检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:高杨[1] 刘延红[1] 夏洪印[1] 何维敬[1] 张兰
机构地区:[1]山东大学齐鲁医院,山东济南250012 [2]山东省电影学校医务室
出 处:《山东医药》2001年第21期5-7,共3页Shandong Medical Journal
摘 要:为探讨肿瘤标志物联合检测在食管癌诊断中的临床意义 ,分别用酶免法 (EIA)、酶法、高效液相色谱法 (HPL C)等测定了 49例食管癌及 2 72例非肿瘤患者的 2 9种血清肿瘤标志物 ,应用特异性、阳性预期值、敏感性、阴性预期值、总有效率、5项平均值 6个指标综合评价各种肿瘤标志物的价值。结果 2 9种肿瘤标志物中 ,平均排序前 6位的是糖类抗原 2 42 (CA2 42 )、精眯 (SPM)、腐胺 (PU )、肿瘤相关物质群 (TSGF)、谷胱甘肽转移酶(GST)、角蛋白 - 19(CYFRA2 11) ,TSGF、GST和癌胚抗原 (CEA)的敏感性为 84.6 2 %。其中前二项敏感性为75 .5 1% ,三项中任一项阳性所致的特异性为 48.6 8%。提示 TSGF、GST、CEA联合检测对食管癌诊断有实用价值。To explore the chonical diagnostic value of combined detection of multipile tumor markers in esophageal cancer.29 types of tumor markers in 49 patients with esophageal cancer were detected by enzyme linked immunosobent assay (ELISA),enzyme methed and highperformance liquid chromatography(HPLC) The clinical diagnostic value of different type of tumor markers were evaluated using specificity,positive expective value,sensitivity,negtive expective value,total valid and averag e value Results showed that in the 29 types of tumor markers,the best six tumor markers of average value were cancer antigen 242(CA242),spermidine (spm),putrescine (pu),tumor supplide group of factors(TSGF),glutathione s-transferase (GST) and cytokeratins(CYFRA-211),the sensitivity of TSGF, GST and cacinoembryonic antigen (CEA) was 84 62%,and the sensitivity of the first two markers among the three was 75 51%,the specificity of one markers positive only among the three waw 48 68%. This sugg ests combined dectection of TSGF,GST and CEA has virtual clinical diagnostic value in esophageal cancer.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.43