Journals / European Archives of Medical Research / 2021 / Cilt: 37 - Sayı: 3

Evaluation of Preoperative Carcinoembryonic Antigen Positivity in Relation to Volume-based PET/CT Parameters in Patients with Colorectal Cancer

Pages
162–166
Publication Date
2022-10-12
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

CEA positivity in the preoperative period has low diagnostic effectiveness independent of the tumor load.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: This study aimed to determine the relationship between the tumor load and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) positivity by comparing CEA positivity and volume-based positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) preoperative parameters in patients with colorectal cancer.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: This retrospective study included a total of 87 patients with colorectal cancer who underwent PET/CT between January 2018 and December 2019 and had simultaneous CEA measurements.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:CEA positivity in the preoperative period has low diagnostic effectiveness independent of the tumor load.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2018 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to determine the relationship between the tumor load and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) positivity by comparing CEA positivity and volume-based positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) preoperative parameters in patients with colorectal cancer. Methods: This retrospective study included a total of 87 patients with colorectal cancer who underwent PET/CT between January 2018 and December 2019 and had simultaneous CEA measurements. CEA level ≥5 ng/mL was accepted as positive. Patients who underwent surgery or received chemotherapy/radiotherapy were excluded from the study. The maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), metabolic tumor volume (MTV), and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) values were calculated using 18fluoro-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT images of the patients. Results: CEA was positive in 43 (49.4%) patients. The site of the primary lesion was the rectum in 40 (46%) patients, sigmoid colon in 19 (21.8%), ascending colon in 14 (16.1%), descending colon in 9 (10.3%), transverse colon in 3 (3.4%), hepatic flexure in 1 (1.1%), and descendingsigmoid colon junction in 1 (1.1%). No significant association was noted between the intestinal segment of the primary lesion and CEA positivity (p=0.878). Moreover, no significant difference was found among SUVmax, MTV, and TLG values of the primary tumor and CEA positivity (p=0.611, p=0.980, and p=0.527, respectively). Conclusion: Preoperatively, no significant relationship was found between CEA positivity and volume-based PET/CT parameters, specifically MTV and TLG, in patients with colon cancer. CEA positivity in the preoperative period has low diagnostic effectiveness independent of the tumor load.

🔖

Cite This Article

CAN, C., GÜNDOĞAN, C., GÜZEL, Y. (2022). Evaluation of Preoperative Carcinoembryonic Antigen Positivity in Relation to Volume-based PET/CT Parameters in Patients with Colorectal Cancer. European Archives of Medical Research, Cilt: 37 - Sayı: 3, 162–166. https://ajindex.com/articles/510313

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:394- 424
  2. Gold P, Freedman SO. Specific carcinoembryonic antigens of the human digestive system. J Exp Med 1965;122:467-81
  3. Thompson JA, Grunert F, Zimmermann W. Carcinoembryonic antigen gene family: molecular biology and clinical perspectives. J Clin Lab Anal 1991;5:344-66
  4. Wang JY, Lu CY, Chu KS, Ma CJ, Wu DC, Tsai HL, et al. Prognostic significance of pre- and postoperative serum carcinoembryonic antigen levels in patients with colorectal cancer. Eur Surg Res 2007;39:245-50
  5. Herbertson RA, Lee ST, Tebbutt N, Scott AM. The expanding role of PET technology in the management of patients with colorectal cancer. Ann Oncol 2007;18:1774-81
  6. Shi D, Cai G, Peng J, Li D, Li X, Xu Y, et al. The preoperative SUVmax for (18)F-FDG uptake predicts survival in patients with colorectal cancer. BMC Cancer 2015;15:991
  7. Can C. Correlation of (18F) FDG PET/CT Parameters with Haematological Parameters in Esophageal Cancers and the Effect of These Parameters on Survival. Dicle Med J 2020;47:556-67
  8. Akdeniz N, Küçüköner M, Kaplan MA, Urakçı Z, Karhan O, Yerlikaya H, et al. The Effect of Metabolic PET Parameters on Survival Outcome in Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma. Dicle Med J 2020;47:16-23
  9. Ince S, Okuyucu K, Hancerliogulları O, Alagoz E, San H, Arslan N. Clinical Significance of Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography/computed Tomography in the Follow-up of Colorectal Cancer: Searching off Approaches Increasing Specificity for Detection of Recurrence. Radiol Oncol 2017;51:378-85
  10. Caglar M, Yener C, Karabulut E. Value of CT, FDG PET-CT and serum tumor markers in staging recurrent colorectal cancer. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2015;10:993-1002
  11. Dbouk HA, Tawil A, Nasr F, Kandakarjian L, Abou-Merhi R. Significance of CEA and VEGF as Diagnostic Markers of Colorectal Cancer in Lebanese Patients. Open Clin Cancer J 2007;1:1-5
  12. Siregar GA, Sibarani H. Comparison of Carcinoembryonic Antigen Levels Among Degree of Differentiation and Colorectal Cancer’s Location in Medan. Open Access Maced J Med Sci 2019;7:3447-50
  13. Lee JE, Kim SW, Kim JS, Choi KY, Kang WK, Oh ST, et al. Prognostic value of 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography in resectable colorectal cancer. World J Gastroentero