17-22

Nam S., Lim W., Jeong J., Lee S., Choi J., et al. The prognostic significance of preoperative tumor marker (CEA, CA15‑3) elevation in breast cancer patients: data from the Korean Breast Cancer Society Registry. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 2019; 177: 669–678.

Li X., Dai D., Chen B., Tang H., Xie X. and Wei W. Determination of the prognostic value of preoperative CA15 3 and CEA in predicting the prognosis of young patients with breast cancer. Oncol. Lett. 2016; 16(4): 4679-4688.

Molina R., Auge J. M., Farrus B., Zanon G., Pahisa J., et al. Prospective evaluation of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen 15.3 (CA 15.3) in patients with primary locoregional breast cancer. Clinical Chemistry. 2010; 56(7):1148–1157.

Uygur M. M. and Gümüs M.The utility of serum tumor markers CEA and CA 15–3 for breast cancer prognosis and their association with clinicopathological parameters. Cancer Treat. Res. Commun. 2021; 28: 100402

Araz M., Beypinar I., Kazan S., Inci F., Celiker M., and Uysal M. Are preoperative serum CA15-3 levels different in breast cancer subgroups?. Curr. Probl. Cancer. 2019; 43(2): 115–122

Shah R.; Rosso K. and Nathanson S. D. Pathogenesis, prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of breast cancer. World J. Clin. Oncol. 2014; 5 (3):283–298.