Indian Journal of Cancer
Home  ICS  Feedback Subscribe Top cited articles Login 
Users Online :1311
Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Navigate Here
 »   Next article
 »   Previous article
 »   Table of Contents

Resource Links
 »   Similar in PUBMED
 »  Search Pubmed for
 »  Search in Google Scholar for
 »Related articles
 »   Citation Manager
 »   Access Statistics
 »   Reader Comments
 »   Email Alert *
 »   Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded274    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 4    

Recommend this journal


Year : 2019  |  Volume : 56  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 216-221

Role of serum HE4 as a prognostic marker in carcinoma of the ovary

Department of Surgical Oncology, King George's Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India

Correspondence Address:
Vijay Kumar
Department of Surgical Oncology, King George's Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/ijc.IJC_305_18

Rights and Permissions

BACKGROUND: Epithelial ovarian cancer is the second most common gynecological cancer. Human Epididymis Protein 4 is a novel biomarker for ovarian cancer. This study aims to explore the role of HE4 in monitoring recurrence and prognostication of ovarian cancer by predicting overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In total, 149 patients with ovarian carcinoma were enrolled in the study. Baseline and post-treatment 3 monthly biomarker levels were recorded. For analysis, patients were divided into primary debulking surgery (PDS) and interval debulking surgery (IDS) groups. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS 24. RESULTS: Median age of patients at diagnosis was 45 (19–75) years. Recurrence was seen in 68.5% (n = 102) patients. The sensitivity of serum HE4 in detecting recurrence was 85.3% (95%CI: 76.95%–91.5%) and specificity was 91.5% (95%CI: 89.5%–98.2%). A >80% decline in HE4 levels during treatment indicated a better PFS, which was statistically significant in both groups (P = 0.04 in PDS and P = <0.001 in IDS group). Multivariate analysis suggested that OS was influenced by optimal cytoreduction in both groups of patients and stage in the IDS group. On the contrary, PFS was influenced by stage and response in HE4 levels in both groups. CONCLUSION: HE4 levels have similar sensitivity but more specificity when compared with CA125 in diagnosing recurrent ovarian cancer. A >80% decline in HE4 levels during treatment predicts better PFS and can help in prognostication.


Print this article     Email this article

  Site Map | What's new | Copyright and Disclaimer | Privacy Notice
  Online since 1st April '07
  © 2007 - Indian Journal of Cancer | Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow