ArticleIn vivo (Athens, Greece)
Identifying the Primary Tumor Site and Distinguishing False-positives in Patients With Elevated Serum Carcinoembryonic Antigen.
Article in In vivo (Athens, Greece). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Serum biomarker changes in pulmonary fibrosis with lung cancer and their correlation with patient survival prognosis.American journal of cancer research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimCarcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is a tumor marker that is frequently evaluated clinically for gastrointestinal and lung cancers. CEA is a glycoprotein antigen, and only the "value" measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay is provided in the clinical setting. At present, no method has been established to indicate whether the value is a false-positive elevation or whether there is a primary cancer site. To obtain clues on how to identify the originating site in patients with cancer with high CEA levels and to identify CEA false-positives in healthy individuals, we conducted an exploratory study. PATIENTS AND
methodsA pilot study was performed using the multivariate analysis method and principal component analysis-discriminant analysis on proteomic results obtained using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC/MS) in two patients with lung cancer, one patient with gastric cancer, and one healthy control individual.
resultsNo differences in specific proteins associated with high CEA levels were detected between lung and gastric cancers using LC/MS. Therefore, we performed statistical analysis using principal component analysis-discriminant analysis to determine whether there were differences in the protein signal patterns obtained using LC/MS. The results showed that the plots obtained for each patient and the healthy control were located in different quadrants of the four-quadrant matrix scatter plot.
conclusionOur results suggest the possibility of visually differentiating the primary tumor site in patients with elevated CEA levels. This method may also help recognize false-positive CEA results.
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.