本文選題：小細(xì)胞肺癌 + 癌胚抗原��； 參考：《河北醫(yī)科大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文

【摘要】：目的:探討血清腫瘤標(biāo)志物CEA、NSE和Pro GRP與免疫組化指標(biāo)Syn、CD56、Cg A,Ki-67在小細(xì)胞肺癌診斷中的關(guān)系。方法:應(yīng)用電化學(xué)發(fā)光技術(shù)和化學(xué)發(fā)光技術(shù)檢測48例小細(xì)胞肺癌患者血清標(biāo)志物CEA、NSE和Pro GRP的濃度;采用Max Vision免疫組化技術(shù)檢測Syn、CD56、Cg A,Ki-67;用χ2檢驗、兩獨立樣本非參數(shù)檢驗、等級相關(guān)Spearman’s檢驗分析結(jié)果。結(jié)果:1小細(xì)胞肺癌免疫組化Syn、CD56、Cg A表達(dá)陽性率高于血清CEA,P0.001差異有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義。免疫組化Syn、CD56、Cg A表達(dá)陽性率與血清NSE、Pro GRP比較,無顯著性差異。2 Ki-67增殖程度與血清腫瘤標(biāo)志物CEA、NSE、Pro GRP等濃度之間均有負(fù)相關(guān)關(guān)系,r值分別為-0.445、-0.065、-0.130;P值分別為0.001、0.001、0.001。P值均0.05有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義。3局限期與廣泛期免疫組化指標(biāo)陽性率表達(dá)無統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義;廣泛期血清腫瘤標(biāo)志物CEA、NSE、Pro GRP濃度均高于局限期,Z值分別為-5.760、-10.833、-12.076;P值均為P0.001,P0.05差異有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義。結(jié)論:1 NSE和Pro GRP在診斷SCLC時優(yōu)于CEA。而免疫組化Syn、CD56、Cg A表達(dá)陽性率與血清NSE、Pro GRP陽性率比較卻沒有明顯優(yōu)勢。2 SCLC Ki-67增殖程度與血清腫瘤標(biāo)志物CEA、NSE、Pro GRP濃度之間均有負(fù)相關(guān)關(guān)系。3 SCLC廣泛期血清腫瘤標(biāo)志物CEA、NSE、Pro GRP濃度均高于局限期。
[Abstract]:Objective: to investigate the relationship between serum tumor markers CEA NSE and Pro GRP and immunocytochemical marker Syngma CD56 C g Agii Ki-67 in the diagnosis of small cell lung cancer (SCLC). Methods: electrochemiluminescence and chemiluminescence techniques were used to detect the concentrations of serum markers CEANANSE and Pro GRP in 48 patients with small cell lung cancer, Max Vision immunohistochemical technique was used to detect the levels of CD56 Cg Agni Ki-67, and 蠂 2 test was used to detect the nonparametric test of two independent samples. Grade correlation Spearman's test results. Results the positive rate of CD56 C g A expression in small cell lung cancer was significantly higher than that in serum CEA P0.001. The positive rate of immunocytochemical expression of CD56 CGA was compared with that of serum NSEP Pro GRP. There was no significant difference between the proliferative degree of Ki-67 and the concentration of serum tumor marker CEA NSEP GRP. R values were -0.445U -0.065U -0.130 (P = 0.001n 0.001N 0.001.P respectively). The rate of expression was not statistically significant. The concentration of serum tumor marker CEA NSEP GRP was significantly higher than that of localized stage (Z = -5.760) -10.833% -12.076 (P < 0.05). Conclusion 1 NSE and Pro GRP are superior to CEA in the diagnosis of SCLC. However, there was no significant correlation between the positive rate of immunocytochemistry and the positive rate of serum NSEP GRP. 2. 2 SCLC Ki-67 proliferative degree and the concentration of serum tumor marker CEA NSEP GRP. 3 SCLC in the extensive stage of serum tumor marker CEA NSEP Pro, there was no significant correlation between the positive rate of immunohistochemistry and the positive rate of serum NSEP. The concentration of GRP was higher than the local deadline.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：河北醫(yī)科大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：R734.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前4條

1 劉斌劍;祁朝玲;鄭淑輝;;腫瘤標(biāo)志物的聯(lián)合檢測對肺癌鑒別診斷的臨床應(yīng)用[J];國際檢驗醫(yī)學(xué)雜志;2008年11期

2 馬秀清;陳良安;李春筍;梁志欣;王平;;肺癌患者血清ProGRP、CA125、CYFRA_(21-1)和TPS檢測的臨床意義[J];軍醫(yī)進(jìn)修學(xué)院學(xué)報;2009年03期

3 高福平;魏謹(jǐn);;Syn及CD_(56)肺小細(xì)胞癌中的表達(dá)及意義[J];臨床肺科雜志;2012年05期

4 黃偉萍;王世俊;;SCC-Ag CEA和CA125聯(lián)合檢測在非小細(xì)胞肺癌組織分型與分期中的意義[J];現(xiàn)代實用醫(yī)學(xué);2009年06期

，

本文編號：1815679