𝔖 Bobbio Scriptorium
✦   LIBER   ✦

Serum macrophage migration-inhibitory factor as a diagnostic and prognostic biomarker for gastric cancer

✍ Scribed by Harry Hua-Xiang Xia; Yi Yang; Kent-Man Chu; Qing Gu; Yuan-Yuan Zhang; Hua He; Wai Man Wong; Suet-Yi Leung; Siu-Tsan Yuen; Man-Fung Yuen; Annie O.O. Chan; Benjamin C.Y. Wong

Publisher
John Wiley and Sons
Year
2009
Tongue
English
Weight
189 KB
Volume
115
Category
Article
ISSN
0008-543X

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

✦ Synopsis

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

This study aimed to determine the potential diagnostic value of migration‐inhibitory factor (MIF) for gastric cancer in patients presenting with dyspepsia and its prognostic value for gastric cancer.

METHODS:

A cohort of 97 patients with histologically confirmed gastric adenocarcinoma and 222 patients with dyspepsia were recruited. Enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay was used to measure serum MIF and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA).

RESULTS:

The serum MIF concentrations were 6554.0 ± 204.1 pg/mL and 1453.7 ± 79.9 pg/mL, respectively, in gastric cancer patients and dyspeptic patients (P < .001). Serum MIF levels increased with the advancing gastric pathologies (P < .001). With the cutoff value of 3230 pg/mL, serum MIF had sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 83.5%, 92.3%, and 89.7%, respectively, in diagnosing gastric cancer, whereas the rates were 60.8%, 83.3%, and 76.5%, respectively, for serum CEA. Gastric cancer patients with serum MIF levels above 6600 pg/mL had a lower 5‐year survival rate than those with serum MIF level below that level (P = .012). Higher serum CEA levels were also associated with poor survival. The prediction for 5‐year survival was even better (P = .0001), using a combination of serum MIF and CEA.

CONCLUSIONS:

Serum MIF level, which correlates with gastric MIF expression, is a better molecular marker than CEA in diagnosing gastric cancer in patients presenting with dyspepsia. A combination of serum MIF and CEA predicts 5‐year survival better than the individual test. Cancer 2009. © 2009 American Cancer Society.

📜 SIMILAR VOLUMES

Clinical utility of serum amyloid A and
Clinical utility of serum amyloid A and macrophage migration inhibitory factor as serum biomarkers for the detection of nonsmall cell lung carcinoma
✍ Nayela Khan; Charles J. Cromer; Michael Campa; Edward F. Patz Jr. 📂 Article 📅 2004 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 97 KB

## Abstract ## BACKGROUND Early lung carcinoma detection strategies involving imaging studies have yet to demonstrate a reduction in mortality. Identification of serum biomarkers that could complement radiologic studies and facilitate earlier diagnosis of lung carcinoma would be of significant ben

Macrophage migration inhibitory factor e
Macrophage migration inhibitory factor evaluation compared with prostate specific antigen as a biomarker in patients with prostate carcinoma
✍ Katherine L. Meyer-Siegler; Michael A. Bellino; Myron Tannenbaum 📂 Article 📅 2002 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 122 KB

## Abstract ## BACKGROUND Cytokines are polypeptides that constitute a class of chemical mediator molecules that modulate cell growth by inducing specific target gene expression. The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical usefulness of serum evaluation of the cytokine macrophage migr

Serum hepatocyte growth factor as a prog
Serum hepatocyte growth factor as a prognostic marker for stage II or III colorectal cancer patients
✍ Yuji Toiyama; Chikao Miki; Yasuhiro Inoue; Yoshinaga Okugawa; Kouji Tanaka; Masa 📂 Article 📅 2009 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 French ⚖ 205 KB

## Abstract We previously reported that a combination of serum hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) was useful for selecting early‐stage colorectal cancer patients with aggressive disease. The aim of the present study was to determine whether serum HGF could provide CEA