CEA 1.4: ng/ml CA-19.9: 7.2U/ml - chance for Metastasis in liver?

Please feel free to read, share your thoughts, your stories and connect with others!
rom_a
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 12:43 pm

CEA 1.4: ng/ml CA-19.9: 7.2U/ml - chance for Metastasis in liver?

Postby rom_a » Wed Aug 30, 2017 12:55 pm

Hi. The case is as follows:
A week ago a 3-4 cm tumor was identified in the colon. There is some suspicious 1.6 cm lump in the liver, which could be metastasis, but not necessarily as there is uncertainty (both ultrasound as well as the CT check could not approve/disprove it). CT PET check will be held on Sunday.

However the blood test shows the liver is ok; more importantly indicators for Metastasis look good: CEA 1.4: ng/ml & CA-19.9: 7.2U/ml.

Does the above decrease the chances for metastasis in the liver (especially the fact that both indicators are good)? is anyone familiar with a study/statistics on the topic?

veckon
Posts: 131
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 7:44 am

Re: CEA 1.4: ng/ml CA-19.9: 7.2U/ml - chance for Metastasis in liver?

Postby veckon » Wed Aug 30, 2017 5:35 pm

rom_a wrote:Hi. The case is as follows:
A week ago a 3-4 cm tumor was identified in the colon. There is some suspicious 1.6 cm lump in the liver, which could be metastasis, but not necessarily as there is uncertainty (both ultrasound as well as the CT check could not approve/disprove it). CT PET check will be held on Sunday.

However the blood test shows the liver is ok; more importantly indicators for Metastasis look good: CEA 1.4: ng/ml & CA-19.9: 7.2U/ml.

Does the above decrease the chances for metastasis in the liver (especially the fact that both indicators are good)? is anyone familiar with a study/statistics on the topic?


I have liver metastases and my blood work does not show tangible signs of liver disease (yet). CEA is similar. I’m not sure any of this really indicates anything one way or the other.
27 yo male
Metastatic rectal cancer diagnosed 12/16
Liver metastases and peritoneal carcinomatosis
Lynch syndrome, MSI-H
Failed liver resection 3/17
FOLFOX6 12/16 - 05/17
Keytruda 5/17 - present
@Memorial Sloan Kettering

rom_a
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 12:43 pm

Re: CEA 1.4: ng/ml CA-19.9: 7.2U/ml - chance for Metastasis in liver?

Postby rom_a » Thu Aug 31, 2017 11:00 am

Thanks for this. I would appreciate any other thoughts?

veckon wrote:
rom_a wrote:Hi. The case is as follows:
A week ago a 3-4 cm tumor was identified in the colon. There is some suspicious 1.6 cm lump in the liver, which could be metastasis, but not necessarily as there is uncertainty (both ultrasound as well as the CT check could not approve/disprove it). CT PET check will be held on Sunday.

However the blood test shows the liver is ok; more importantly indicators for Metastasis look good: CEA 1.4: ng/ml & CA-19.9: 7.2U/ml.

Does the above decrease the chances for metastasis in the liver (especially the fact that both indicators are good)? is anyone familiar with a study/statistics on the topic?


I have liver metastases and my blood work does not show tangible signs of liver disease (yet). CEA is similar. I’m not sure any of this really indicates anything one way or the other.

rp1954
Posts: 1523
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 1:13 am

Re: CEA 1.4: ng/ml CA-19.9: 7.2U/ml - chance for Metastasis in liver?

Postby rp1954 » Thu Aug 31, 2017 4:49 pm

Single low readings are limited, preliminary information cancerwise, although statistically the odds are much more favorable with low values. Also the CEA and CA19-9 by themselves are a limited picture. If you have been diagnosed with CRC, hopefully you are still lower stage and curable. However, various data can refine the picture over time. You can improve baseline data at strategic points, like before and after surgery, in essence "scanning" for (monitorable) anomalies or documenting "good behavior" on various elements.

Gathering better data is like building the structure of a building. They work best all together and complete, less likely to fail catastrophically without warning in a storm. We've used better data to get early warnings, improve treatment and performance, and prepare followup steps, literal life savers.

We use other indicators serially for mets and liver issues. Beside the usual SGPT, SGOT, ALP panel, we include GGTP, LDH, AFP (a liver cancer marker fairly common for CRC), bilirubin, PT/INR, and Total protein A/G. Inflammatory conditions are reflected in ESR and hsCRP, which are helpful whether due to cancer or to promote it. Inflammation can be modified even before surgery.

We were able to establish highly stable baseline behavior for over a year with the immune components, mild drugs, supplements and IV vitamin C. Our experience with AFP, CEA, CA19-9 included serial elevations or initial elevations reduced by surgery.

One possible important difference is that CEA, AFP and/or CA19-9 go higher when things are looking iffy. Sometimes we can watch liver stuff dissolve on +- annual and extra scans with high enough intensity immunochemo, long after the real decisions were made based on blood work.
watchful, active researcher and caregiver for stage IVb/c CC. surgeries 4/10 sigmoid etc & 5/11 para-aortic LN cluster; 8 yrs immuno-Chemo for mCRC; now no chemo
most of 2010 Life Extension recommendations and possibilities + more, some (much) higher, peaking ~2011-12, taper to almost nothing mid 2018, mostly IV C

veckon
Posts: 131
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 7:44 am

Re: CEA 1.4: ng/ml CA-19.9: 7.2U/ml - chance for Metastasis in liver?

Postby veckon » Thu Aug 31, 2017 4:56 pm

rp1954 wrote:Single low readings are limited, preliminary information cancerwise, although statistically the odds are much more favorable with low values. Also the CEA and CA19-9 by themselves are a limited picture. If you have been diagnosed with CRC, hopefully you are still lower stage and curable. However, various data can refine the picture over time. You can improve baseline data at strategic points, like before and after surgery, in essence "scanning" for (monitorable) anomalies or documenting "good behavior" on various elements.

Gathering better data is like building the structure of a building. They work best all together and complete, less likely to fail catastrophically without warning in a storm.

We use other indicators serially for mets and liver issues. Beside the usual SGPT, SGOT, ALP panel, we include GGTP, LDH, AFP (a liver cancer marker fairly common for CRC), bilirubin, PT/INR, and Total protein A/G. Inflammatory conditions are reflected in ESR and hsCRP, which are helpful whether due to cancer or to promote it. Inflammation can be modified even before surgery.

We were able to establish highly stable baseline behavior for over a year with the immune components, mild drugs, supplements and IV vitamin C. Our experience with AFP, CEA, CA19-9 included serial elevations or initial elevations reduced by surgery.

One possible important difference is that CEA, AFP and/or CA19-9 go higher when things are looking iffy. Sometimes we can watch liver stuff dissolve on +- annual and extra scans with high enough intensity immunochemo, long after the real decisions were made based on blood work.


This is an amazing answer.
27 yo male
Metastatic rectal cancer diagnosed 12/16
Liver metastases and peritoneal carcinomatosis
Lynch syndrome, MSI-H
Failed liver resection 3/17
FOLFOX6 12/16 - 05/17
Keytruda 5/17 - present
@Memorial Sloan Kettering

missjv
Posts: 1416
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 10:38 am
Location: FLORIDA

Re: CEA 1.4: ng/ml CA-19.9: 7.2U/ml - chance for Metastasis in liver?

Postby missjv » Thu Aug 31, 2017 4:58 pm

when I was diagnosed stage 4 I had four tumors in my liver and my cea was 2. scans are the only way to tell or a biopsy you can't rely on bloodwork.


missjv

rom_a
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 12:43 pm

Re: CEA 1.4: ng/ml CA-19.9: 7.2U/ml - chance for Metastasis in liver?

Postby rom_a » Thu Aug 31, 2017 6:34 pm

Thanks very much for the comprehensive answers. I can also comment that all the following indicators are fine: GPT, GOT, PT, INR, Lymphocytes, ALKP-Alkaline Phosphatase, Albumin (B).
What is less good is the CRP which is 1.5 mg/dl.

This person will have PET CT scan next week, so will update...


rp1954 wrote:Single low readings are limited, preliminary information cancerwise, although statistically the odds are much more favorable with low values. Also the CEA and CA19-9 by themselves are a limited picture. If you have been diagnosed with CRC, hopefully you are still lower stage and curable. However, various data can refine the picture over time. You can improve baseline data at strategic points, like before and after surgery, in essence "scanning" for (monitorable) anomalies or documenting "good behavior" on various elements.

Gathering better data is like building the structure of a building. They work best all together and complete, less likely to fail catastrophically without warning in a storm. We've used better data to get early warnings, improve treatment and performance, and prepare followup steps, literal life savers.

We use other indicators serially for mets and liver issues. Beside the usual SGPT, SGOT, ALP panel, we include GGTP, LDH, AFP (a liver cancer marker fairly common for CRC), bilirubin, PT/INR, and Total protein A/G. Inflammatory conditions are reflected in ESR and hsCRP, which are helpful whether due to cancer or to promote it. Inflammation can be modified even before surgery.

We were able to establish highly stable baseline behavior for over a year with the immune components, mild drugs, supplements and IV vitamin C. Our experience with AFP, CEA, CA19-9 included serial elevations or initial elevations reduced by surgery.

One possible important difference is that CEA, AFP and/or CA19-9 go higher when things are looking iffy. Sometimes we can watch liver stuff dissolve on +- annual and extra scans with high enough intensity immunochemo, long after the real decisions were made based on blood work.

rp1954
Posts: 1523
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 1:13 am

Re: CEA 1.4: ng/ml CA-19.9: 7.2U/ml - chance for Metastasis in liver?

Postby rp1954 » Fri Sep 01, 2017 11:32 pm

rom_a wrote:...all the following indicators are fine: GPT, GOT, PT, INR, Lymphocytes, ALKP-Alkaline Phosphatase, Albumin (B).

ALP/ALKP stats about the"good" range change after a cancer dx but are not commonly interpreted according to the specific CRC data in the literature.

What is less good is the CRP which is 1.5 mg/dl.

Most of us have massively incomplete blood data at a cancer diagnosis. (hs)CRP and ESR are usually missing then. Later, we learn to wheedle the others or order them ourselves. What data are usually available and somewhat statistically prognostic are neutrophils, platelets and lymphocytes (combined as ratios), which you will already have. Other inflammation markers commonly available are fibrinogen and ferritin.

Basically, inflammation markers are elevated at CRC dx, and statistically, more elevated is less good. What's perhaps more important is what they are long term, since inflammation both feeds cancer and often reflects cancer.
watchful, active researcher and caregiver for stage IVb/c CC. surgeries 4/10 sigmoid etc & 5/11 para-aortic LN cluster; 8 yrs immuno-Chemo for mCRC; now no chemo
most of 2010 Life Extension recommendations and possibilities + more, some (much) higher, peaking ~2011-12, taper to almost nothing mid 2018, mostly IV C

rom_a
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 12:43 pm

Re: CEA 1.4: ng/ml CA-19.9: 7.2U/ml - chance for Metastasis in liver?

Postby rom_a » Sat Sep 02, 2017 1:53 pm

Thank you for the answer. I have checked this person's results for the below indicators (neutrophils, platelets and lymphocytes) - all are fine and within the range.

Overall blood is perfect apart from one indicator (CRP which is at 1.5 mg / dl).

I hope this is a good sign? I am reminding that this person has a colon cancer with 3-4 cm tumor, there is a 16 mm lump in the liver and a standard CT scan could not show whether this is a metastasis. This person will have a PET CT scan tomorrow to see whether this is just a lump versus a metastasis.


rp1954 wrote:
rom_a wrote:...all the following indicators are fine: GPT, GOT, PT, INR, Lymphocytes, ALKP-Alkaline Phosphatase, Albumin (B).

ALP/ALKP stats about the"good" range change after a cancer dx but are not commonly interpreted according to the specific CRC data in the literature.

What is less good is the CRP which is 1.5 mg/dl.

Most of us have massively incomplete blood data at a cancer diagnosis. (hs)CRP and ESR are usually missing then. Later, we learn to wheedle the others or order them ourselves. What data are usually available and somewhat statistically prognostic are neutrophils, platelets and lymphocytes (combined as ratios), which you will already have. Other inflammation markers commonly available are fibrinogen and ferritin.

Basically, inflammation markers are elevated at CRC dx, and statistically, more elevated is less good. What's perhaps more important is what they are long term, since inflammation both feeds cancer and often reflects cancer.


Return to “Colon Talk - Colon cancer (colorectal cancer) support forum”



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 31 guests

cron