Evidence Hub

Diagnostic value of combining preoperative inflammatory markers ratios with CA199 for patients with early-stage pancreatic cancer

Gu Y, Hua Q, Li Z, Zhang X, Lou C, Zhang Y, Wang W, Cai P et al.

BMC cancer, 2023

872 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: An early diagnosis of pancreatic cancer (PC) is extremely difficult because of the lack of sensitive liquid biopsy methods and effective biomarkers. We attempted to evaluate whether circulating inflammatory marker could complement CA199 for the detection of early-stage PC.

METHODS: We enrolled 430 patients with early-stage PC, 287 patients with other pancreatic tumors (OPT), and 401 healthy controls (HC). The patients and HC were randomly divided into a training set (n = 872) and two testing sets (n1 = 218, n2 = 28). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were investigated to evaluate the diagnostic performance of circulating inflammatory markers ratios, CA199, and combinations of the markers ratios in the training set, which would then be validated in the two testing sets.

RESULTS: Circulating fibrinogen, neutrophils, and monocytes in patients with PC were significantly higher while circulating albumin, prealbumin, lymphocytes, and platelets of patients with PC were significantly lower compared to those of HC and OPT (all P < 0.05). The fibrinogen-to-albumin (FAR), fibrinogen-to-prealbumin (FPR), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte (PLR), monocyte-to-lymphocyte (MLR), and fibrinogen-to-lymphocyte (FLR) ratios were significantly higher while the prognostic nutrition index values (PNI) were lower in patients with PC than in HC and OPT (all P < 0.05). Combining the FAR, FPR, and FLR with CA199 exhibited the best diagnostic value for…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 872 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free