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

File Download Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
Supplementary
  • Basic View
  • Metadata View
  • XML View
TitleSerum macrophage migration-inhibitory factor as a diagnostic and prognostic biomarker for gastric cancer
AuthorsXia, HHX2 3
Yang, Y1 2
Chu, KM2
Gu, Q2
Zhang, YY4
He, H2
Wong, WM2
Leung, SY2
Yuen, ST2
Yuen, MF2
Chan, AOO2
Wong, BCY2
KeywordsCarcinoembryonic antigen
Diagnosis
Gastric cancer
Macrophage migration-inhibitory factor
Prognosis
Issue Date2009
PublisherJohn Wiley & Sons, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/28741
CitationCancer, 2009, v. 115 n. 23, p. 5441-5449 [How to Cite?]
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.24609
AbstractBACKGROUND: 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. © 2009 American Cancer Society.
ISSN0008-543X
2011 Impact Factor: 4.771
2011 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.578
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.24609
ISI Accession Number IDWOS:000271918600013
ReferencesReferences in Scopus
DC Field
Value
dc.contributor.authorXia, HHX
dc.contributor.authorYang, Y
dc.contributor.authorChu, KM
dc.contributor.authorGu, Q
dc.contributor.authorZhang, YY
dc.contributor.authorHe, H
dc.contributor.authorWong, WM
dc.contributor.authorLeung, SY
dc.contributor.authorYuen, ST
dc.contributor.authorYuen, MF
dc.contributor.authorChan, AOO
dc.contributor.authorWong, BCY
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-06T07:19:35Z
dc.date.available2010-09-06T07:19:35Z
dc.date.issued2009
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: 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. © 2009 American Cancer Society.
dc.description.natureLink_to_subscribed_fulltext
dc.identifier.citationCancer, 2009, v. 115 n. 23, p. 5441-5449 [How to Cite?]
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.24609
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.24609
dc.identifier.epage5449
dc.identifier.hkuros168260
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000271918600013
dc.identifier.issn0008-543X
2011 Impact Factor: 4.771
2011 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.578
dc.identifier.issue23
dc.identifier.openurl
dc.identifier.pmid19685530
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-72249100819
dc.identifier.spage5441
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/76283
dc.identifier.volume115
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherJohn Wiley & Sons, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/28741
dc.publisher.placeUnited States
dc.relation.ispartofCancer
dc.relation.referencesReferences in Scopus
dc.rightsCancer. Copyright © John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
dc.subject.meshAged
dc.subject.meshDyspepsia - pathology
dc.subject.meshFemale
dc.subject.meshHumans
dc.subject.meshMacrophage Migration-Inhibitory Factors - blood
dc.subject.meshMale
dc.subject.meshMiddle Aged
dc.subject.meshPrognosis
dc.subject.meshStomach Neoplasms - blood - diagnosis - mortality
dc.subject.meshTumor Markers, Biological - blood
dc.subjectCarcinoembryonic antigen
dc.subjectDiagnosis
dc.subjectGastric cancer
dc.subjectMacrophage migration-inhibitory factor
dc.subjectPrognosis
dc.titleSerum macrophage migration-inhibitory factor as a diagnostic and prognostic biomarker for gastric cancer
dc.typeArticle
Author Affiliations
  1. Johns Hopkins University
  2. The University of Hong Kong
  3. Novartis Pharma
  4. Fudan University