• Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases
• /
• v.44 no.4
• /
• pp.785-795
• /
• 1997

Background : Tumor markers have been used in diagnosis, predicting the extent of disease, monitoring recurrence after therapy and prediction of prognosis. But the utility of markers in lung cancer has been limited by low sensitivity and specificity. TPA-M is recently developed marker using combined monoclonal antibody of Cytokeratin 8, 18, and 19. This study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of new tumor marker, TPA-M by comparing the estabilished markers SCC, CEA, Cyfra21-1 in lung cancer. Method : An immunoradiometric assay of serum CEA, sec, Cyfra21-1, and TPA-M was performed in 49 pathologically confirmed lung cancer patients who visited Keimyung University Hospital from April 1996 to August 1996, and 29 benign lung diseases. Commercially available kits, Ab bead CEA (Eiken) to CEA, SCC RIA BEAD (DAINABOT) to SCC, CA2H (TFB) to Cyfra2H. and TPA-M (DAIICHI) to TPA-M were used for this study. Results : The mean serum values of lung cancer group and control group were $10.05{\pm}38.39{\mu}/L$, $1.59{\pm}0.94{\mu}/L$ in CEA, $3.04{\pm}5.79{\mu}/L$, $1.58{\pm}2.85{\mu}/L$ in SCC, $8.27{\pm}11.96{\mu}/L$, $1.77{\pm}2.72{\mu}/L$ in Cyfra21-1, and $132.02{\pm}209.35\;U/L$, $45.86{\pm}75.86\;U/L$ in TPA-M respectively. Serum values of Cyfra21-1 and TPA-M in lung cancer group were higher than control group (p<0.05). Using cutoff value recommended by the manufactures, that is $2.5{\mu}/L$ in CEA, $3.0{\mu}/L$ in Cyfra21-1, 70.0 U/L in TPA-M, and $2.0{\mu}/L$ in SCC, sensitivity and specificity of lung cancer were 33.3%, 78.6% in CEA, 50.0%, 89.7% in Cyfra21-1, 52.3%, 89.7% in TPA-M, 23.8%, 89.3% in SCC. Sensitivity and specificity of nonsmall cell lung cancer were 36.1%, 78.1% in CEA, 50.1%, 89.7% in Cyfra21-1, 53.1%, 89.7% in TPA-M, 33.8%, 89.3% in SCC. Sensitivity and specificity of small cell lung cancer were 25.0%, 78.5% in CEA, 50.0%, 89.6% in Cyfra21-1, 50.0%, 89.6% in TPA-M, 0%, 89.2% in SCC. Cutoff value according to ROC(Receiver operating characteristics) curve was $1.25{\mu}/L$ in CEA, $1.5{\mu}/L$ in Cyfra2-1, 35 U/L in TPA-M, $0.6{\mu}/L$ in SCC. With this cutoff value, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and kappa index of Cyfra21-1 and TPA-M were better than CEA and SCC. SCC only was related with statistic significance to TNM stages, dividing to operable stages(TNM stage I to IIIA) and inoperable stages (IIIB and IV) (p<0.05). But no tumor markers showed any correlation with significance with tumor size(p>0.05). Conclusion : Serum TPA-M and Cyfra21-1 shows higher sensitivity and specificity than CEA and SCC in overall lung cancer and nonsmall cell lung cancer those were confirmed pathologically. SCC has higher specificity in nonsmall cell lung cancer. And the level of serum sec are signiticantly related with TNM staging.

• Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases
• /
• v.51 no.4
• /
• pp.303-314
• /
• 2001

Background : Matrix metalioproteinase(MMP)-2 and MMP-9 have been known to play an important role in cell migration and the tissue remodeling process by type IV collagen lysis, a major component of the basement membrane. Intra-alveolar fibrosis, secondary to an injury to the basement membrane of the alveolar epithelial lining, is a major process in the pathogenesis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis(IPF). Therefore, MMP-2 and MMP-9 was hypothesized to play an important role in IPF pathogenesis. As a result, their level may reflect the activity or prognosis. Method : Forty one progressive IPF patients(age $59.82{\pm}1.73$ years, M:F=23:18), 16 patients with stable IPF for more than one year without therapy(age : $63.6{\pm}2.8$ years, M:F=13:3), and 7 normal controls were enrolled in this study. The MMP-2 and MMP-9 levels in the BAL fluid and alveolar macrophage conditioned media(AM-CM) were measured by zymography and the TIMP-1 level was measured by ELISA. Results : 1) The MMP-2 level in BALF was highest in the progressive IPF group ($1.36{\pm}0.28$) followed by the stable group ($0.46{\pm}0.13$) and the controls ($0.08{\pm}0.09$), which was statistically significant. The MMP-9 level of the IPF ($0.31{\pm}0.058$) and the stable group ($0.22{\pm}0.078$) were higher than that of the control group ($0.002{\pm}0.004$). In the AM-CM, only MMP-9 was detected, which was significantly higher in IPF group ($0.80{\pm}0.1O$) than in the control group($0.23{\pm}0.081$). The TIMP-1 level was also higher in both the IPF ($36.34{\pm}8.62\;{\mu}g/ml$) and stable group ($20.83{\pm}8.53\;{\mu}g/ml$) compared to the control group ($2.80{\pm}1.05\;{\mu}g/ml$) (p<0.05). 3) There was a correlation between the MMP-2 level in the BALF with the total cell number(r=0.298) and neutrophils(r=0.357) (p<0.05), and the MMP-9 level with the number of neutrophils (r=0.407) and lymphocytes (r=0.574)(p<0.05). The TIMP-1 level correlated with the total number of cell (r=0.338, p<0.05) and neutrophils(r=0.449, p=0.059). Conclusion : Both MMP and TIMP appear to play an important role in IPF pathogenesis, and their level may reflect the disease activity.

• Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases
• /
• v.42 no.4
• /
• pp.555-568
• /
• 1995

Background: It is most physiologic to measure the diffusing capacity of the lung by using oxygen, but it is so difficult to measure partial pressure of oxygen in the capillary blood of the lung that in clinical practice it is measured by using carbon monoxide, and single-breath diffusing capacity method is used most widely. However, since the process of withholding the breath for 10 seconds after inspiration to the total lung capacity is very hard to practice for patients who suffer from cough, dyspnea, etc, the intra-breath lung diffusing capacity method which requires a single exhalation of low-flow rate without such process was devised. In this study, we want to know whether or not there is any significant difference in the diffusing capacity of the lung measured by the single-breath and intra-breath methods, and if any, which factors have any influence. Methods: We chose randomly 73 persons without regarding specific disease, and after conducting 3 times the flow-volume curve test, we selected forced vital capacity(FVC), percent of predicted forced vital capacity, forced expiratory volume within 1 second($FEV_1$), percent of forced expiratory volume within 1 second, the ratio of forced expiratory volume within 1 second against forced vital capacity($FEV_1$/FVC) in test which the sum of FVC and $FEV_1$ is biggest. We measured the diffusing capacity of the lung 3 times in each of the single-breath and intra-breath methods at intervals of 5 minutes, and we evaluated which factors have any influence on the difference of the diffusing capacity of the lung between two methods[the mean values(ml/min/mmHg) of difference between two diffusing capacity measured by two methods] by means of the linear regression method, and obtained the following results: Results: 1) Intra-test reproducibility in the single-breath and intra-breath methods was excellent. 2) There was in general a good correlation between the diffusing capacity of the lung measured by a single-breath method and that measured by the intra-breath method, but there was a significant difference between values measured by both methods($1.01{\pm}0.35ml/min/mmHg$, p<0.01) 3) The difference between the diffusing capacity of the lung measured by both methods was not correlated to FVC, but was correlated to $FEV_1$, percent of $FEV_1$, $FEV_1$/FVC and the gradient of methane concentration which is an indicator of distribution of ventilation, and it was found as a result of the multiple regression test, that the effect of $FEV_1$/FVC was most strong(r=-0.4725, p<0.01) 4) In a graphic view of the difference of diffusing capacity measured by single-breath and intra-breath method and $FEV_1$/FVC, it was found that the former was divided into two groups in section where $FEV_1$/FVC is 50~60%, and that there was no significant difference between two methods in the section where $FEV_1$/FVC is equal or more than 60% ($0.05{\pm}0.24ml/min/mmHg$, p>0.1), but there was significant difference in the section, less than 60%($-4.5{\pm}0.34ml/min/mmHg$, p<0.01). 5. The diffusing capacity of the lung measured by the single-breath and intra-breath method was the same in value($24.3{\pm}0.68ml/min/mmHg$) within the normal range(2%/L) of the methane gas gradient, and there was no difference depending on the measuring method, but if the methane concentration gradients exceed 2%/L, the diffusing capacity of the lung measured by single-breath method became $15.0{\pm}0.44ml/min/mmHg$, and that measured by intra-breath method, $11.9{\pm}0.51ml/min/mmHg$, and there was a significant difference between them(p<0.01). Conclusion: Therefore, in case where $FEV_1$/FVC was less than 60%, the diffusing capacity of the lung measured by intra-breath method represented significantly lower value than that by single-breath method, and it was presumed to be caused largely by a defect of ventilation-distribution, but the possibility could not be excluded that the diffusing capacity of the lung might be overestimated in the single-breath method, or the actual reduction of the diffusing capacity of the lung appeared more sensitively in the intra-breath method.