ArticleAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP2024
Exploring the Prognostic Value of CS15-3 Tumor Marker in Breast Cancer Recurrence.
Article in Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe most prevalent tumor marker for breast cancer is CS15-3. This marker's elevated serum levels have been proven to predict a patient's risk of developing the condition again. PURPOSES: The purpose of this study was to ascertain the sensitivity of blood CS15-3 levels in the identification of breast cancer recurrence. PATIENTS AND
methodsA prospective cohort follow-up analytical study was conducted at Basra Oncology Center from early 2016 to the end of 2022. The study included 178 females aged ≥18 years with histologically confirmed invasive ductal breast cancer. CS15-3 had been evaluated for all included cases on two occasions: the first, at the time of diagnosis or remission, and the second, at the time of progression. The tumor marker (CS15-3) was evaluated using a Cobas e411 analyzer (Roche Diagnostics International Ltd).
resultsThe mean age showed no significant difference between the groups (P=0.581). The duration of progression was higher among those with the luminal group (40.60± 42.08). Those with bony and liver metastasis were mostly among luminal (50.0%) and HER 2+ (52.4%) groups respectively. At the time of diagnosis CS15-3 tumor marker showed no significant difference between the three groups, while at the time of progression, the luminal group showed higher means (120.74± 95.07) compared to others with a significant mean difference of (-99.84± 94.43).
conclusionsAge, disease stages, and co-morbidity have no significant influence on the distribution between groups of luminal. The duration of progression was higher among those in the luminal group. Osseous and hepatic secondaries are mostly among luminal and hormonal receptors positive. Initially, at the time of diagnosis CS15-3 marker expressed no significant difference between the groups, whereas at the time of progression, the luminal group expressed a higher means of level of the CS15-3 marker.
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.