Why the study?
Does the combined measurement of BNP and CA125 improve the diagnosis of heart failure and evaluation of short-term treatment efficacy?
Does the combined measurement of BNP and CA125 improve the diagnosis of heart failure and evaluation of short-term treatment efficacy?
Combined detection of BNP and CA125 may offer better diagnostic accuracy and treatment monitoring for heart failure than either marker alone.
CA125 and BNP associate with HF and LVEF in cross-sectional data; leaves open combined diagnostic value pending prospective validation.
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to study the association between B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and tumour markers and heart failure (HF) to evaluate the value of BNP and carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA125) in HF patients. DESIGN AND SETTING: A university hospital-based cross-over study of 285 subjects (157 men and 128 women) in HF, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), mild-mid pulmonary hypertension patients and control subjects. RESULTS: CA125 and BNP were significantly higher in the HF group than in the non-HF group and in severe HF than in mild HF (P < 0.01). No changes were observed in other tumour markers. CA125 and BNP decreased obviously after clinical improvement by aggressive treatment (P < 0.01). Left ventricular ejection fraction correlated positively with CA125 (r = 0.789, P < 0.01) and BNP (r = 0.730, P < 0.01) in left heart failure patients, but not in other patients. BNP and CA125 had better accuracy and positive predictive value in diagnosing HF from the characteristic receiver-operator curve. CONCLUSIONS: CA125 and BNP are markedly elevated in heart failure and closely reflect heart function. They are better markers in evaluating the efficiency of short-term therapy. Detecting BNP combined with CA125 may be more valuable than only detecting BNP or CA125 for diagnosing HF and evaluating the efficiency of treatment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: