Comparison of Immunoassays for Tumor Markers CA 19-9, CA 15-3 and CA 125: Data from an International Quality Assessment Scheme

Abstract

Data collected in the 1993 and 1994 cycles of an international external quality assessment (EQA) program and in a national multicenter collaborative study were cumulatively analyzed to evaluate the standardization of the methods currently in use for the assay of mucinous tumor markers CA 19-9, CA 15-3 and CA 125. On average the between-laboratory variability was 15.2 and 16.0 CV% for CA 15-3 and CA 125 respectively; the between-laboratory variability found for CA 19-9 was markedly worse (mean 28.3 CV%). The variability component attributable to systematic differences between different methods/kits was relatively small for CA 15-3 and CA 125 (18% and 24% of the total variability) but markedly larger for CA 19-9 (48% of the total variability). The agreement of CA 19-9 results worsened in the last few years when new nonisotopic techniques became available. The precision of the methods/kits most used in the survey ranged from 9.9 to 13.3 CV% for CA 125 and from 11.6 to 13.9 CV% for CA 15-3. For these two tumor markers the precision of the traditional IRMAs does not appear different from that of the new fully automated nonisotopic techniques. The precision of CA 19-9 methods was on average worse (from 11.7 to 19.6 CV%) although two automated systems exhibited a precision better than that of IRMAs. In conclusion, the results of this study indicate that CA 15-3 and CA 125 are satisfactorily assayed whereas CA 19-9 assay appears affected by larger differences between methods and by poorer precision of laboratories and kits.