Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Sep 23;11(22):6565-6570.
doi: 10.7150/jca.49252. eCollection 2020.

CEA Decline Predicts Tumor Regression and Prognosis in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Patients with Elevated Baseline CEA

Zerong Cai  1 , Lingyu Huang  1 , Yufeng Chen  1 , Xiaoyu Xie  2 , Yifeng Zou  1 , Ping Lan  1   3   4 , Xiaojian Wu  1   3   4
Affiliations

CEA Decline Predicts Tumor Regression and Prognosis in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Patients with Elevated Baseline CEA

Zerong Cai et al. J Cancer. .

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the value of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) decline in predicting pathological tumor regression and outcome for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) patients who received neoadjuvant therapy with elevated baseline CEA. Methods: LARC patients with elevated pre-treatment CEA who received neoadjuvant therapy and radical tumor resection were retrospectively collected. Serum CEA level during treatment were recorded and the predictive value of pre-treatment CEA, post-treatment CEA and CEA ratio (CEApost-treatment /CEApre-treatment) for tumor regression grade (TRG), overall survival and diseases free survival were estimated by logistic regression or cox proportional hazard regression. Results: Two hundred and eighty-four LARC patients with elevated pre-treatment CEA were enrolled and the baseline, post-treatment CEA level and CEA ratio were 11.87 (5.02-731.31) ng/ml, 4.23 (0.50-173.80) ng/ml and 0.31(0.01-2.55) respectively. CEA level in 59.2% of the patients declined to normal after neoadjuvant therapy. Multivariate analysis showed that CEA ratio was an independent predictor for TRG (OR=3.463, 95% CI: 1.269-9.446, P=0.015) and tumor downstage (OR=0.393, 95% CI: 0.187-0.829, P=0.014). Patients with normalized post-treatment CEA level had better overall survival (P=0.010) and disease free survival (P=0.003) than those with elevated CEA level. Higher post-treatment CEA was an independent unfavored predictor for overall survival in LARC patients with elevated pre-treatment CEA (OR=1.042, 95% CI: 1.017-1.067, P=0.001). Conclusion: Post/pre-treatment CEA ratio predicted tumor regression in term of TRG and tumor downstage for LARC patients with elevated pre-treatment CEA and higher post-treatment CEA predicted poor overall survival.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interest exists.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Kalan-Meier survival curves of overall survival and disease-free survival according to post-treatment CEA level.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Sauer R, Becker H, Hohenberger W. et al. Preoperative versus postoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004-10-21. 2004;351(17):1731–1740. - PubMed
    1. Smith JD, Ruby JA, Goodman KA. et al. Nonoperative management of rectal cancer with complete clinical response after neoadjuvant therapy. Ann Surg. 2012-12-01. 2012;256(6):965–972. - PubMed
    1. Kalyan A, Rozelle S, Benson AR. Neoadjuvant treatment of rectal cancer: where are we now? Gastroenterol Rep (Oxf). 2016-08-01. 2016;4(3):206–209. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Xiao J, Cai Z, Li W. et al. Tumor Volume Reduction Rate Predicts Pathologic Tumor Response of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy alone: Results from a Prospective Trial. J Cancer. 2015-01-20. 2015;6(7):636–642. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nie K, Shi L, Chen Q. et al. Rectal Cancer: Assessment of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Outcome based on Radiomics of Multiparametric MRI. Clin Cancer Res. 2016-11-01. 2016;22(21):5256–5264. - PMC - PubMed