Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26779635›Full record

ArticleTumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine2016

Monitoring the treatment outcome in endometrial cancer patients by CEA and TATI.

Barbara Kozakiewicz, Małgorzata Chądzyńska, Ewa Dmoch-Gajzlerska, Małgorzata Stefaniak

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Barbara KozakiewiczM.Skłodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center and Institute of Oncology, 15 Wawelska St, 02-034, Warsaw, Poland. wum@wp.eu.
Małgorzata ChądzyńskaInstitute of Psychiatry and Neurology, Warsaw, Poland.
Ewa Dmoch-GajzlerskaFaculty of Health Sciences in Warsaw, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.
Małgorzata StefaniakFaculty of Health Sciences in Warsaw, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.
Medical University of Warsaw · PLInstitute of Psychiatry and Neurology · PLThe Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An attempt was made to compare the usefulness of determining markers carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and tumor-associated trypsin inhibitor (TATI) in endometrial cancer patients in whom recurrence or distant metastasis was diagnosed in observation after treatment. The study included 316 patients aged 32-81, average age of 61 years, SD = 8.72, with diagnosed endometrial cancer, treated between 1994 and 1995 at the Oncology Center in Warsaw and then under observation from 4 months to 17 years after completion of treatment. The levels of the markers TATI and CEA were assessed from the first five serum samples taken during postoperative radiotherapy and in the initial period of observation after completed treatment. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated, determining the sensitivity and specificity of both CEA and TATI in patients who experienced treatment failure, i.e., recurrence and distant metastasis. Assessing the sensitivity of the marker CEA, it was found that if in the third sample, i.e., during radiation therapy, the marker level increased by more than 20 % compared with the first sample, then recurrence of cancer occurred during the observation period in 75.9 % of patients and metastatic occurred in 69.7 % of patients. In the evaluation of the marker TATI, it was found that if the level of TATI between the first and the third sample increases by 10.6 % from the initial level, then in 84.4 % (sensitivity) of cases, this means the occurrence of cancer recurrence and in 75.7 % (sensitivity) of cases, the occurrence of metastasis. The specificity of both markers is low and not useful diagnostically.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAmino Acid Transport Systems, NeutralBiomarkers, TumorCarcinoembryonic AntigenCombined Modality TherapyEndometrial NeoplasmsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansImmunoenzyme TechniquesMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasm StagingAmino Acid Transport Systems, NeutralBiomarkers, TumorCarcinoembryonic AntigenSLC16A10 protein, humanCEA and TATI in endometrial cancerROC curvesSensitivity and specificity of CEA and TATI

Identifiers

PMID26779635
PMCPMC4990607
OpenAlexW2314301982

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.