Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26263901›Full record

ArticleCancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society2015

Diagnostic value of (18)F-FDG PET/CT as first choice in the detection of recurrent colorectal cancer due to rising CEA.

Michael Gade, Magdalena Kubik, Rune V Fisker, Ole Thorlacius-Ussing, Lars J Petersen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Diagnostic and prognostic value of quantitativeAbdominal radiology (New York) · 2025
    Article
  4. Evaluation ofClinical and translational radiation oncology · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Statistical Modeling of Relations Between PET/CT Parameters and CEA in Recurrent and Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH · 2023
    Article
  8. Radiologic Imaging Modalities for Colorectal Cancer.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2022
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Observational
  11. Role of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the Follow-up of Colorectal Cancer.Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH · 2020
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Michael GadeThe Department of Nuclear Medicine, Clinical Cancer Research Center, Aalborg University Hospital, Hobrovej 18-22, DK-9000, Aalborg, Denmark. michael.g@rn.dk.
Magdalena KubikThe Department of Nuclear Medicine, Clinical Cancer Research Center, Aalborg University Hospital, Hobrovej 18-22, DK-9000, Aalborg, Denmark. m.kubik9@yahoo.dk.
Rune V FiskerThe Department of Nuclear Medicine, Clinical Cancer Research Center, Aalborg University Hospital, Hobrovej 18-22, DK-9000, Aalborg, Denmark. rvf@rn.dk.
Ole Thorlacius-UssingThe Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Clinical Cancer Research Center, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark. otu@rn.dk.
Lars J PetersenThe Department of Nuclear Medicine, Clinical Cancer Research Center, Aalborg University Hospital, Hobrovej 18-22, DK-9000, Aalborg, Denmark. lajp@rn.dk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe diagnostic value of (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography ((18)F-FDG PET/CT) as the first imaging approach in the evaluation of rising carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is not clear. The objective of this study was to investigate the value of (18)F-FDG PET/CT in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) and suspected recurrence based on rising CEA.

methodsA total of 73 patients with CRC were referred to PET/CT after radical surgery. Generally, all patients were scheduled to follow a CT-based post-surgical follow-up regimen. In the case of rising CEA, (18)F-FDG PET/CT was performed in most patients with contrast-enhanced CT. The PET/CT images were independently reviewed by two readers. The presence or absence of recurrence was based on histology and/or standardized clinical follow-up.

resultsAmong 35 patients who had confirmed recurrence of CRC, PET/CT demonstrated recurrence with a sensitivity of 85.7 %, a specificity of 94.7 %, a positive predictive value of 93.8 %, and a negative predictive value of 87.8 %. The SUVmax ranged from 1.3 to 19.9. The mean time since the last postoperative imaging and PET/CT was 8 months (median 4 months). CEA values at referral ranged from 1.5 to 164.0 μg/L (median 5.6 μg/L). The diagnostic properties of PET/CT were analyzed in subgroups of patients with a single rising CEA sample (30 patients, 41 %), 31 patients (43 %) with two or more consecutive increases, and 12 patients (16 %) with persistently elevated values.

conclusions(18)F-FDG PET/contrast-enhanced CT has high diagnostic accuracy in the diagnosis of recurrent CRC, even in patients in a conventional CT-based follow-up program.

Indexed as

Fluorodeoxyglucose F18Positron-Emission TomographyRadiopharmaceuticalsTomography, X-Ray ComputedAdenocarcinomaAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCarcinoembryonic AntigenColonic NeoplasmsCombined Modality TherapyFemaleHumansLymphatic MetastasisMaleMiddle AgedCarcinoembryonic AntigenFluorodeoxyglucose F18Radiopharmaceuticals

Identifiers

PMID26263901
PMCPMC4534082

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.