Serum HE4 levels combined with CE CT imaging improve the management of monitoring women affected by epithelial ovarian cancer

Manganaro,Lucia; Michienzi,Simona; Vinci,Valeria; Falzarano,Renato; Saldari,Matteo; Granato,Teresa; Viggiani,Valentina; Frati,Luigi; Anastasi,Emanuela

doi:10.3892/or.2013.2682

Serum HE4 levels combined with CE CT imaging improve the management of monitoring women affected by epithelial ovarian cancer

Authors:
- Lucia Manganaro
- Simona Michienzi
- Valeria Vinci
- Renato Falzarano
- Matteo Saldari
- Teresa Granato
- Valentina Viggiani
- Luigi Frati
- Emanuela Anastasi
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Radiological, Oncological and Anatomopathological Sciences, ‘Sapienza’ University, Umberto I Hospital, I-00161 Rome, Italy, Department of Molecular Medicine, ‘Sapienza’ University, Umberto I Hospital, I-00161 Rome, Italy, CNR-IBPM, National Research Council, I-00161 Rome, Italy
Published online on: August 21, 2013 https://doi.org/10.3892/or.2013.2682
Pages: 2481-2487

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to evaluate human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) as a marker of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) relapse and the combination of this biomarker with contrast-enhanced high-resolution multidetector row computed tomography CE CT imaging to impove the monitoring of EOC patients. Twenty-one patients with advanced EOC (FIGO III/IV) who underwent surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy were retrospectively selected. Each patient contributed 3 serum samples drawn at 3-month intervals: time interval I (1-3 months from surgery), time interval II (4-6 months from surgery) and time interval III (7-10 months from surgery). Serum HE4 and cancer antigen-125 (CA-125) levels were determined by EIA and IRMA assays, respectively. Nine out of the 21 (Group A) women had disease relapse while 12 out of the 21 (Group B) women had stable disease during the follow-up study. Twenty out of the 21 patients underwent at least two CE CT follow-ups with an interval time of ~6 months. One patient did not undergo a second CE CT. In patients with relapsed EOC, an increase in HE4 was noted in 22, 78 and 89% of patients within the time intervals I, II and III, respectively. Positivity for CA-125 was found later at time interval III and only in 44% of patients. Conversely, for EOC patients in remission, increase over the threshold level was observed only for marker CA-125 (4/12). The evaluation of imaging findings at interval time II showed a significant correlation with high levels of HE4 in 6 out of 9 patients with recurrent disease. This study supports the hypothesis that HE4 may serve as an early biomarker for recurrence of EOC. Moreover, HE4 serum levels combined with CE CT imaging may improve the monitoring management of women affected by ovarian cancer.

View Figures

View References

1	Kobayashi E, Ueda Y, Matsuzaki S, Yokoyama T, Kimura T, Yoshino K, Fujita M, Kimura T and Enomoto T: Biomarkers for screening, diagnosis, and monitoring of ovarian cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 21:1902–1912. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
2	Berek JS, Crum C and Friedlander M: Cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, and peritoneum. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 119(Suppl 2): S118–S129. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3	Husseinzadeh N: Status of tumor markers in epithelial ovarian cancer has there been any progress? A review Gynecol Oncol. 120:152–157. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4	Rosen DG, Wang L, Atkinson JN, Yu Y, Lu KH, Diamandis EP, Hellstrom I, Mok SC, Liu J and Bast RC Jr: Potential markers that complement expression of CA125 in epithelial ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 99:267–277. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	Bast RC Jr, Badgwell D, Lu Z, et al: New tumor markers: CA125 and beyond. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 15(Suppl 3): 274–281. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
6	Medeiros LR, Rosa DD, da Rosa MI, et al: Accuracy of CA 125 in the diagnosis of ovarian tumors: a quantitative systematic review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 142:99–105. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
7	Kirchhoff C: Molecular characterization of epididymal proteins. Rev Reprod. 3:86–95. 1998. View Article : Google Scholar
8	Galgano MT, Hampton GM and Frierson HF Jr: Comprehensive analysis of HE4 expression in normal and malignant human tissues. Mod Pathol. 19:847–853. 2006.PubMed/NCBI
9	Hellström I, Raycraft J, Hayden-Ledbetter M, et al: The HE4 (WFDC2) protein is a biomarker for ovarian carcinoma. Cancer Res. 63:3695–3700. 2003.PubMed/NCBI
10	Li J, Dowdy S, Tipton T, Podratz K, Lu WG, Xie X and Jiang SW: HE4 as a biomarker for ovarian and endometrial cancer management. Expert Rev Mol Diagn. 9:555–566. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Anastasi E, Marchei GG, Viggiani V, et al: HE4: a new potential early biomarker for the recurrence of ovarian cancer. Tumour Biol. 31:113–119. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Moore RG and Maclaughlan S: Current clinical use of biomarkers for epithelial ovarian cancer. Curr Opin Oncol. 22:492–497. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	Tempany CM, Zou KH, Silverman SG, Brown DL, Kurtz AB and McNeil BJ: Staging of advanced ovarian cancer: comparison of imaging modalities - report from the Radiological Diagnostic Oncology Group. Radiology. 215:761–767. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
14	Gronlund B, Høgdall C, Hilden J, Engelholm SA, Høgdall EV and Hansen HH: Should CA-125 response criteria be preferred to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) for prognostication during second-line chemotherapy of ovarian carcinoma? J Clin Oncol. 22:4051–4058. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar
15	Gu P, Pan LL, Wu SQ, et al: CA 125, PET alone, PET-CT, CT and MRI in diagnosing recurrent ovarian carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol. 71:164–174. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
16	Togashi K: Ovarian cancer: the clinical role of US, CT, and MRI. Eur Radiol. 13(Suppl 4): L87–L104. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17	Goonewardene TI, Hall MR and Rustin GJ: Management of asymptomatic patients on follow-up for ovarian cancer with rising CA-125 concentrations. Lancet Oncol. 8:813–821. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
18	Aebi S and Castiglione M; ESMO Guidelines Working Group. Newly and relapsed epithelial ovarian carcinoma: ESMO clinical recommendations for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 20(Suppl 4): 21–23. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
19	Sturgeon CM, Duffy MJ, Stenman U-H, et al: National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry laboratory medicine practice guidelines for use of tumor markers in testicular, prostate, colorectal, breast, and ovarian cancers. Clin Chem. 54:e11–e79. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar
20	Bast RC Jr: Status of tumor markers in ovarian cancer screening. J Clin Oncol. 21(Suppl 10): s200–s205. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar
21	Moore RG, Jaube-Raughley M, Brown AK, et al: Comparison of a novel multiple marker assay vs. the Risk of Malignancy Index for the prediction of epithelial ovarian cancer in patients with a pelvic mass. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 203:e1–e6. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
22	Schummer M, Drescher C, Forrest R, Gough S, Thorpe J, Hellström I, Hellström KE and Urban N: Evaluation of ovarian cancer remission markers HE4, MMP7 and Mesothelin by comparison to the established marker CA125. Gynecol Oncol. 125:65–69. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
23	Hori SS and Gambhir SS: Mathematical model identifies blood biomarker-based early cancer detection strategies and limitations. Sci Transl Med. 3:109ra1162011.PubMed/NCBI
24	Häfner N, Nicolaus K, Weiss S, Frey M, Diebolder H, Rengsberger M, Dürst M and Runnebaum IB: p53-autoantibody may be more sensitive than CA-125 in monitoring microscopic and macroscopic residual disease after primary therapy for epithelial ovarian cancer. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 139:1207–1210. 2013.PubMed/NCBI
25	Rustin GJ: Follow-up with CA125 after primary therapy of advanced ovarian cancer has major implications for treatment outcome and trial performances and should not be routinely performed. Ann Oncol. 22(Suppl 8): viii45–iii48. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar
26	Rustin GJ, van der Burg ME, Griffin CL, et al: Early versus delayed treatment of relapsed ovarian cancer (MRC OV05/EORTC 55955): a randomised trial. Lancet. 376:1155–1163. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
27	Forstner R, Sala E, Kinkel K and Spencer JA; European Society of Urogenital Radiology. ESUR guidelines: ovarian cancer staging and follow-up. Eur Radiol. 20:2773–2780. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
28	Coakley FV, Choi PH, Gougoutas CA, Pothuri B, Venkatraman E, Chi D, Bergman A and Hricak H: Peritoneal metastases: detection with spiral CT in patients with ovarian cancer. Radiology. 223:495–499. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
29	Sala E, Kataoka M, Pandit-Taskar N, Ishill N, Mironov S, Moskowitz CS, Mironov O, Collins MA, Chi DS, Larson S and Hricak H: Recurrent ovarian cancer: use of contrast-enhanced CT and PET/CT to accurately localize tumor recurrence and to predict patients’ survival. Radiology. 257:125–134. 2010.PubMed/NCBI
30	Diniz Bizzo SM, Meira DD, Lima JM, da Mororó JS, Casali-da-Rocha JC and Ornellas MH: Peritoneal VEGF burden as a predictor of cytoreductive surgery outcome in women with epithelial ovarian cancer. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 109:113–117. 2010.PubMed/NCBI
31	Kang S: The role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in ovarian cancer patients with extensive tumor burden. J Gynecol Oncol. 22:299–300. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
32	Midulla C, Manganaro L, Longo F, Viggiani V, Frati L, Granato T and Anastasi E: HE4 combined with MDCT imaging is a good marker in the evaluation of disease extension in advanced epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Tumour Biol. 33:1291–1298. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI