» Articles » PMID: 21468765

What is the Most Accurate Whole-body Imaging Modality for Assessment of Local and Distant Recurrent Disease in Colorectal Cancer? A Meta-analysis : Imaging for Recurrent Colorectal Cancer

Overview
Date 2011 Apr 7
PMID 21468765
Citations 25
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: The objective of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance of positron emission tomography (PET), PET/CT, CT and MRI as whole-body imaging modalities for the detection of local and/or distant recurrent disease in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients who have a (high) suspicion of recurrent disease, based on clinical findings or rise in carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA).

Methods: A meta-analysis was undertaken. PubMed and Embase were searched for studies on the accuracy of whole-body imaging for patients with suspected local and/or distant recurrence of their CRC. Additionally, studies had to have included at least 20 patients with CRC and 2 × 2 contingency tables had to be provided or derivable. Articles evaluating only local recurrence or liver metastasis were excluded. Summary receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed from the data on sensitivity and specificity of individual studies and pooled estimates of diagnostic odds ratios (DORs) and areas under the ROC curve (AUCs) were calculated. To test for heterogeneity the Cochran Q test was used.

Results: Fourteen observational studies were included which evaluated PET, PET/CT, CT and/or MRI. Study results were available in 12 studies for PET, in 5 studies for CT, in 5 studies for PET/CT and in 1 study for MRI. AUCs for PET, PET/CT and CT were 0.94 (0.90-0.97), 0.94 (0.87-0.98) and 0.83 (0.72-0.90), respectively. In patient based analyses PET/CT had a higher diagnostic performance than PET with an AUC of 0.95 (0.89-0.97) for PET/CT vs 0.92 (0.86-0.96) for PET.

Conclusion: Both whole-body PET and PET/CT are very accurate for the detection of local and/or distant recurrent disease in CRC patients with a (high) suspicion of recurrent disease. CT has the lowest diagnostic performance. This difference is probably mainly due to the lower accuracy of CT for detection of extrahepatic metastases (including local recurrence). For clinical practice PET/CT might be the modality of choice when evaluating patients with a (high) suspicion of recurrent disease, because of its best performance in patient based analyses and confident prediction of disease status.

Citing Articles

Current Applications and Future Directions of Circulating Tumor Cells in Colorectal Cancer Recurrence.

Tsai K, Huang P, Chu P, Nguyen T, Hung H, Hsieh C Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(13).

PMID: 39001379 PMC: 11240518. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16132316.


Imaging in the era of risk-adapted treatment in colon cancer.

Lahaye M, Lambregts D, Aalbers A, Snaebjornsson P, Beets-Tan R, Kok N Br J Radiol. 2024; 97(1159):1214-1221.

PMID: 38648743 PMC: 11186558. DOI: 10.1093/bjr/tqae061.


Local Recurrences in Rectal Cancer: MRI vs. CT.

Grazzini G, Danti G, Chiti G, Giannessi C, Pradella S, Miele V Diagnostics (Basel). 2023; 13(12).

PMID: 37370997 PMC: 10296819. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13122104.


Surveillance strategies following curative resection and non-operative approach of rectal cancer: How and how long? Review of current recommendations.

Lauretta A, Montori G, Guerrini G World J Gastrointest Surg. 2023; 15(2):177-192.

PMID: 36896297 PMC: 9988648. DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v15.i2.177.


Follow-up after radiological intervention in oncology: ECIO-ESOI evidence and consensus-based recommendations for clinical practice.

Maas M, Beets-Tan R, Gaubert J, Munoz F, Habert P, Klompenhouwer L Insights Imaging. 2020; 11(1):83.

PMID: 32676924 PMC: 7366866. DOI: 10.1186/s13244-020-00884-5.


References
1.
Kim J, Czernin J, Allen-Auerbach M, Halpern B, Fueger B, Hecht J . Comparison between 18F-FDG PET, in-line PET/CT, and software fusion for restaging of recurrent colorectal cancer. J Nucl Med. 2005; 46(4):587-95. View

2.
Johnson K, Bakhsh A, Young D, Martin Jr T, Arnold M . Correlating computed tomography and positron emission tomography scan with operative findings in metastatic colorectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2001; 44(3):354-7. DOI: 10.1007/BF02234732. View

3.
Vitola J, Delbeke D, Sandler M, Campbell M, Powers T, Wright J . Positron emission tomography to stage suspected metastatic colorectal carcinoma to the liver. Am J Surg. 1996; 171(1):21-6. DOI: 10.1016/S0002-9610(99)80067-1. View

4.
Ruhlmann J, Schomburg A, Bender H, Oehr P, VAUPEL H, Wolter H . Fluorodeoxyglucose whole-body positron emission tomography in colorectal cancer patients studied in routine daily practice. Dis Colon Rectum. 1997; 40(10):1195-204. DOI: 10.1007/BF02055166. View

5.
Lonneux M, Delval D, Bausart R, MOENS R, Willockx R, Van Mael P . Can dual-headed 18F-FDG SPET imaging reliably supersede PET in clinical oncology? A comparative study in lung and gastrointestinal tract cancer. Nucl Med Commun. 1998; 19(11):1047-54. DOI: 10.1097/00006231-199811000-00004. View