Lorenzo Garosi

Prognostic significance of CEA, CA 19-9 and CA 72-4 preoperative serum levels in gastric carcinoma.

The prognostic value of preoperative serum levels of CEA, CA 19-9 and CA 72-4 tumor markers was investigated in 153 patients resected for gastric cancer. The positivity rates for CEA, CA 19-9 and CA 72-4 were 20.9, 34.6 and 28.1%, respectively. Multiple logistic regression analysis for positive levels of tumor markers indicates that CEA positivity is significantly related to the depth of invasion (p < 0.005) and the presence of distant metastasis (p < 0.05), CA 19-9 positivity is related to nodal involvement (p < 0.05) and the depth of invasion (p < 0.05), whereas CA 72-4 positivity is influenced by tumor size (p < 0.005) and noncurative surgery (p < 0.05). Positive levels of each tumor marker were associated with a worse prognosis if compared with negative cases using univariate analysis. Multivariate analysis of curatively resected cases identified depth in gastric wall (p < 0.0001), nodal status (p < 0.0005), and tumor location in the upper third (p < 0.05) as significant prognostic variables; CEA, CA 19-9 and CA 72-4 serum positivity did not reach statistical significance. However, when the positivity of the three markers was associated, a p value < 0.05 was observed. The analysis of survival curves stratified by tumor stage revealed that marker positivity significantly affects survival in stages I, II and IV (p < 0.05). The combined assay of CEA, CA 19-9 and CA 72-4 preoperative serum levels provides additional prognostic information in patients resected for gastric cancer; patients with preoperative positivity for one of these tumor markers should be considered at high risk of recurrence even in early stages of gastric carcinoma.

Clinical utility of CEA, CA 19-9, and CA 72-4 in the follow-up of patients with resectable gastric cancer

BACKGROUND The aim of this longitudinal study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the serum tumor markers CEA, CA 19-9, and CA 72-4 in the early diagnosis of recurrence of gastric cancer. METHODS One hundred and thirty-three patients who had undergone potentially curative surgery were considered. Serum samples were obtained preoperatively, 1 week after surgery, and at every follow-up examination. Mean follow-up time for the entire patient population was 41 +/- 33 months, and 71 +/- 27 months for patients classified as disease-free. RESULTS Preoperative positivity was 16% for CEA, 35% for CA 19-9, and 20% for CA 72-4. Recurrence of disease was found in 75 patients (56%). Marker sensitivity in recurrent cases was 44% for CEA, 56% for CA 19-9, and 51% for CA 72-4; the combined use of the three markers increased sensitivity to 87%, which reached 100% in patients with positive preoperative levels. Marker specificity, evaluated in 58 disease-free patients, was 79% for CEA, 74% for CA 19-9, and 97% for CA 72-4. CONCLUSIONS The combined assay of CEA, CA 19-9, and CA 72-4 may be useful for early diagnosis of recurrence of gastric cancer; however, only CA 72-4 positivity should be considered a specific predictor of tumor recurrence.

High Incidence of Familial Gastric Cancer in Tuscany, a Region in Italy

Objectives: Only 1% of diffuse gastric cancers occur in families with autosomal dominant gastric cancer susceptibility. Germline mutations in the E-cadherin gene account for the hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC) syndrome. We studied a large cohort of gastric cancer patients from Tuscany, a region in Italy, to evaluate the presence of familial clustering of gastric cancer. Methods: 238 pedigrees were retrospectively studied by structured interviews. All probands with diagnosed gastric cancer were contacted in-person or by phone and tumor types were assessed in first- and second-degree relatives. Familial aggregation was investigated in order to search for families with suspected HDGC. Results: Familial aggregation for gastric cancer was observed in 79 of 238 cases (33.2%). Among these, there were 64 families (81%) with one gastric cancer other than the proband, 10 families with two gastric cancers (12.7%) and 5 families with three gastric cancers (6.3%). Fourteen families fulfilled the HDGC clinical criteria, one of them presenting with a pathogenic germline mutation in the E-cadherin gene (7.1%). Conclusions: The prevalence of familial HDGC appears extremely high. Since only one pathogenic germline mutation was noted in a family fulfilling the HDGC clinical criteria, factors other than E-cadherin gene mutations may contribute to the familial clustering of HDGC.

CDH1 C-160A promoter polymorphism and gastric cancer risk.

The objective of this study was to find out whether C-160A single nucleotide polymorphism of the promoter region of the E-cadherin gene might be a potential genetic marker for identifying individuals at risk for gastric cancer (GC). To test this hypothesis, 412 GC patients and 408 controls were analyzed statistically. A PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism assay was adopted for C-160A single nucleotide polymorphism detection. No statistical differences were found among CC, CA, and AA genotypes and the risk of GC, even stratifying according to age, sex, and area of residence. Similarly, genotype was not associated with intestinal or diffuse histotypes, or with cardia or noncardia carcinomas. In conclusion, the C-160A polymorphism is not associated with GC risk in the Italian population.

Assessment of a tumor bank: a thirty years experience of the University of Siena (Italy)

Tumor biobank plays a pivotal role in cancer biomedical research. The collection of a high variety of biological samples, including DNA, RNA, tissues, cells, blood, plasma and other body fluids, represents a necessary step to plan new strategies in the improvement of oncological patient care. Since 1985, a consolidated experience in biobanking management has been developed at the University of Siena (Italy). During these years, some information about clinico-pathology, surgery and a high number of human bispecimens have been collected. Herein, we described our experience in sampling management to improve the cancer research and the patient care.