Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 6, 2026
Author Spotlight: Advancing Early Detection and Treatment of Gastrointestinal Tumors
Published on: February 16, 2024
Receiver operating characteristic analysis of prediction for gastric cancer development using serum pepsinogen and
Chisato Hamashima1, Shizuka Sasazuki2, Manami Inoue2,3
1Division of Cancer Screening Assessment and Management, Center for Social Public Health Sciences, National Cancer Center, 5-1-1 Tsukiji Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan. chamashi@ncc.go.jp.
Background:
Chronic Helicobacter pylori infection plays a central role in the development of gastric cancer as shown by biological and epidemiological studies. The H. pylori antibody and serum pepsinogen (PG) tests have been anticipated to predict gastric cancer development.
Methods:
We determined the predictive sensitivity and specificity of gastric cancer development using these tests. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed, and areas under the curve were estimated. The predictive sensitivity and specificity of gastric cancer development were compared among single tests and combined methods using serum pepsinogen and H. pylori antibody tests.
Results:
From a large-scale population-based cohort of over 100,000 subjects followed between 1990 and 2004, 497 gastric cancer subjects and 497 matched healthy controls were chosen. The predictive sensitivity and specificity were low in all single tests and combination methods. The highest predictive sensitivity and specificity were obtained for the serum PG I/II ratio. The optimal PG I/II cut-off values were 2.5 and 3.0. At a PG I/II cut-off value of 3.0, the sensitivity was 86.9% and the specificity was 39.8%. Even if three biomarkers were combined, the sensitivity was 97.2% and the specificity was 21.1% when the cut-off values were 3.0 for PG I/II, 70 ng/mL for PG I, and 10.0 U/mL for H. pylori antibody.
Conclusions:
The predictive accuracy of gastric cancer development was low with the serum pepsinogen and H. pylori antibody tests even if these tests were combined. To adopt these biomarkers for gastric cancer screening, a high specificity is required. When these tests are adopted for gastric cancer screening, they should be carefully interpreted with a clear understanding of their limitations.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
01:28Peptic Ulcer Disease III: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Studies
Few clinical manifestations differentiate gastric ulcers from duodenal ulcers. Distinctions in the location, timing, and pain relief are crucial for healthcare providers in differentiating between gastric and duodenal ulcers during clinical assessments.
01:30Serum Laboratory Studies, Stool Test, Breath Test
01:16Treating Helicobacter pylori in Peptic Ulcers: Antimicrobial Therapy
01:22Pathophysiology of Peptic Ulcer Disease: Injurious Factors
In the antrum region, G cells secrete the gastrin hormone that binds to gastrin-cholecystokinin-B (CCK2) receptors on parietal and enterochromaffin-like (ECL) cells in the fundic glands. Simultaneously, the vagus nerve releases acetylcholine, which binds...
01:30Peptic Ulcer Disease I: Introduction
An acute ulcer, marked by superficial erosion and minimal inflammation, swiftly resolves upon identifying and addressing the underlying cause. In contrast, a chronic ulcer persists, potentially eroding through the muscular wall and forming fibrous tissue.
Peptic ulcers can also be...
01:23Gastritis III: Clinical Manifestations and Management
Clinical manifestations of acute gastritis
The patient with acute gastritis may have a rapid onset of symptoms, such as epigastric pain or discomfort, dyspepsia, anorexia, hiccups, or nausea and vomiting, which can last from a few hours to a few days. Erosive or hemorrhagic gastritis may cause bleeding, which may manifest as blood in vomit or as...