본문으로 건너뛰기
← 뒤로

Head-to-head comparison of the diagnostic value of fecal and serum carcinoembryonic antigen for colorectal cancer detection.

2/5 보강
International journal of cancer 📖 저널 OA 54.7% 2022: 0/3 OA 2023: 1/3 OA 2024: 6/16 OA 2025: 32/61 OA 2026: 146/241 OA 2022~2026 2026 OA Colorectal Cancer Screening and Dete
Retraction 확인
출처
PubMed DOI OpenAlex 마지막 보강 2026-04-30

PICO 자동 추출 (휴리스틱, conf 2/4)

유사 논문
P · Population 대상 환자/모집단
with and without mechanical homogenization.
I · Intervention 중재 / 시술
추출되지 않음
C · Comparison 대조 / 비교
추출되지 않음
O · Outcome 결과 / 결론
In conclusion, fCEA is inferior to sCEA as a non-invasive biomarker for CRC detection.
OpenAlex 토픽 · Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection Radiopharmaceutical Chemistry and Applications Intraperitoneal and Appendiceal Malignancies

Li X, Zhao Z, Stassen L, Maya AP, Bhardwaj M, Seum T

📖 무료 전문 🔓 OA PDF oa
📝 환자 설명용 한 줄

This study aimed to conduct a head-to-head comparison of the diagnostic value of serum carcinoembryonic antigen (sCEA) and fecal CEA (fCEA) for colorectal cancer (CRC) detection.

🔬 핵심 임상 통계 (초록에서 자동 추출 — 원문 검증 권장)
  • p-value p < .001
  • p-value p = .067
  • Sensitivity 85%
  • Specificity 36.2%

이 논문을 인용하기

↓ .bib ↓ .ris
APA Xianzhe Li, Zitong Zhao, et al. (2026). Head-to-head comparison of the diagnostic value of fecal and serum carcinoembryonic antigen for colorectal cancer detection.. International journal of cancer. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.70435
MLA Xianzhe Li, et al.. "Head-to-head comparison of the diagnostic value of fecal and serum carcinoembryonic antigen for colorectal cancer detection.." International journal of cancer, 2026.
PMID 41957956 ↗
DOI 10.1002/ijc.70435

Abstract

This study aimed to conduct a head-to-head comparison of the diagnostic value of serum carcinoembryonic antigen (sCEA) and fecal CEA (fCEA) for colorectal cancer (CRC) detection. Fecal and serum samples from 80 CRC cases at various tumor stages and 100 controls free of colorectal neoplasms at screening colonoscopy were randomly selected from two ongoing large prospective CRC detection studies (IDA and BLITZ) for CEA measurements. Fecal samples were processed using two methods: with and without mechanical homogenization. Diagnostic performance (area under the curve value [AUC], sensitivity) of fCEA and sCEA was compared individually and in combination with fecal immunochemical test (FIT). The fCEA concentrations obtained using both sample processing methods were highly correlated in both CRC cases and controls, but neither correlated with sCEA. The sCEA concentrations demonstrated significantly greater differences between the CRC and control group compared to fCEA concentrations. The diagnostic performance of fCEA obtained with both fecal sample processing methods was significantly lower than that of sCEA (AUC: 0.62 and 0.57 vs. 0.83, both p < .001; sensitivity at 85% specificity: 36.2% and 26.2% vs. 52.5%, p = .067 and .002). Algorithms combining sCEA with fCEA did not significantly improve the diagnostic performance compared to sCEA alone. Combining FIT with sCEA improved diagnostic performance over FIT alone. However, combining FIT with fCEA showed no improvement. In conclusion, fCEA is inferior to sCEA as a non-invasive biomarker for CRC detection. Combination of FIT with sCEA demonstrates greater potential for CRC screening than combination of FIT with fCEA.

🏷️ 키워드 / MeSH 📖 같은 키워드 OA만

같은 제1저자의 인용 많은 논문 (5)

🏷️ 같은 키워드 · 무료전문 — 이 논문 MeSH/keyword 기반

🔓 OA PDF 열기