Loading
Life sciences · Journal article
Journal of Clinical Medicine · September 15, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Journal article.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Background: Serial serum tumor-marker testing is widely used in clinical practice, but its relationship to concurrent imaging response and survival in advanced gastric cancer (AGC) remains uncertain. We evaluated five serum tumor markers—carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9, CA72-4, CA125, and tissue polypeptide antigen (TPA)—in patients receiving first-line palliative systemic therapy. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 140 patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma treated between 2021 and 2024. Results: Baseline positivity rates for the individual markers ranged from 43.6% to 73.6%, and at least one marker was elevated in 90.0% of patients. Baseline CA125 positivity was associated with a lower objective response rate compared to CA125 negativity (29.7% vs. 55.3%). Among the 117 patients with complete serial measurements of all five markers, decreases in CEA, CA72-4, CA125, and TPA were more frequent in responders than in nonresponders. Individual marker decreases showed limited discriminatory performance, whereas multi-marker thresholds showed complementary operating characteristics: a decrease in ≥2 markers had a sensitivity of 89.7%, while decreases in all five markers had a specificity of 93.2%. Patients with ≥3 elevated baseline markers had shorter median overall survival than those with <3 elevated markers (8.0 vs. 18.8 months; HR, 2.269; p < 0.001). Conclusions: Multi-marker assessment may provide complementary information at the time of radiological response assessment, but these exploratory findings require prospective and external validation before clinical use.