Clinical value of TV-CDS combined with serum tumor markers in diagnosis of ovarian cancer

Yu,Chunying; Dou,Ting; Liu,Yun; Liu,Ruirong

doi:10.3892/ol.2020.11705

Clinical value of TV-CDS combined with serum tumor markers in diagnosis of ovarian cancer

Authors:
- Chunying Yu
- Ting Dou
- Yun Liu
- Ruirong Liu
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Ultrasonic Medicine, The Third People's Hospital of Qingdao, Qingdao, Shandong 266041, P.R. China
Published online on: June 5, 2020 https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2020.11705
Pages: 2028-2034

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

Clinical application value was investigated of transvaginal color Doppler ultrasound (TV-CDS) combined with serum tumor markers carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA125), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and osteopontin (OPN) in the diagnosis of ovarian cancer (OC). One hundred and six patients with OC [malignant tumor group (MTG)] and fifty patients with benign ovarian diseases [benign control group (BCG)] were selected. Both groups of patients underwent TV-CDS examination. The lesion morphology and internal structure were observed, and the tumor blood flow signal, resistance index (RI) and pulsability index (PI) under ultrasound were determined. Serum CA125 was detected by electrochemiluminescence, and VEGF and OPN levels were detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. The incidence of irregular lesion morphology, unclear boundary, uneven internal echo, microcalcification and side-acoustic images in OC group (OCG) was significantly higher than that in BCG (P<0.01). As for blood flow grading, most patients in the MTG were in grade Ⅱ and Ⅲ, while most patients in the BCG were in grade 0. Compared with BCG, the flow RI and PI in the OCG were significantly reduced (P<0.01). The levels of serum CA125, VEGF and OPN in OCG were significantly higher than those in BCG. The expression levels of serum CA125, VEGF and OPN in OC patients with clinical high stage (stage III and IV), poorly differentiated, ascites, recurrence and metastasis were significantly higher than those in patients with clinical low stage (stage I and II), well differentiated, no ascites and no recurrence and metastasis (P<0.05). With the disappearance of the tumor or the decrease of tumor load, the serum marker levels after treatment were significantly lower than that before treatment (P<0.05). The sensitivity and accuracy of the combined examination in the diagnosis of OC were obviously improved compared with the single and partial combined examinations (P<0.05). In conclusion, combined examination can significantly improve the sensitivity and accuracy of OC, which is conducive to early diagnosis and clinical intervention of OC.

View Figures

View References

1	Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, Ferlay J, Lortet-Tieulent J and Jemal A: Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 65:87–108. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
2	Ulusoy S, Akbayir O, Numanoglu C, Ulusoy N, Odabas E and Gulkilik A: The risk of malignancy index in discrimination of adnexal masses. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 96:186–191. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3	Menon U, Talaat A, Rosenthal AN, Macdonald ND, Jeyerajah AR, Skates SJ, Sibley K, Oram DH and Jacobs IJ: Performance of ultrasound as a second line test to serum CA125 in ovarian cancer screening. BJOG. 121:35–39. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4	Schelling M, Braun M, Kuhn W, Bogner G, Gruber R, Gnirs J, Schneider KT, Ulm K, Rutke S and Staudach A: Combined transvaginal B-mode and color Doppler sonography for differential diagnosis of ovarian tumors: Results of a multivariate logistic regression analysis. Gynecol Oncol. 77:78–86. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	Goldberger S, Tepper R, Markov S and Beyth Y: Transvaginal sonographic characterization of ovarian disease: Evaluation of a new scoring system to predict ovarian malignancy. Obstet Gynecol. 78:1151–1152. 1991.PubMed/NCBI
6	Kupesic S and Kurjak A: Contrast-enhanced, three-dimensional power Doppler sonography for differentiation of adnexal masses. Obstet Gynecol. 96:452–458. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
7	Benjapibal M, Sunsaneevitayakul P, Boriboonhirunsarn D, Sutanthavibul A and Chakorngowit M: Color Doppler ultraso-nography for prediction of malignant ovarian tumors. J Med Assoc Thai. 85:709–715. 2002.PubMed/NCBI
8	Sawicki W, Spiewankiewicz B, Cendrowski K and Stelmachów J: Preoperative discrimination between malignant and benign adnexal masses with transvaginal ultrasonography and colour blood flow imaging. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 22:137–142. 2001.PubMed/NCBI
9	kurjak A, Kupesic S, Sparac V, Prka M and Bekavac I: The detection of stage I ovarian cancer by three-dimensional sonography and power Doppler. Gynecol Oncol. 90:258–264. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10	Fishman DA, Cohen L, Blank SV, Shulman L, Singh D, Bozorgi K, Tamura R, Timor-Tritsch I and Schwartz PE: The role of ultrasound evaluation in the detection of early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 192:1214–1221, discussion 1221-1222. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Gupta KK, Gupta VK and Naumann RW: Ovarian cancer: Screening and future directions. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 29:195–200. 2019. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Yang Z, Zhao B and Li L: The significance of the change pattern of serum CA125 level for judging prognosis and diagnosing recurrences of epithelial ovarian cancer. J Ovarian Res. 9:572016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	Schummer M, Drescher C, Forrest R, Gough S, Thorpe J, Hellström I, Hellström KE and Urban N: Evaluation of ovarian cancer remission markers HE4, MMP7 and Mesothelin by comparison to the established marker CA125. Gynecol Oncol. 125:65–69. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
14	Dorigo O and Berek JS: Personalizing CA125 levels for ovarian cancer screening. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 4:1356–1359. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15	Goel HL and Mercurio AM: VEGF targets the tumour cell. Nat Rev Cancer. 13:871–882. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
16	Vempati P, Popel AS and MacGabhann F: Formation of VEGF isoform-specific spatial distributions governing angiogenesis: Computational analysis. BMC Syst Biol. 5:592011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17	Wada H, Ura S, Kitaoka S, Satoh-Asahara N, Horie T, Ono K, Takaya T, Takanabe-Mori R, Akao M, Abe M, et al: Distinct characteristics of circulating vascular endothelial growth factor-A and C levels in human subjects. PLoS One. 6:e293512011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
18	Wang X, Chen X, Fang J and Yang C: Overexpression of both VEGF-A and VEGF-C in gastric cancer correlates with prognosis, and silencing of both is effective to inhibit cancer growth. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 6:586–597. 2013.PubMed/NCBI
19	Li L, Wang L, Zhang W, Tang B, Zhang J, Song H, Yao D, Tang Y, Chen X, Yang Z, et al: Correlation of serum VEGF levels with clinical stage, therapy efficacy, tumor metastasis and patient survival in ovarian cancer. Anticancer Res. 24:1973–1979. 2004.PubMed/NCBI
20	Lan Z, Fu D, Yu X and Xi M: Diagnostic values of osteopontin combined with CA125 for ovarian cancer: A meta-analysis. Fam Cancer. 15:221–230. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
21	Ramchandani D and Weber GF: Interactions between osteopontin and vascular endothelial growth factor: Implications for cancer. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1855:202–222. 2015.PubMed/NCBI
22	Wang YD, Chen H, Liu HQ and Hao M: Correlation between ovarian neoplasm and serum levels of osteopontin: A meta-analysis. Tumour Biol. 35:11799–11808. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
23	Rao G, Wang H, Li B, Huang L, Xue D, Wang X, Jin H, Wang J, Zhu Y, Lu Y, et al: Reciprocal interactions between tumor-associated macrophages and CD44-positive cancer cells via osteopontin/CD44 promote tumorigenicity in colorectal cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 19:785–797. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
24	Kim JH, Skates SJ, Uede T, Wong KK, Schorge JO, Feltmate CM, Berkowitz RS, Cramer DW and Mok SC: Osteopontin as a potential diagnostic biomarker for ovarian cancer. JAMA. 287:1671–1679. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
25	Tilli TM, Franco VF, Robbs BK, Wanderley JL, da Silva FR, de Mello KD, Viola JP, Weber GF and Gimba ER: Osteopontin-c splicing isoform contributes to ovarian cancer progression. Mol Cancer Res. 9:280–293. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI