Imaging Techniques Contribute to Increased Surgical Rescue of Relapse in the Follow-Up of Colorectal Cancer (original) (raw)
Related papers
Yield of routine imaging after curative colorectal cancer treatment
Acta chirurgica Belgica
The use of imaging in the follow-up of patients after curative colorectal cancer resection is much debated. The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons did not recommend routine imaging. This retrospective study assesses the yield of routine imaging to detect recurrent disease. In 1998, 108 consecutive patients underwent curative resection for colorectal carcinoma. Minimum followup in our institution was 3 years. Multidisciplinary follow-up at a joint clinic consisted out of a history, clinical examination, serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), chest X-ray and abdominal ultrasound, at least every 6 months. Colonoscopy was performed within 1 year after operation and every 3 to 5 years thereafter. The incidence, timing, means of detection and resectability of recurrence were studied. The recurrence rate was 22% (24 patients): liver metastases (11), extra-hepatic recurrence (10) and combined recurrence (3). Recurrent disease occurred in stage II or III cancer, except for two pati...
Detection of recurrence after surgery for colorectal cancer
European Journal of Cancer, 1995
Of all patients operated for colorectal cancer, 1 in 3 will suffer from cancer recurrence, and most of these patients will die from disseminated disease. Postoperative follow-up aims at improving these grim figures. This sound idea has not been supported by any empirical data. In the current article, we discuss some theoretical issues concerning colorectal cancer follow-up, and present results of a cost-effectiveness analysis, used to model the natural history of colorectal cancer recurrence and the costs and effects of follow-up and re-operation. The expected results of three policies were calculated: no follow-up, selective follow-up and intensive follow-up. For most patients, follow-up will only lead to a significant increase in costs, without increase in (quality-adjusted) life expectancy. Colorectal cancer follow-up is not "evidence-based medicine".
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery, 2006
Assessment of risk-independent follow-up to detect asymptomatic recurrence after curative resection of colorectal cancer Abstract Background and aims: Colorectal cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer death. We analyzed the value of standardized, risk-independent postoperative surveillance. Materials and methods: Between 1995 and 2001, 564 patients with colorectal cancer underwent standardized oncologic resection. One hundred thirty-four were unable to take part in the surveillance program, while 430 patients were grouped as follows: group I (n=272, risk-independent follow-up), group II (n=113, follow-up at other departments), and group III (n=45, no follow-up). Results: The 5-year cancer-specific survival rate for UICC III and IV was significantly higher in group I (87%) as compared to group II (35%). In group I, the 5-year disease-free survival rate was 70%. Cancer recurrence occurred at mean 17 (±12) months after colorectal resection and yielded a 5-year survival rate of 63%. Reresection was performed in 17 (35%) patients, of whom ten remained disease-free (5-year survival rate, 91%). The money spent for one patient's 5-year follow-up was 1665. Conclusions: A standardized, risk-independent follow-up program allows early diagnosis of asymptomatic recurrence of colorectal cancer. Reresection improves the 5-year survival rate in this setting.
Colorectal Cancer: Postoperative Follow-up and Surveillance
Indian Journal of Surgery, 2017
Follow-up and surveillance form an important aspect of care in patients with colorectal cancers (CRC). Most recurrences will occur within 2 years of surgery and 90% by 5 years. Follow up protocols have not been well defined in stage I disease and the approach should be individualized. As 40% of patients with stages II and III will develop recurrences, intensive postoperative follow-up strategy is recommended for them. It includes visit to the clinician for clinical examination, serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), computed tomography (CT) of the chest and abdomen, colonoscopy, and flexible proctosigmoidoscopy in rectal cancers. Surveillance should be undertaken in those who are medically fit for repeat surgical procedures or for chemoradiotherapy. The concept of intensive post operative surveillance is based on the fact that some of these patients can have resectable/curable recurrence.
European Journal of Radiology, 2005
Recurrent disease in colorectal cancer occurs in approximately 50% of patients who undergo a "curative" operation. Tumor recurrence may occur locally (at the anastomotic site), in the mesentery or mesocolon adjacent to the post-operative site, in the nodal echelon downstream to the post-operative site, and as distant metastases to the peritoneal cavity, liver or lung. Local recurrence at the anastomosis is frequently diagnosed at follow-up endoscopic examinations as part of screening for metachronous lesions. Other types of recurrences require imaging studies, most frequently CT or MR imaging to diagnose. We developed an approach to analyze imaging obtained after curative resection of colorectal cancer. Our approach is based on the knowledge of patterns of disease spread, of types of surgical procedures and of pathologic staging. Using this approach has the potential to detect recurrent disease at an early stage because the locoregional and nodal spread of this disease is predictable. Early diagnosis of recurrent disease, even in asymptomatic cases, allows for more effective treatment that can improve the long-term survival of these patients.
Follow-up of colorectal cancer resected for cure
Dis Colon Rectum, 1987
Sixty-four consecutive patients who had undergone curative resection for colorectal carcinoma were studied prospectively to evaluate the roles of sequential CEA determinations and independent instrumental follow-up in the early detection of resectable recurrences. Fifty-two of these patients also were submitted to sequential determinations of other tumor antigens: TPA (tissue polypeptide antigen) and Ca 19-9 (colon cancer antigen detected with a monodonal antibody), for a retrospective evaluation of their utility as markers of recurrent tumors. Twenty-two recurrences were detected in a period ranging from 12 to 72 months (median, ,t7 months). CEA was the best predictor of recurrence (sensitivity, 90 percent) when compared with the other two markers (TPA sensitivity, 60 percent; Ca 19-9 sensitivity, 20 percent). When compared with the instrumental or biochemical examinations of the follow-up, CEA was still the most sensitive indicator of relapse although the specificity was quite low (78 percent) if minimal significative increases were considered. History and physical examination were more useful than CEA in detecting local recurrences in rectal cancer where the preoperative CEA level was low. A few second-look explorations based solely on small CEA increases failed to demonstrate recurrence or revealed peritoneal carcinomatosis. Selected second-look surgery based on demonstrated recurrences resulted in a resectability rate of 57 percent. A follow-up program based on frequent CEA assays, history, and physical examinations, including rectal, vaginal, and perineal exploration, is proposed. Extensive instrumental investigations should follow when aminimal significative CEA rise is observed, or when history and physical examinations suggest a possible recurfence. Second-look surgery should be evaluated after confirmed or highly suspected diagnosis of recurrence, on the basis of instrumental or clinical examinations.
Follow-up of patients with colorectal cancer
European Journal of Cancer, 2002
Follow-up after curative treatment of patients with colorectal cancer has as its main aims the quality assessment of the treatment given, patient support, and improved outcome by the early detection and treatment of cancer recurrence. How often, and to what extent, the final aim, improved survival, is indeed realised is so far unclear. A literature search was performed to provide quantitative estimates for the main determinants of the effectiveness of the follow-up. Data were extracted from a total of 267 articles and databases, and were aggregated using modern meta-analytic methods. In order to provide one more colorectal cancer patient with long-term survival through follow-up, 360 positive follow-up tests and 11 operations for colorectal cancer recurrence are needed. In the remaining 359 tests and 10 operations, either no gains are achieved or harm is done. As the third aim of colorectal cancer follow-up, improved survival, is realised in only few patients, follow-up should focus less on diagnosis and treatment of recurrences. It should be of limited intensity and duration (3 years), and the search for preclinical cancer recurrence should primarily be performed by carcino-embryonic antigen (CEA) testing and ultrasound (US). The focus of colorectal cancer follow-up should shift from the early detection of recurrence towards quality assessment and patient support. As support that is as good or even better can be provided by a patient's general practitioner (GP) or by specialised nursing personnel, there is no need for routine follow-up to be performed by the surgeon.
Journal of Cancer, 2014
Despite advances in neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy, attention to proper surgical technique, and improved pathological staging for both the primary and metastatic lesions, almost half of all colorectal cancer patients will develop recurrent disease. More concerning, this includes ~25% of patients with theoretically curable node-negative, non-metastatic Stage I and II disease. Given the annual incidence of colorectal cancer, approximately 150,000 new patients are candidates each year for follow-up surveillance. When combined with the greater population already enrolled in a surveillance protocol, this translates to a tremendous number of patients at risk for recurrence. It is therefore imperative that strategies aim for detection of recurrence as early as possible to allow initiation of treatment that may still result in cure. Yet, controversy exists regarding the optimal surveillance strategy (high-intensity vs. traditional), ideal testing regimen, and overall effectiveness. While benefits may involve earlier detection of recurrence, psychological welfare improvement, and greater overall survival, this must be weighed against the potential disadvantages including more invasive tests, higher rates of reoperation, and increased costs. In this review, we will examine the current options available and challenges surrounding colorectal cancer surveillance and early detection of recurrence.
Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 2014
To investigate clinicopathological features in patients with recurrent colorectal cancer within 1 year and more than 1 year after curative resection. We retrospectively evaluated 103 patients with disease recurrence before versus after 1 year of resection. Thirty-two patients (31%) were diagnosed with recurrence less than 1 year after curative resection for colorectal cancer (early recurrence) and 71 (69%) after more than 1 year (non-early recurrence). The early recurrence group displayed a significantly lower overall survival rate for both colon cancer (p=0, 01) and rectal cancer (p<0.001). Inadequate lymph node dissection was a significant predictor for early relapse. There were no statistically significant differences in clinicopathological variables such as age, sex, primary tumor localization, stage, depth of invasion, lymphovascular invasion and perineural invasion between the early and non-early recurrence groups. However, a K-ras mutation subgroup was significantly associ...