Diagnostic Role of F-18 FDG PET/CT in the Follow-up of Patients with Colorectal Cancer: Comparison with Serum CEA, CA 19-9 Levels and Computed Tomography.
- Author:
Sungmin KANG
1
;
Bong Il SONG
;
Hong Je LEE
;
Ji Hyoung SEO
;
Sang Woo LEE
;
Jeongsoo YOO
;
Byeong Cheol AHN
;
Jaetae LEE
;
Kyusuk CHOI
;
Soo Han JUN
Author Information
1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Kyungpook National University Hospital, Daegu, Korea. jaetae@knu.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Colorectal cancer;
F-18 FDG PET/CT;
carcinoembryonic antigen;
carbohydrate antigen 19-9;
computed tomography;
recurrence
- MeSH:
Biopsy;
Carcinoembryonic Antigen;
Colorectal Neoplasms;
Follow-Up Studies;
Humans;
Neoplasm Metastasis;
Recurrence;
Sensitivity and Specificity;
Biomarkers, Tumor
- From:Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
2009;43(2):120-128
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: Early detection of recurrence is an important factor for long term survival of patients with colorectal cancer. Measurement of serum levels of CEA, CA 19-9, CT and PET/CT has been commonly used in the postoperative surveillance of colorectal cancer. The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic ability of PET/CT, tumor marker and CT for recurrence in colorectal cancer patients after treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: F-18 FDG PET/CT imaging was performed in 189 colorectal cancer patients who underwent curative surgical resection and/or chemotherapy. Measurement of serum levels of CEA, CA 19-9 and CT imaging were performed within 2 months of PET/CT examination. Final diagnosis of recurrence was made by biopsy, radiologic studies or clinical follow-up for 6 months after each study. RESULTS: Overall sensitivity, specificity of PET/CT was 94.7%, 91.1%, while those of serum CEA were 44.7% and 97.3%, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity were 94.2%, 90.4% for PET/CT and better than those of combined CEA and CA 19-9 measurement (52.1%, 88.5%) in 174 patients measured available both CEA and CA 19-9 data. In 115 patients with both tumor markers and CT images available, PET/CT showed similar sensitivity but higher specificity (92.9%, 91.3%) compared to combination of tumor markers and CT images (92.9%, 74.1%). CONCLUSION: PET/CT was superior for detection of recurred colorectal cancer patients compared with both CEA, CA 19-9, and even with combination of both tumor markers and CT. Therefore PET/CT could be used as a routine surveillance examination to detect recurrence or metastasis of colorectal cancer.
