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
. 2023 Nov 3;13(21):3379.
doi: 10.3390/diagnostics13213379.

Are Tumor Marker Tests Applied Appropriately in Clinical Practice? A Healthcare Claims Data Analysis

Affiliations

Are Tumor Marker Tests Applied Appropriately in Clinical Practice? A Healthcare Claims Data Analysis

Sabrina M Stollberg et al. Diagnostics (Basel). .

Abstract

Tumor markers (TM) are crucial in the monitoring of cancer treatment. However, inappropriate requests for screening reasons have a high risk of false positive and negative findings, which can lead to patient anxiety and unnecessary follow-up examinations. We aimed to assess the appropriateness of TM testing in outpatient practice in Switzerland. We conducted a retrospective cohort study based on healthcare claims data. Patients who had received at least one out of seven TM tests (CEA, CA19-9, CA125, CA15-3, CA72-4, Calcitonin, or NSE) between 2018 and 2021 were analyzed. Appropriate determinations were defined as a request with a corresponding cancer-related diagnosis or intervention. Appropriateness of TM determination by patient characteristics and prescriber specialty was estimated by using multivariate analyses. A total of 51,395 TM determinations in 36,537 patients were included. An amount of 41.6% of all TM were determined appropriately. General practitioners most often determined TM (44.3%) and had the lowest number of appropriate requests (27.8%). A strong predictor for appropriate determinations were requests by medical oncologists. A remarkable proportion of TM testing was performed inappropriately, particularly in the primary care setting. Our results suggest that a considerable proportion of the population is at risk for various harms associated with misinterpretations of TM test results.

Keywords: guideline adherence; healthcare claims data; inappropriateness; laboratory testing; overutilization; tumor marker determination.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

    1. Duffy M.J., Lamerz R., Haglund C., Nicolini A., Kalousová M., Holubec L., Sturgeon C. Tumor markers in colorectal cancer, gastric cancer and gastrointestinal stromal cancers: European group on tumor markers 2014 guidelines update. Int. J. Cancer. 2014;134:2513–2522. doi: 10.1002/ijc.28384. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sturgeon C.M., Duffy M.J., Stenman U.-H., Lilja H., Brunner N., Chan D.W., Babaian R., Bast R.C., Dowell B., Esteva F.J., et al. National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry laboratory medicine practice guidelines for use of tumor markers in testicular, prostate, colorectal, breast, and ovarian cancers. Clin. Chem. 2008;54:e11–e79. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2008.105601. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Gion M., Trevisiol C., Rutjes A.W.S., Rainato G., Fabricio A.S.C. Circulating tumor markers: A guide to their appropriate clinical use | Comparative summary of recommendations from clinical practice guidelines (PART 1) Int. J. Biol. Markers. 2016;31:e332–e367. doi: 10.5301/jbm.5000251. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Gion M., Trevisiol C., Rutjes A.W.S., Rainato G., Fabricio A.S.C. Circulating tumor markers: A guide to their appropriate clinical use | Comparative summary of recommendations from clinical practice guidelines (PART 2) Int. J. Biol. Markers. 2017;32:e1–e52. doi: 10.5301/ijbm.5000259. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Gion M., Trevisiol C., Rutjes A.W.S., Rainato G., Fabricio A.S.C. Circulating tumor markers: A guide to their appropriate clinical use | Comparative summary of recommendations from clinical practice guidelines (PART 3) Int. J. Biol. Markers. 2017;32:e147–e181. doi: 10.5301/ijbm.5000272. - DOI - PubMed