Colorectal Cancer

  • Hirofumi Shibata
  • Ukihide Tateishi
  • Tomio Inoue


Approximately 13 % new cases of colorectal cancer are diagnosed in the US every year, and approximately 70 % of these patients undergo a radical surgical resection of primary lesions, but only two thirds are cured. About one third of patients who undergo curative surgical resection of the primary lesion have a recurrence after the initial treatment (August TA, Ottow RT, Sugarbaker PH. Cancer Metastasis 3:303–324, 1984). After the initial surgical colorectal cancer resection, the accurate and early detection of potentially respectable metastatic tumors localized in the liver and lung is important in patient management. In cases of rectal cancer and sigmoid colon cancer, important also is the detection of pelvic recurrence that is amenable to resection with curative intent during the course of clinical follow-up after initial surgical treatment (Turk PS, Wanebo HJ. Cancer 72:4267–4277, 1993). Diagnosis of recurrence and the appropriate selection of patients for surgery are difficult because of the low sensitivity of computed tomography (CT) for early metastasis. Scar formation after resection of rectal cancer, which mimics local recurrence on CT and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can make it difficult to accurately diagnose local recurrence. More accurate preoperative restaging using fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) would reduce the frequency of surgery for nonresectable recurrence, and a more sensitive form of detecting tumor recurrence may increase the rate of resectability at restaging.


Positron Emission Tomography Rectal Cancer Colon Wall Lateral Pelvic Node Positron Emission Tomography Finding 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    August TA, Ottow RT, Sugarbaker PH. Clinical ­perspectives on human colorectal cancer metastases. Cancer Metastasis. 1984;3:303–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Turk PS, Wanebo HJ. Results of surgical treatment of nonhepatic recurrence of colorectal carcinoma. Cancer. 1993;72:4267–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nabi AH, Doerr RJ, Lamonica DM, et al. Staging of primary colorectal carcinomas with F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose whole-body PET: correlation with histopathologic and CT findings. Radiology. 1998;206:755–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yasuda S, Fuji H, Nakahara T, et al. F-18 FDG-PET detection of colonic adenoma. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:989–92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mukai M, Sadahiro S, Yasuda S, et al. Preoperative evaluation by whole body 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with primary colorectal cancer. Oncol Rep. 2000;7:85–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kantorova I, Lipska L, Belohlavek O, et al. Routine 18F_FDG PET pre-operative staging of colorectal cancer: comparison with conventional staging and its impact on treatment decision making. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1784–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Davey K, Heriot AG, Mackay J, et al. The impact of 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography on the staging and management of primary rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2008;51:997–1003.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cohade C, Osman M. Direct comparison of sup 18F-FDG PET and PET/CT in patients with colorectal carcinoma. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1797–803.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Heriot AG, Hicks RJ, Drummond EG, et al. Does positron emission tomography change management in primary rectal cancer? A prospective assessment. Dis Colon Rectum. 2004;47:451–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Huebner RH, Park KC, Shepherd IE, et al. A meta-analysis of the literature for whole-body FDG PET detection of colorectal cancer. J Nucl Med. 2000;41:1177–89.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ito K, Kato T, Tadokoro M, et al. Recurrent rectal cancer and scar: differentiation with PET and MR imaging. Radiology. 1992;182:549–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Abouzied I, Zubeldia JM, Nabi RA. Role of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the detection of occult recurrent carcinoma presenting with rising tumor markers. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:23.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Flangen FL, Dehdashi FD, Gunbiyi OA, et al. Utility of FDG-PET for investigating unexplained plasma CEA elevation in patients with colorectal cancer. Ann Surg. 1998;227:319–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Valk PE, Abella-Columna E, Haseman MK, et al. Whole-body PET imaging with F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose in management of recurrent colorectal cancer. Arch Surg. 1999;134:503–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schiepers C, Penninckx F, De Vadder N, et al. Contribution of PET in the diagnosis of recurrent colorectal cancer: comparison with conventional imaging. Eur J Surg Oncol. 1995;21:517–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vitola V, Delbeke D, Sandler MP, et al. Positron emission tomography to stage metastatic colorectal carcinoma to the liver. Am J Surg. 1996;171:21–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Delbeke D, Vitola I, Sandler MP, et al. Staging recurrent metastatic colorectal carcinoma with PET. J Nucl Med. 1997;38:1196–201.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ogunbiyi OA, Flanagan FL, Dehdashti F, et al. Detection of recurrent and metastatic colorectal cancer: comparison of positron emission tomography and computed tomography. Ann Surg Oncol. 1997;4:613–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kinkel K, Lu BM, et al. Detection of hepatic metastases from cancers of the gastrointestinal tract by using noninvasive imaging methods (US, CT, MRimaging, PET): a meta-analysis. Radiology. 2002;224(3):748–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Beets G, Penninckx F, Schiepers C, et al. Clinical value of whole-body positron emission tomography with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose in recurrent colorectal cancer. Br J Surg. 1994;81:1666–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lai DT, Fulham M, Stephen MS, et al. The role of whole-body positron emission tomography with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose in identifying operable colorectal cancer. Arch Surg. 1996;131:703–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Flamen P, Stroobants S, Van Cutsem E, et al. Additional value of whole body positron emission tomography with fluorine-18–2-fluoro-2deoxy-D-glucose in recurrent colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17(3):894–901.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Imdahl A, Reinhardt MI, Nitzsche EU, et al. Impact of 18F-FDG positron emission tomography for decision making in colorectal cancer recurrences. Arch Surg. 2000;385(2):129–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Staib L, Schirrmeister H, Reske SN, et al. Is (l8)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in recurrent colorectal cancer a contribution to surgical decision making? Am J Surg. 2000;180(1):1–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kalff Hicks R, Ware R. F-18 FDG PET for suspected or confirmed recurrence of colon cancer. A prospective study of impact and outcome. Clin Positron Imag. 2000;3:183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Strasberg SM, Dehdashti F, Siegel BA, et al. Survival of patients evaluated by FDG PET before hepatic resection for metastatic colorectal carcinoma: a prospective database study. Ann Surg. 2001;233:320–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ruers TJ, Langenhoff BS, Neeleman N, et al. Value of positron emission tomography with [F-18] fluorodeoxyglucose in patients with colorectal liver metastases: a prospective study. J Clin Onco1. 2002;20(2):388–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bar-shalom R, Yefremov N, Guralnik L, et al. Clinical performance of PET/CT in the evaluation of cancer: additional value for diagnostic imaging and patient management. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1200–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Selzner M, Hany TF, Wildbrett P, et al. Dose the novel PET/CT imaging modality impact on the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer of the liver? Ann Surg. 2004;204:1027–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Long-Bang C, Jin-Long T, Hai-Zhu S, et al. 18F-DG PET/CT in detection of recurrence and metastasis of colorectal cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2007;13(37):5025–9.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Carlo C, Lucia R, Paola AE, et al. Sequential FDG-PET/CT reliably predicts response of locally advanced rectal cancer to neo-adjuvant chemo-radiation therapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imag. 2007;34:1583–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Findlay M, Young H, Cunningham D, et al. Noninvasive monitoring of tumor metabolism using fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography in colorectal cancer liver metastases: correlation with tumor response to fluorouracil. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14:700–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Guillem J, Calle J, Akhurst T, et al. Prospective assessment of primary rectal cancer response to preoperative radiation and chemotherapy using 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Dis Colon Rectum. 2000;43:18–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Guillem JG, Moore HG, Akhurst T, et al. Sequential preoperative fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography assessment of response to preoperative chemoradiation: a means for determining long term outcomes of rectal cancer. J Am Coll Surg. 2004;199:1–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hirofumi Shibata
    • 1
  • Ukihide Tateishi
    • 1
  • Tomio Inoue
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyYokohama City University School of MedicineYokohamaJapan
  2. 2.Department of RadiologyYokohama City University School of MedicineYokohamaJapan

Personalised recommendations