Serum IGFBP-2 levels correlate with tumor load and disease stage in colorectal cancer, and in combination with CEA, may have an adjunct role in cancer surveillance.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
IGFBP-2 elevation was associated with colorectal cancer stage; hypothesis-generating and leaves open any adjunctive surveillance role.
This study explored the relationships of serum insulin-like growth factors, IGF-I and IGF-II, and their binding proteins (IGFBP)-2 and IGFBP-3, with key clinicopathological parameters in 92 patients with colorectal cancer (cases). Comparisons were made with 57 individuals who had a normal colonoscopy (controls). Serial changes were examined in 27 cases. As IGF-related peptides are age- and sex-dependent, absolute concentrations were converted to standard deviation scores (SDS). Mean IGF-II SDS were elevated in Dukes A (n = 12, P< 0.001) and Dukes B (n = 25, P< 0.001) cases compared with controls, but not in advanced disease. Compared with controls, mean IGFBP-2 SDS were significantly elevated in patients with Dukes B (P< 0.001), Dukes C (n = 13, P< 0.001) and advanced disease (n = 42, P< 0.0001), with a significant trend from early to advanced disease (one-way ANOVA, P< 0.001). Furthermore, IGFBP-2 SDS were positively related to tumour size (P = 0.01) and fell significantly in patients following curative resection (P = 0.04), suggesting that circulating levels reflect tumour load. We tested the potential tumour marker characteristics of IGFBP-2 SDS against three endpoints: metastasis alone; local pelvic recurrence alone; and metastasis and recurrence combined. The sensitivities for IGFBP-2 alone (>/= + 2SD) were modest at 55%, 46%, and 52%, but in combination with CEA, increased substantially to 90%, 77% and 86%, respectively. We conclude that the serum IGF-II and IGFBP-2 profiles may provide insights into underlying biological mechanisms, and that serum IGFBP-2 may have an adjunct role in cancer surveillance in patients with colorectal cancer.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Renehan et al. (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: