Včasná detekce rekurentního karcinomu vaječníků, současné využití onkomarkerů, zobrazovací metody a budoucí perspektivy

Stáhnout PDF English version

Autoři: V. Smoligová; J. Kosťun; P. Stráník; J. Presl
Působiště autorů: Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Charles University Medical Faculty and University Hospital in Pilsen
Vyšlo v časopise: Ceska Gynekol 2025; 90(4): 333-338
Kategorie: Přehledová práce
doi: https://doi.org/10.48095/cccg2025333

Souhrn

Karcinom ovaria patří mezi nejzávažnější typy gynekologických nádorů. Obvykle bývá diagnostikován v pokročilých stadiích, a to zejména kvůli asymptomatickému průběhu či nespecifickým příznakům časných stadií. Vyznačuje se také tendencí často recidivovat, a snižovat tak celkové přežití pacientek. Tento článek se zaměřuje na možnosti detekce návratu onemocnění v rámci follow-up pacientek po kompletní remisi. Podle analyzované literatury přináší potenciál časného záchytu recidiv sledování hladin onkomarkerů CA-125 a HE4 v kombinaci se zobrazovacími metodami, jako je expertní ultrasonografické vyšetření, CT a pozitronové emisní metody. Příslib přináší i nejmodernější typ počítačové tomografie –⁠ photon counting CT s vysokou detekční schopností a zároveň menší radiační zátěží. Prostor pro další diskuzi pak přináší otázka dalšího postupu u časně detekované asymptomatické recidivy.

Klíčová slova:

recidiva – následná péče – rakovina vaječníků – nádorové markery – včasná diagnóza – diagnostické zobrazování

Zdroje

1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE et al. Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin 2022; 72 (1): 7–33. doi: 10.3322/caac.21708.

2. Lu Z, Chen J. Introduction of WHO classification of tumours of female reproductive organs, fourth edition. Zhonghua Bing Li Xue Za Zhi 2014; 43 (10): 649–650.

3. Goff BA, Mandel LS, Drescher CW et al. Development of an ovarian cancer symptom index: possibilities for earlier detection. Cancer 2007; 109 (2): 221–227. doi: 10.1002/cncr. 22371.

4. Siegel RL, Giaquinto AN, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2024. CA Cancer J Clin 2024; 74 (1): 12–49. doi: 10.3322/caac.21820.

5. Rustin GJ, van der Burg ME, Griffin CL et al. Early versus delayed treatment of relapsed ovarian cancer (MRC OV05/EORTC 55955): a randomised trial. Lancet 2010; 376 (9747): 1155–1163. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736 (10) 612 68-8.

6. Rustin G, van der Burg M, Griffin C et al. Early versus delayed treatment of relapsed ovarian cancer. Lancet 2011; 377 (9763): 380–381. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736 (11) 60126-8.

7. Miller RE, Rustin GJ. How to follow-up patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. Curr Opin Oncol 2010; 22 (5): 498–502. doi: 10.1097/CCO.0 b013e32833ae8b6.

8. Ledermann JA, Matias-Guiu X, Amant F et al. ESGO-ESMO-ESP consensus conference recommendations on ovarian cancer: pathology and molecular biology and early, advanced and recurrent disease. Ann Oncol 2024; 35 (3): 248–266. doi: 10.1016/j.annonc.2023. 11.015.

9. Nustad K, Bast RC Jr, Brien TJ et al. Specificity and affinity of 26 monoclonal antibodies against the CA 125 antigen: first report from the ISOBM TD-1 workshop. International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine. Tumour Biol 1996; 17 (4): 196–219. doi: 10.1159/000217982.

10. Urban N. Specific keynote: ovarian cancer risk assessment and the potential for early detection. Gynecol Oncol 2003; 88 (1 Pt 2): S75–S83. doi: 10.1006/gyno.2002.6689.

11. Markman M, Webster K, Zanotti K et al. Use of tamoxifen in asymptomatic patients with recurrent small-volume ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2004; 93 (2): 390–393. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2004.01.035.

12. Meden H, Fattahi-Meibodi A. CA 125 in benign gynecological conditions. Int J Biol Markers 1998; 13 (4): 231–237. doi: 10.1177/1724600 89801300411.

13. Qing X, Liu L, Mao X. A clinical diagnostic value analysis of serum CA125, CA199, and HE4 in women with early ovarian cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. Computat Math Methods Med 2022; 2022 : 9339325. doi: 10.1155/2022/9339325.

14. Sturgeon CM, Duffy MJ, Walker G. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines for early detection of ovarian cancer: the pivotal role of the clinical laboratory. Ann Clin Biochem 2011; 48 (Pt 4): 295–299. doi: 10.1258/acb.2011.011117.

15. Drapkin R, von Horsten HH, Lin Y et al. Human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) is a secreted glycoprotein that is overexpressed by serous and endometrioid ovarian carcinomas. Cancer Res 2005; 65 (6): 2162–2169. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-3924.

16. Dochez V, Caillon H, Vaucel E et al. Biomarkers and algorithms for diagnosis of ovarian cancer: CA125, HE4, RMI and ROMA, a review. J Ovarian Res 2019; 12 (1): 28. doi: 10.1186/s13 048-019-0503-7.

17. Plotti F, Guzzo F, Schirò T et al. Role of human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) in detecting recurrence in CA125 negative ovarian cancer patients. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2019; 29 (4): 768–771. doi: 10.1136/ijgc-2019 -⁠ 000211.

18. FDA CfDaRH. 2008 [online]. Available from: https: //www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf7/K072939.pdf.

19. FDA CfDaRH. 2012 [online]. Available from: https: //www.accessdata.fda.gov.

20. Moore RG, Brown AK, Miller MC et al. The use of multiple novel tumor biomarkers for the detection of ovarian carcinoma in patients with a pelvic mass. Gynecol Oncol 2008; 108 (2): 402–408. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2007. 10.017.

21. Lakshmanan M, Kumar V, Chaturvedi A et al. Role of serum HE4 as a prognostic marker in carcinoma of the ovary. Indian J Cancer 2019; 56 (3): 216–221. doi: 10.4103/ijc.IJC_305_18.

22. Piovano E, Attamante L, Macchi C et al. The role of HE4 in ovarian cancer follow-up: a review. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2014; 24 (8): 1359–1365. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000218.

23. Uno M, Matsuo R, Maezawa N et al. Evaluation of follow-up observation using human epididymis protein 4, a tumor marker, in patients with ovarian cancer. Obstet Gynecol Sci 2023; 66 (4): 290–299. doi: 10.5468/ogs. 23024.

24. Manganaro L, Michienzi S, Vinci V et al. Serum HE4 levels combined with CE CT imaging improve the management of monitoring women affected by epithelial ovarian cancer. Oncol Rep 2013; 30 (5): 2481–2487. doi: 10.3892/or.2013.2682.

25. Presl J, Havelka P, Weinberger V et al. The role of HE4 in the follow-up of advanced ovarian, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneal cancer-CEEGOG OX-01 study. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16 (21): 3566. doi: 10.3390/cancers162 13566.

26. Gadducci A, Cosio S, Zola P et al. Surveillance procedures for patients treated for epithelial ovarian cancer: a review of the literature. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2007; 17 (1): 21–31. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1438.2007.00826.x.

27. Fischerova D, Cibula D. Ultrasound in gynecological cancer: is it time for re-evaluation of its uses? Curr Oncol Rep 2015; 17 (6): 28. doi: 10.1007/s11912-015-0449-x.

28. Vlasak P, Bouda J, Kostun J et al. Diagnostic reliability, accuracy and safety of ultrasound-guided biopsy and ascites puncture in primarily inoperable ovarian tumours. Anticancer Res 2020; 40 (6): 3527–3534. doi: 10.21873/anticanres.14341.

29. Gu P, Pan LL, Wu SQ et al. CA 125, PET alone, PET-CT, CT and MRI in diagnosing recurrent ovarian carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol 2009; 71 (1): 164–174. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.02.019.

30. Limei Z, Yong C, Yan X et al. Accuracy of positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the diagnosis and restaging for recurrent ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2013; 23 (4): 598–607. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0b013e31828 a183c.

31. Khiewvan B, Torigian DA, Emamzadehfard S et al. An update on the role of PET/CT and PET/MRI in ovarian cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2017; 44 (6): 1079–1091. doi: 10.1007/s00259-017-3638-z.

32. Hirsch FW, Sattler B, Sorge I et al. PET/MR in children. Initial clinical experience in paediatric oncology using an integrated PET/MR scanner. Pediatr Radiol 2013; 43 (7): 860–875. doi: 10.1007/s00247-012-2570-4.

33. Beiderwellen K, Grueneisen J, Ruhlmann V et al. [ (18) F]FDG PET/MRI vs. PET/CT for whole--body staging in patients with recurrent malignancies of the female pelvis: initial results. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015; 42 (1): 56–65. doi: 10.1007/s00259-014-2902-8.

34. Flohr T, Petersilka M, Henning A et al. Photon-counting CT review. Phys Med 2020; 79 : 126–136. doi: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2020. 10.030.

35. Stein T, Rau A, Russe MF et al. Photon-counting computed tomography –⁠ basic principles, potenzial benefits, and initial clinical experience. RoFo 2023; 195 (8): 691–698. doi: 10.1055/a-2018-3396.

36. Ferda J, Vendiš T, Flohr T et al. Computed tomography with a full FOV photon-counting detector in a clinical setting, the first experience. Eur J Radiol 2021; 137 : 109614. doi: 10.1016/ j.ejrad.2021.109614.