![]()
38
| 4 | 2006
Klinisk Biokemi i Norden
Hva nå?
Nye potensielle markører for bruk ved disse syk-
dommene dukker opp i litteraturen med ujevne
mellomrom, men de fleste dør stille hen uten
noensinne å nå klinisk rutine. Behovet for sensiti-
ve biokjemiske markører er størst ved ovarialcan-
cer, og her ser vi en rekke tumormarkørkandidater
i horisonten. Spesiell oppmerksomhet fortjener
kanskje ”proteomikk-tilnærmingen”, hvor man ser
etter peptidmønstre i serum [15]. Men fallgrubene
og artefaktene er mange, og for en med 36 års
fartstid i rutinelaboratorietet ved et spesialsykehus
for cancer er det fristende å sitere et gammelt ord-
tak: ”Nye markører er alltid best”. I rutinelaborato-
riet har vi fortsatt en jobb å gjøre, for å lære oss
selv og klinikerne å bruke de laboratorieverktøy vi
har, på best mulig måte for pasienten.
Referanser
1. Cancer in Norway 2004. Cancer Registry of
Norway, Oslo 2006.
2. Karsten U, von Mensdorff-Pouilly S, Goletz
S. What makes MUC1 a tumor antigen?
Tumor Biol 2005; 26(4); 217-20.
3. Norum LF, Sauren AM, Rye PD, Nustad K.
New immunoassays for MUC1 in breast can-
cer. Tumor Biol 2001; 22:216-22.
4. Molina R, Barak V, van Dalen A, Duffy M,
Einarsson R, Gion M,
et al
. Tumor markers
in breast cancer – European Group on Tumor
Markers recommendations. Tumor Biol 2005;
26:281-93.
5. Duffy M. Serum tumor markers in breast
cancer: are they of clinical value? Clin Chem
2006; 52(3): 345-51.
6. Collins RF, Bekker HL, Dodwell DJ. Follow-
up care of patients treated for breast cancer:
a structured review. Cancer Treat Rev 2004;
30(1): 19-35.
7. Kong S-Y, Nam B-H, Lee KS, Kwon Y, Lee
ES, Seong M-W,
et al
. Predicting tissue HER2
status using serum HER2 levels in patients
with metastatic breast cancer. Clin Chem
2006; 52(8): 1510-5.
8. Bast RC Jr, Feeney M, Lazarus H, Nadler LM,
Colvin RB, Knapp RC. Reactivity of a mono-
clonal antibody with human ovarian carci-
noma. J Clin Invest 1981; 68: 1331-7.
9. Nustad K, Bast RC, O’Brien TJ, Nilsson O,
Seguin P, Suresh MR. Specificity and affi-
nity of 26 monoclonal antibodies against
the CA125 antigen. First report from the
ISOBM TD-1 workshop. Tumor Biol 1996;
17: 196-219.
10. Yin BW, Lloyd KO. Molecular cloning of the
CA125 ovarian cancer antigen: identifica-
tion as a new mucin, MUC16. J Biol Chem
2001; 276(29): 26371-5.
11. Norum LF, Erikstein B, Nustad K. Elevated
CA125 in breast cancer – a sign of advan-
ced disease. Tumor Biol 2001; 22(4): 223-8.
12. Fields MM, Chevlen E. Ovarian cancer
screening: a look at the evidence. Clin J
Oncol Nurs 2006; 10(1): 77-81.
13. Gaarenstroom KN, van der Hiel B, Tollenaar
RA, Vink GR, Jansen FW, van Asperen CJ,
et al
. Efficacy of screening women at high
risk of hereditary ovarian cancer: results
of an 11-year cohort study. Int J Gynecol
Cancer 2006; 16 Suppl 1: 54-9.
14. Olivier RI, Lubsen-Brandsma MA, Verhoef
S, van Beurden M. CA125 and transvaginal
ultrasound monitoring in high-risk women
cannot prevent the diagnosis of advan-
ced ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2006;
100(1): 20-6.
15. Bast RC Jr, Badgwell D, Lu Z, Marquez R,
Rosen D, Liu J,
et al
. New tumor markers:
CA125 and beyond. Int J Gynecol Cancer
2005; 15 Suppl 3: 274-81.
16. Tingulstad S, Hagen B, Skjeldestad FE,
Onsrud M, Kiserud T, Halvorsen T, Nustad
K. Evaluation of a risk of malignancy index
based on serum CA125, ultrasound findings
and menopausal status in the pre-operative
diagnosis of pelvic masses. Br J Obstet
Gynaecol 1996; 103(8), 626-31.
17. Bailey J, Tailor A, Naik R, Lopes A, Godfrey
K, Hatem HM,
et al
. Risk of malignancy
index for referral of ovarian cancer cases
to a tertiary center: does it identify the cor-
rect cases? Int J Gynecol Cancer 2006; 16
Suppl 1: 30-4.
18. Vergote IB, Bormer OP, Abeler VM.
Evaluation of serum CA125 levels in the
monitoring of ovarian cancer. Am J Obstet
Gynecol 1987; 157(1): 88-92.
(Fortsat fra side 37)
