切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华普通外科学文献(电子版) ›› 2014, Vol. 08 ›› Issue (05) : 365 -369. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-0793.2014.05.007

所属专题: 文献

论著

高尔基体糖蛋白73检测对原发性肝癌的诊断价值探讨
李新丰1,(), 周文瑞1, 王高雄1, 李承中1, 黄天从1   
  1. 1. 362000 泉州,福建医科大学附属第二医院肝胆胰外科
  • 收稿日期:2014-04-15 出版日期:2014-10-01
  • 通信作者: 李新丰
  • 基金资助:
    福建省医学创新课题资助项目(2012-CXB-22)

Diagnosis value of Golgi protein 73 detection for primary hepatic carcinoma

Xinfeng Li1,(), Wenrui Zhou1, Gaoxiong Wang1, Chengzhong Li1, Tiancong Huang1   

  1. 1. Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Quanzhou 362000, China
  • Received:2014-04-15 Published:2014-10-01
  • Corresponding author: Xinfeng Li
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Li Xinfeng, Email:
引用本文:

李新丰, 周文瑞, 王高雄, 李承中, 黄天从. 高尔基体糖蛋白73检测对原发性肝癌的诊断价值探讨[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2014, 08(05): 365-369.

Xinfeng Li, Wenrui Zhou, Gaoxiong Wang, Chengzhong Li, Tiancong Huang. Diagnosis value of Golgi protein 73 detection for primary hepatic carcinoma[J]. Chinese Archives of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2014, 08(05): 365-369.

目的

研究高尔基体糖蛋白73(GP73)、甲胎蛋白(AFP)、血管内皮生长因子(VEGF)在原发性肝癌(PHC)患者血清中的表达意义。

方法

43例PHC及9例肝良性肿瘤患者接受双抗体夹心ELISA法检测血清GP73、VEGF浓度及电化学发光法检测血清AFP浓度。

结果

GP73在不同年龄、性别、肿瘤大小间的表达差异无统计学意义。伴乙肝病毒携带的患者其GP73表达水平高于不伴有乙肝病毒携带的患者(P<0.05),伴有肝硬化的患者其GP73表达水平高于不伴有肝硬化的患者(P<0.05)。PHC组高于肝良性肿瘤组[(241.413±77.079)μg/L vs(101.866±74.192)μg/L,P<0.01]。手术前GP73、AFP和VEGF表达水平均高于手术后[(674.176±1 090.083)μg/L vs (178.560±289.330)μg/L,(256.666±164.760)μg/L vs(149.072±158.643)μg/L,P<0.01]。AFP、GP73、VEGF在PHC鉴别诊断的ROC曲线下面积分别为0.894、0.791、0.612,GP73面积为最大。GP73诊断PHC组敏感性及特异性为88.4%、77.7%,高于AFP。将AFP及GP73并联检测后发现,敏感度为96.8%,特异度为63.7%,与单项检测相比,GP73联合AFP可明显提高PHC诊断的准确性。

结论

GP73是一种灵敏度、特异度更高的PHC诊断的血清标志物,而GP73、AFP联合检测可提高PHC诊断准确性。

Objective

To investigate the expression and clinical significance of serum Golgi protein 73 (GP73) , Alpha-fetoproteins (AFP) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in primary hepatic cancer (PHC) patients.

Methods

Serum AFP, GP73 and VEGF levels of forty-three PHC patients and 9 patients with benign hepatic tumor were detected by electrochemiluminescence and double antibody sandwich ELISA.

Results

The serum levels of GP73 in different ages, gender, tumor sizes was not significantly different. The serum level of GP73 in hepatitis B virus carriers was significantly higher than no hepatitis B virus carriers, and that in hepatic cirrhosis group was significantly higher than no cirrhosis group (P<0.05) . The serum level of GP73 in PHC group was significantly higher than benign liver tumor group[ (241.413±77.079) vs (101.866±74.192) μg/L, P<0.01]. The serum levels of GP73 , AFP and VEGF before the operation were significantly higher than those after the operation [ (247.231±77.009) μg/L vs (128.334±92.235)μg/L, (674.176±1090.083) μg/L vs(178.560±289.330)μg/L,(256.666±164.76) μg/L vs (149.072±158.643) μg/L, all P<0.01]. The area of AFP, GP73, VEGF under the ROC curve in the differential diagnosis of PHC were 0.894, 0.791, 0.612. The sensitivity and specificity value of GP73 were 88.4% and 77.7%, higher than those of AFP. The sensitivity and specificity value of AFP combined with GP73 reached 96.8% and 63.7%, higher than either single detection.

Conclusion

GP73 is a sensitivity and specificity PHC diagnostic serum markers. AFP combined with GP73 detection has higher accuracy for PHC diagnosis.

图1 GP73浓度计算标准曲线
图2 VEGF浓度计算标准曲线
表1 不同组别之间血清GP73水平的比较(μg/L,t检验)
表2 两组患者之间血清GP73、VEGF、AFP的水平比较(μg/L,t检验,±s
表3 43例PHC组患者手术前后血清GP73、VEGF、AFP比较(μg/L,t检验,±s
图3 AFP单独及联合GP73诊断PHC的真实性和可靠性对比
图4 GP73、AFP、VEGF诊断肝癌的ROC曲线
[1]
Tamura Y,Igarashi M,Suda T, et al. Fucosylated fraction of alpha-fetoprotein as a predictor of prognosis in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after curative treatment[J]. Dig Dis Sci, 2010, 55(7): 2095-2101.
[2]
Sterling RK,Wright EC,Morgan TR, et al. Frequency of elevated hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) biomarkers in patients with advanced hepatitis C[J]. Am J Gastroenterol, 2012, 107(1): 64-74.
[3]
Kladney RD,Bulla GA,Guo L, et al. GP73, a novel golgi - localized protein upregulated by viral infection[J]. Gene, 2000, 249(1): 53-65.
[4]
Tian L,Wang Y,Xu D, et al. Serological AFP/Golgi protein 73 could be a new diagnostic parameter of hepatic diseases[J]. Int J Cancer, 2011, 129(8): 1923-1931.
[5]
李利军,李新丰,王高雄, 等. GP73联合AFP、VEGF检测对原发性肝癌的诊断价值[J]. 世界华人消化杂志, 2009, 17(29): 3056-3060.
[6]
Abelev GI,Perova SD,Khramkova NI, et al. Production of embryonal alpha-globulin by transplantable mouse hepatomas[J]. Transplantation, 1963, 1: 174-180.
[7]
Ruoslahti E,Seppala M. Studies of carcino-fetal proteins.3. DeveloPment of a Radioimmunoassay for-fetoprotein.Demonstration of-fetoprotein in serum of healthy human adults[J]. Int J Cancer, 1971, 8(3): 374-383.
[8]
Hu JS,Wu DW,Liang S, et al. GP73, a resident Golgi glycoprotein, is sensibility and specificity for hepatocellular carcinoma of diagnosis in a hepatitis B-endemic Asian population[J]. Med Oneol, 2010, 27(2): 339-345.
[9]
Marrero JA,Romano PR,Nikolaeva O, et al. GP73, a resident Golgi glycoprotein, is a novel serum marker for hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. J Hepatol, 2005, 43(6): 1007-1012.
[10]
Zhou Y,Yin X,Ying J, et al. Golgi protein 73 versus alpha-fetoprotein as a biomarker for hepatocellular carcinoma: a diagnostic meta-analysis[J]. BMC Cancer, 2012 , 16 (12) :17-20.
[11]
Tian L,Wang Y,Xu D, et al. Serological AFP/Golgi protein 73 could be a new diagnostic parameter of hepatic diseases[J]. Int J Cancer, 2011, 129(8): 1923-1931.
[12]
Stefaniuk P,Cianciara J,Wiercinska -Drapalo A. Present and future possibilities for early diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2010, 16(4): 418-424.
[13]
Poon RT,Lau C,Pang R, et al. High serum vascular endothelial growth factor levels predict poor prognosis after radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma: importance of tumor biomarker in ablative therapies[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2007, 14(6): 1835-1845.
[1] 兰青, 熊枝繁, 杨盛力. 甲胎蛋白在胃肝样腺癌中的作用机制及诊断预后研究进展[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 376-379.
[2] 王博, 白子锐, 李坚. 近红外二区新型血管内皮生长因子受体靶向探针在结直肠癌小鼠模型中的应用[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 173-177.
[3] 杨倩, 李翠芳, 张婉秋. 原发性肝癌自发性破裂出血急诊TACE术后的近远期预后及影响因素分析[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 33-36.
[4] 董奕琦, 罗耀兵, 刘涛, 张岚, 杨明. 血流拓扑学肝分段与Couinaud肝分段在原发性肝癌术前评估及手术规划中的应用价值[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(04): 423-426.
[5] 芦丹, 杨硕, 刘旭. VEGF、HMGB1、hs-CRP/Alb在AECOPD伴呼吸衰竭中的变化及预后分析[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2023, 16(04): 532-534.
[6] 王玉芹, 刘冠群, 曲福君. IDH1和VEGF对非小细胞肺癌的诊断意义[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2022, 15(06): 847-849.
[7] 韩冰, 顾劲扬. 深度学习神经网络在肝癌诊疗中的研究及应用前景[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(05): 480-485.
[8] 王楚风, 蒋安. 原发性肝癌的分子诊断[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(05): 499-503.
[9] 葛云鹏, 崔红元, 宋京海. 人工智能在原发性肝癌诊断、治疗及预后中的应用[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(04): 367-371.
[10] 赫嵘, 贾哲, 张珂, 李代京, 张萌, 蒋力. 基于PSM分析腹腔镜肝切除联合Hassab术治疗合并门静脉高压症肝癌疗效[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(04): 376-383.
[11] 陈家豪, 邝小红, 廖媛, 刘志欢, 陈忠城, 周文营. 血清学多参数Logistic回归模型对肝细胞癌的诊断价值[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(06): 615-618.
[12] 崔宏宇, 杨一佺, 郭黎霞, 吕爱国, 张志宏, 张新, 杨艳萍, 申然, 连丽英, 曹志刚, 王立芳, 胡建华, 范肃洁. 改良Ahmed青光眼引流阀植入术治疗闭角期新生血管性青光眼疗效的临床研究[J]. 中华眼科医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(02): 76-81.
[13] 吴晓翔, 杨波, 李景漩, 张凤玲, 郭桂辉, 郑少培. 脐动脉超声检查联合NLR、sFlt-1/PLGF对妊娠高血压综合征患者不良妊娠结局的预测价值[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 266-271.
[14] 黄学卿, 魏楠, 蒋天鹏, 安天志, 王黎洲, 许敏, 周石. 超声引导经远端桡动脉入路行肝癌TACE术的临床研究[J]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2023, 11(03): 251-256.
[15] 颜凡辉, 赵明俐, 李颖, 郭方明, 詹景冬, 赵英杰, 王阳, 张艳芬, 赵笑梅. 急性冠脉综合征患者冠脉血管病变程度与血清TNF-α、VEGF水平相关性研究[J]. 中华诊断学电子杂志, 2023, 11(03): 158-164.
阅读次数
全文


摘要