ArticleTranslational cancer research2022
Diagnostic value of combined detection of CA72-4, CA19-9, and carcinoembryonic antigen comparing to CA72-4 alone in gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Translational cancer research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Carbohydrate antigen 72-4 and tumor-associated glycoprotein 72 - tumor marker: Past, present and future.World journal of gastrointestinal pathophysiology · 2026Review
- Computed tomography with carcinoembryonic antigen and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 in diagnosing lymph node metastasis of early gastric cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Article
- Serum CEA, CA19-9, and AFP as biomarkers for gastric cancer.Journal of medical biochemistry · 2026Article
- Diagnostic and prognostic value of serum markers CEA, CA50, CA19-9, CA72-4, and CYFRA21-1 in colon cancer.Journal of medical biochemistry · 2026Article
- RBM3-associated germline variants and their functional role in gastric cancer susceptibility and progression.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Review
- The value of circulating methylated septin 9 in the diagnosis and prognostic assessment of gastric cancer.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Diagnostic value of circulating tumor cells in gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Translational cancer research · 2025Article
- The Future of Tumor Markers: Advancing Early Malignancy Detection Through Omics Technologies, Continuous Monitoring, and Personalized Reference Intervals.Biomolecules · 2025Review
- Integrating TNF-α with Established Tumor Markers to Enhance Prognostic Accuracy in Gastric Cancer: A Prospective Observational Study.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of pleural fluid carbohydrate antigen 72-4 for malignant pleural effusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Translational cancer research · 2025Article
- Reply: Circulating Exosomal MicroRNA Signature Predicts Peritoneal Metastasis in Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Review
- Diagnostic and prognostic value of CD44v9 and TIM3 expression in CKOncology letters · 2024Article
- Serum tumor markers (carcinoembryonic antigen, carbohydrate antigen 19-9, carbohydrate antigen 72-4, carbohydrate antigen 24-2, ferritin) and gastric cancer prognosis correlation.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Protein Biomarkers of Gastric Preneoplasia and Cancer Lesions in Blood: A Comprehensive Review.Cancers · 2024Review
- Effect of cetuximab plus FOLFOX4 regimen on clinical outcomes in advanced gastric carcinoma patients receiving evidence-based care.World journal of clinical cases · 2024Article
- Global progress and future prospects of early gastric cancer screening.Journal of Cancer · 2024Review
- Determination of serum CA724 levels using fluorescence immunochromatography.BMC biotechnology · 2023Article
- Serum circular RNA hsa_circ_0000702 as a novel biomarker for diagnosis of gastric cancer.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Gastric cancer (GC) is one of the most common malignant tumors in humans. Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9, and CA72-4 are all serum tumor markers for diagnosis of gastric cancer. However, the results of studies reporting the diagnosis of the combined three varied. In this study, the combined diagnostic performance of these 3 serum tumor markers was systematically evaluated. Methods: PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang data were searched for literature on serum tumor markers CEA, CA19-9, and CA72-4 in the diagnosis of gastric cancer. The inclusion criteria were designed according to the Participants, Intervention, Control, Outcomes, Study (PICOS) principles. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) scoring scale was used to assess the quality of the literature. After extracting the data, Stata 16.0 software was used for meta-analysis. Results: A total of 10 articles were finally included, and a total of 6,574 patients participated in diagnosis, 3,077 for confirmed GC and 3,497 for non-GC respectively. Meta-analysis results showed that the diagnostic sensitivity of the combined diagnosis of the 3 tumor markers was 0.67 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.54, 0.77], the specificity was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.82, 0.93), the positive likelihood ratio was 5.9 (95% CI: 3.5, 9.8), the negative likelihood ratio was 0.38 (95% CI: 0.27, 0.53), and the diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was 16 (95% CI: 8, 32). The diagnostic sensitivity of CA72-4 diagnosis alone was 0.58 (95% CI: 0.40, 0.73), specificity was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.80, 0.90), the positive likelihood ratio was 4.0 (95% CI: 3.1, 5.1), the negative likelihood ratio was 0.49 (95% CI: 0.34, 0.71), and the DOR was 8 (95% CI: 5, 14). The area under the ROC curve (AUC) values of the combined three diagnosis and CA72-4 diagnosis alone were 0.87 (95% CI: 0.83, 0.89) and 0.84 (95% CI: 0.81, 0.87), respectively, the difference was statistically significant (Z=4.86, P<0.05). Discussion: The combined use of the 3 tumor markers has higher sensitivity and specificity than single marker diagnosis in the diagnosis of gastric cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.