Cite this article
Volume | Year
European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology (EJGO) is published by IMR Press from Volume 40 Issue 1 (2019). Previous articles were published by another publisher on a subscription basis, and they are hosted by IMR Press on imrpress.com as a courtesy and upon agreement with S.O.G.
Evaluation of the importance of the serum levels of CA-125, CA15-3, CA-19-9, carcinoembryonic antigen and alpha fetoprotein for distinguishing benign and malignant adnexal masses and contribution of different test combinations to diagnostic accuracy
M. Bozkurt1,*, A. E. Yumru1, İ. Aral2
1 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Taksim Education and Research Hospital, Istanbul
2 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Afyon Kocatepe University, Afyon (Turkey)
Eur. J. Gynaecol. Oncol. 2013, 34(6), 540–544;
Published: 10 December 2013
Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPPV) of the serum levels of CA-125, CA15-3, CA19-9, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) in the differentiation of benign and malignant ovarian tumors histopathologically diagnosed in patients and to determine the effects of the different test combinations on diagnostic accuracy. Material and Methods: One-hundred sixty-eight patients that had their preoperative CA-125, CA15-3, CA19-9, CEA, AFP levels assessed and that were subsequently surgically treated for adnexal masses, were included in the study. For each tumor markers in these patients with histopathologically-confirmed diagnosis, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV, and diagnostic accuracy, and odds ratio were calculated. Results: The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV of CA125 with cut-off 35 U/ml, were found to be 78.9%, 86.9%, 63.8%, and 93.3%, respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio of CA-125 with cut-off of 35 U/ml, was found to be 25. With cut-off 65 U/ml, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV values were 65.7%, 95.3%, 80.6%, and 90.5%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of CEA were 16%, 93%, 37%, and 83%, respectively. For AFP, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV were to be 2.6%, 98%, 33.3%, and 77.5%, respectively. For CA 15-3, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV were found to be 26.3% 96.1%, 66.6%, and 81.6%, respectively. Likelihood ratio tests: positive (LR+) = 6.83 and negative (LR-) = 0.76, with an odds ratio: 8.9. The risk of malignancy for adnexal masses with higher CA15-3 increased by approximately nine times. For CA19-9, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV value were found to be 18.4%, 93%, 43.7%, and 79.6%, respectively. CA19-9 was not statistically significant in the differentiation of benign and malignant of adnexal masses. Even the combinations of CA125 + CEA + CA19-9 and CA125 + CEA + CA19-9 + AFP and CA125 + CA15-3 made a small contribution (one, two, and four cases, respectively), but was not statistically significant. Conclusion: The levels of CA-125 and CA15-3 were found to be significant in order to distinguish benign and malign; CA 19-9, CEA, and AFP were not found to be significant. The different test combinations did not have contribution for diagnostic accuracy.
Benign and malign masses