TY - JOUR
T1 - The pitfalls of CA19-9
T2 - Routine testing and comparison of two automated immunoassays in a reference oncology center
AU - Passerini, Rita
AU - Cassatella, Maria C.
AU - Boveri, Sara
AU - Salvatici, Michela
AU - Radice, Davide
AU - Zorzino, Laura
AU - Galli, Claudio
AU - Sandri, Maria T.
PY - 2012/8
Y1 - 2012/8
N2 - We evaluated CA19-9 as a marker of various malignancies and compared the results of 2 commercial immunoassays. The Abbott ARCHITECT i2000 and Roche cobas 410 immunoassays were used on 500 consecutive samples to evaluate the frequency of positive results by cancer type and the correlation between assays. The patients were tested before or after surgery and/or during chemotherapy. The rate of results exceeding conventional thresholds was 92.3% in pancreatic cancer, 36.8% in gastric cancer, and ranged from 3.0% to 35.9% in other tumors. Agreement (90.6%) and correlation (R 2 = 0.865) between the 2 assays were good and the frequency of highly discordant results was low (6/500). In some cases, interference by heterophilic antibodies was demonstrated. The 2 methods were comparable in diagnostic accuracy and had good correlation but are not interchangeable. Patients should always be monitored for CA19-9 with the same method and it should be indicated in the report. Copyright
AB - We evaluated CA19-9 as a marker of various malignancies and compared the results of 2 commercial immunoassays. The Abbott ARCHITECT i2000 and Roche cobas 410 immunoassays were used on 500 consecutive samples to evaluate the frequency of positive results by cancer type and the correlation between assays. The patients were tested before or after surgery and/or during chemotherapy. The rate of results exceeding conventional thresholds was 92.3% in pancreatic cancer, 36.8% in gastric cancer, and ranged from 3.0% to 35.9% in other tumors. Agreement (90.6%) and correlation (R 2 = 0.865) between the 2 assays were good and the frequency of highly discordant results was low (6/500). In some cases, interference by heterophilic antibodies was demonstrated. The 2 methods were comparable in diagnostic accuracy and had good correlation but are not interchangeable. Patients should always be monitored for CA19-9 with the same method and it should be indicated in the report. Copyright
KW - Automated immunoassays
KW - CA19-9
KW - Interference
KW - Standardization
KW - Tumor markers
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84865403407&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84865403407&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1309/AJCPOPNPLLCYR07H
DO - 10.1309/AJCPOPNPLLCYR07H
M3 - Article
C2 - 22904141
AN - SCOPUS:84865403407
VL - 138
SP - 281
EP - 287
JO - American Journal of Clinical Pathology
JF - American Journal of Clinical Pathology
SN - 0002-9173
IS - 2
ER -