Value of anti-plasminogen binding peptide, anti-carbonic anhydrase II, immunoglobulin G4, and other serological markers for the differentiation of autoimmune pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid

Abstract

The diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) and its differential diagnosis from pancreatic cancer (PC) can be challenging. In this retrospective study, we aimed to evaluate the value of anti-plasminogen binding peptide (a-PBP), immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4), and anti-carbonic anhydrase-II (a-CA-II), together with other serological markers whose value is not fully elucidated.

The serum levels of a-PBP, IgG4, IgG, anti-nuclear antibodies (ANA), anti-lactoferrin (a-LF), a-CA-II, and rheumatoid factor (RF) were evaluated in patients with AIP (n = 29), PC (n = 17), pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm (P-NEN, n = 12), and alcoholic chronic pancreatitis (ACP, n = 41). ANCA were measured in the AIP patients.

There was no statistically significant difference in mean a-PBP values in AIP compared with PC. A ROC curve showed that, when using a cut-off of 38.3 U, low values of a-PBP had a sensitivity and specificity of 45% and 71% for differentiating AIP from PC. The sensitivity and specificity of IgG4 (cut-off 1.4 g/L) for differentiating AIP from PC was 45% and 88%, but rose to 52% and 88% when using a cut-off of 1.09 g/L. When using this cut-off, the sensitivity and specificity for differentiating type 1 AIP from PC was 68% and 88%. None of the other markers were significantly changed in AIP versus PC. For differentiation of type 1 and type 2 AIP, the only significant differences were IgG4 in type 1 AIP (P < .01), with a sensitivity of 68% and a specificity of 80%, and c-ANCA elevations found in some type 2 AIP patients (P < .05).

The only serological marker for which we found a statistically significant difference in mean values between AIP and PC was IgG4. However, the value of IgG4 for the distinction of AIP from PC was limited, probably in part due to the relatively high number of type 2 AIP patients in our study. In accord with recent publications, our data do not support a role of increased serum a-PBP for the diagnosis of AIP.

Related Topics

    loading  Loading Related Articles