Comparing EMCA and CA15.3 in Breast Cancer Treatment Response
Author Information
Author(s): A.R. Dixon, M.R. Price, C.W. Hand, P.E.C. Sibley, C. Selby, R.W. Blamey
Primary Institution: City Hospital Nottingham
Hypothesis
Does the sequential measurement of EMCA correlate with the clinical course of metastatic breast cancer compared to CA 15.3?
Conclusion
EMCA is a potentially more useful marker than CA 15.3 for monitoring therapy in advanced breast cancer.
Supporting Evidence
- EMCA showed a highly significant correlation with UICC assessed response at 6 months.
- EMCA had a sensitivity of 80% and specificity of 91% at 2 months.
- Four patients unassessable by CA 15.3 were assessable by EMCA.
Takeaway
This study looked at two tests to see how well they can track breast cancer treatment. One test, EMCA, might be better than the other, CA 15.3.
Methodology
The study involved 77 women with metastatic breast cancer, comparing EMCA and CA 15.3 levels before and during treatment.
Limitations
The study only included women with newly diagnosed UICC assessable metastatic breast cancer.
Participant Demographics
Mean age of participants was 57.9 years, with 59 receiving hormonal therapy and 18 receiving chemotherapy.
Statistical Information
P-Value
p<0.001
Statistical Significance
p<0.001
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website