Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 3985564

Lack of comparability between CEA analyses using three different methods.

H Davidson·D R Pledger·A Belfield
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Three different methods for the assay of carcinoembryonic antigen were investigated--radioimmunoassay, enzyme-linked immunoassay, and a commercial immunoradiometric assay. Two standard preparations of CEA were used: the 1st British Standard (73/601) and a commercial preparation obtained as a component of the IRMA kit. Serum samples were assayed by each method against each standard material. Significant differences between results were obtained when the different methods were compared. When using the two standards in the same assay system no significant differences were found between results. A possible explanation and the implications of these findings for the routine assay of CEA are discussed.

Explore related subjects

Carcinoembryonic AntigenEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayHumansImmunoassayRadioimmunoassayReagent Kits, DiagnosticComparative StudyJournal ArticleResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

H Davidson, D R Pledger, A Belfield. 1985. Lack of comparability between CEA analyses using three different methods.. https://doi.org/10.1177/000456328502200111

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

Strategies of follow-up for colorectal cancer: a survey of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons.

BACKGROUND: The postoperative surveillance of patients who have undergone curative treatment for colorectal cancer (CRC) is controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the follow-up practice of colorectal surgeons in the United States. METHODS: A postal survey was sent to 1641 active members of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons practicing in the United States to assess the frequency of follow-up and the methods used in the surveillance of asymptomatic patients following curative surgery for CRC. RESULTS: Only 582 (36%) of the questionnaires that were sent were returned fully completed. Of these, 173 surgeons (30%) followed their patients according to guidelines. Ninety-four percent of surgeons during the first year and 81% during the second year saw their patients regularly every 3 or 6 months. The most widely used tests were colonoscopy and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) testing. There was wide discrepancy in the frequency of follow-up and techniques employed, with only about 50% of surgeons following recommended practice. CONCLUSIONS: Surveillance strategies mainly rely on clinical examination, CEA monitoring and colonoscopy. No clear consensus on surveillance programs for CRC patients exists.

Carcinoembryonic Antigen↗
PubMed2006

Colorectal cancer follow-up: useful or useless?

Follow-up of surgically treated colorectal cancer patients is not supported by objectively certain data. Despite the thousands of investigations reported in the scientific literature, only six randomized prospective studies and two meta-analysis of randomized studies provide data suggesting clear conclusions. Our review of the literature revealed that intensive colorectal follow-up should be performed even if the long-term survival benefit is small. The timing and investigations conducted in follow-ups diverge. The inconsistency of follow-ups is revealed by the fact that the leading USA and European societies propose different guidelines. One datum that the literature agrees on is that pancolonoscopy performed at 3-5 year intervals in colorectal cancer surgery patients supports diagnosis of adenomatous polyps and metachronous cancers. Cost analysis have shown that intensive follow-up would certainly exceed the cut-off point level set for every additional year of good quality of life.

Carcinoembryonic Antigen↗
PubMed2006

Antitumor activity of chimeric immunoreceptor gene-modified Tc1 and Th1 cells against autologous carcinoembryonic antigen-expressing colon cancer cells.

To generate tumor-specific and interferon (IFN)-gamma-producing Tc1 and Th1 cells applicable for many cancer patients, we previously developed a protocol for generating carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA)-specific Tc1 and Th1 cells from healthy human T cells by transduction with a lentivirus containing a chimeric immunoglobulin T-cell receptor (cIgTCR) gene composed of single-chain variable fragments from an anti-CEA-specific monoclonal antibody fused to an intracellular signaling domain of CD28 and CD3zeta. These cells, designated Tc1-T and Th1-T bodies, respectively, showed strong antitumor activity against CEA-expressing tumor cells in RAG2-/- mice when both of them were transferred. However, it remains unclear whether it is possible to generate Tc1-T and Th1-T bodies from cancer patients with defective T-cell function because of significant immunosuppression. Here, we prepared Tc1-T and Th1-T bodies from T cells of a colon cancer patient, and asked whether these T bodies can exert effective T-cell function against autologous tumor cells. These T bodies showed high cytotoxicity and produced IFN-gamma in response to CEA-expressing autologous tumor cells, even in the presence of soluble CEA. It was also demonstrated that Th1-T bodies supported the survival of Tc1-T bodies through cell-to-cell interactions. Furthermore, our protocol utilized retrovirus for cIgTCR transduction to achieve better induction efficiency compared to lentivirus-mediated transduction. Taken together, our findings here indicate that retrovirally transduced Tc1-T and Th1-T bodies will become a promising strategy for adoptive immunotherapy of human cancer.

Carcinoembryonic Antigen↗