Validation of combined carcinoembryonic antigen and glucose testing in pancreatic cyst fluid to differentiate mucinous from non-mucinous cysts.

Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) Diagnostic accuracy Endoscopy: Endoscopic ultrasound diagnostic and therapeutic Glucose Hepatobiliary tract and spleen Pancreatic cyst fluid Pancreatic cystic neoplasms

Journal

Surgical endoscopy
ISSN: 1432-2218
Titre abrégé: Surg Endosc
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8806653

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
05 2023
Historique:
received: 17 08 2022
accepted: 05 12 2022
medline: 5 5 2023
pubmed: 20 1 2023
entrez: 19 1 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

More accurate diagnosis of mucinous cysts will reduce the risk of unnecessary pancreatic surgery. Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and glucose in pancreatic cyst fluid (PCF) can differentiate mucinous from non-mucinous pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCN). The current study assessed the value of combined CEA and glucose testing in PCF. Cross-sectional validation study including prospectively collected PCF from patients undergoing endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and pancreatic surgery. We performed laboratory measurements for CEA and glucose and measured glucose levels by a hand glucometer. Primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy evaluated by receiver operator curves (ROC), sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive value (PPV, NPV). Overall, PCF was collected from 63 patients, including 33 (52%) with mucinous and 30 (48%) with non-mucinous PCN. Histopathology (n = 36; 57%), cytopathology (n = 2; 3%), or clinical and/or radiological diagnosis (n = 25; 40%) was used as reference standard. Combined CEA (cut-off ≥ 192 ng/ml) and laboratory glucose testing (cut-off ≤ 50 mg/dL) reached 92% specificity and 48% sensitivity, whereas either positive CEA (cut-off ≥ 20 ng/ml) or glucose testing (cut-off ≤ 50 mg/dL) showed 97% sensitivity and 50% specificity. Sensitivity and specificity were 80% and 68% for CEA ≥ 20 ng/mL versus 50% and 93% for CEA ≥ 192 ng/mL (the conventional cut-off level). Laboratory and glucometer glucose both reached 100% sensitivity and 60% and 45% specificity, respectively. None of the biomarkers and cut-offs reached a PPV exceeding 90%, whereas both glucose measurements had a NPV of 100% (i.e., high glucose excludes a mucinous cyst). Combined CEA and glucose testing in PCF reached high specificity and sensitivity for differentiating mucinous from non-mucinous PCN. Glucose testing, whether alone or combined with the new CEA cut-off (≥ 20 ng/mL), reached > 95% sensitivity for mucinous cysts, whereas only glucose reached a NPV > 95%.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
More accurate diagnosis of mucinous cysts will reduce the risk of unnecessary pancreatic surgery. Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and glucose in pancreatic cyst fluid (PCF) can differentiate mucinous from non-mucinous pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCN). The current study assessed the value of combined CEA and glucose testing in PCF.
METHODS
Cross-sectional validation study including prospectively collected PCF from patients undergoing endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and pancreatic surgery. We performed laboratory measurements for CEA and glucose and measured glucose levels by a hand glucometer. Primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy evaluated by receiver operator curves (ROC), sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive value (PPV, NPV).
RESULTS
Overall, PCF was collected from 63 patients, including 33 (52%) with mucinous and 30 (48%) with non-mucinous PCN. Histopathology (n = 36; 57%), cytopathology (n = 2; 3%), or clinical and/or radiological diagnosis (n = 25; 40%) was used as reference standard. Combined CEA (cut-off ≥ 192 ng/ml) and laboratory glucose testing (cut-off ≤ 50 mg/dL) reached 92% specificity and 48% sensitivity, whereas either positive CEA (cut-off ≥ 20 ng/ml) or glucose testing (cut-off ≤ 50 mg/dL) showed 97% sensitivity and 50% specificity. Sensitivity and specificity were 80% and 68% for CEA ≥ 20 ng/mL versus 50% and 93% for CEA ≥ 192 ng/mL (the conventional cut-off level). Laboratory and glucometer glucose both reached 100% sensitivity and 60% and 45% specificity, respectively. None of the biomarkers and cut-offs reached a PPV exceeding 90%, whereas both glucose measurements had a NPV of 100% (i.e., high glucose excludes a mucinous cyst).
CONCLUSION
Combined CEA and glucose testing in PCF reached high specificity and sensitivity for differentiating mucinous from non-mucinous PCN. Glucose testing, whether alone or combined with the new CEA cut-off (≥ 20 ng/mL), reached > 95% sensitivity for mucinous cysts, whereas only glucose reached a NPV > 95%.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36656409
doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09822-6
pii: 10.1007/s00464-022-09822-6
pmc: PMC10156886
doi:

Substances chimiques

Carcinoembryonic Antigen 0
Glucose IY9XDZ35W2

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

3739-3746

Informations de copyright

© 2023. The Author(s).

Références

Gastrointest Endosc. 2021 Oct;94(4):698-712.e6
pubmed: 33964311
Pancreatology. 2017 Sep - Oct;17(5):738-753
pubmed: 28735806
Am J Gastroenterol. 2015 Jun;110(6):909-14
pubmed: 25986360
Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019 Nov;16(11):676-689
pubmed: 31527862
Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Dec;82(6):1060-9
pubmed: 26077458
Ann Clin Biochem. 2022 Mar;59(2):125-133
pubmed: 34719238
Gut. 2018 Jan;67(1):138-145
pubmed: 28877981
Gastroenterology. 2004 May;126(5):1330-6
pubmed: 15131794
J Clin Gastroenterol. 2022 Feb 1;56(2):e131-e136
pubmed: 33731599
Gastrointest Endosc. 2021 May;93(5):1019-1033.e5
pubmed: 33359054
BMJ. 2015 Oct 28;351:h5527
pubmed: 26511519
Gut. 2018 May;67(5):789-804
pubmed: 29574408
Gastrointest Endosc. 2017 May;85(5):1025-1031
pubmed: 27693645

Auteurs

Myrte Gorris (M)

Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Frederike Dijk (F)

Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. f.dijk@amsterdamUMC.nl.
Department of Pathology, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. f.dijk@amsterdamUMC.nl.

Arantza Farina (A)

Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Pathology, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Johannes B Halfwerk (JB)

Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Pathology, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Gerrit K Hooijer (GK)

Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Pathology, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Selma J Lekkerkerker (SJ)

Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Rogier P Voermans (RP)

Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Mattheus C Wielenga (MC)

Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Marc G Besselink (MG)

Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Jeanin E van Hooft (JE)

Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH