Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Diagnostic Value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in Detecting Local Recurrent Colorectal Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of 26 Individual Studies

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Cell Biochemistry and Biophysics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) has emerged as a new modality for colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the diagnostic value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in detecting local recurrence in patients with CRC. We searched PubMed, Medline, Embase, and ISI databases to collect articles in English that evaluated the diagnostic value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with CRC. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of each study using the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies tool. The data were analyzed using Meta-Disc (Version 1.4) and Stata (Version 12.0) software. We estimated the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC). A total of 26 studies were included. When all the eligible studies included, the pooled sensitivity and specificity for 18F-FDG PET/CT in detecting CRC were 0.94 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.92–0.96) and 0.94 (95 % CI 0.93–0.95), respectively. The pooled PLR and NLR were 14.39 (95 % CI 7.37–28.09) and 0.08 (95 % CI 0.06–0.12), respectively. The DOR was 208.67 (95 % CI 109.56–397.44) and the area under the SROC curve was 0.9776. The overall diagnostic accuracy (Q* index) was 0.9329. 18F-FDG PET/CT has good diagnostic performance in detecting local recurrence in patients with CRC. Further larger prospective studies are needed to establish its value for detecting local recurrence of CRC cancer patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Siegel, R., Naishadham, D., & Jemal, A. (2013). Cancer statistics, 2013. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 63(1), 11–30.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bellomi, M., Rizzo, S., Travainni, L. L., et al. (2007). Role of multidetector CT and FDG-PET/CT in the diagnosis of local and distant recurrence of resected rectal cancer. Medical Radiology, 112(5), 681–690.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Delbeke, D., & Martin, W. H. (2004). PET and PET-CT for evaluation colorectal carcinoma. Seminars in Nuclear Medicine, 34(3), 209–223.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Czernin, J., Benz, M. R., & Allen-Auerbach, M. S. (2010). PET/CT imaging: The incremental value of assessing the glucose metabolic phenotype and the structure of cancers in a single examination. European Journal of Radiology, 73, 470–480.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Whiting, P., Rutjes, A. W., Reitsma, J. B., Bossuyt, P. M., & Kleijnen, J. (2003). The development of QUADAS: A tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 3, 25.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Whiteford, M. H., Whiteford, H. M., Yee, L. F., Ogunbiyi, O. A., Dehdashti, F., Siegel, B. A., et al. (2000). Usefulness of FDG-PET scan in the assessment of suspected metastatic or recurrent adenocarcinoma of the colon and rectum. Diseases of the Colon and Rectum, 43(6), 759–767.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Arulampalam, T., Costa, D., Visvikis, D., Boulos, P., Taylor, I., & Ell, P. (2001). The impact of FDG-PET on the management algorithm for recurrent colorectal cancer. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 28(12), 1758–1765.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Schlag, P., Lehner, B., Strauss, L. G., Georgi, P., & Herfarth, C. (1989). Scar or recurrent rectal cancer. Positron emission tomography is more helpful for diagnosis than immunoscintigraphy. Archives of Surgery, 124(2), 197–200.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Shyn, P. B., Madan, R., Wu, C., Erturk, S. M., & Silverman, S. G. (2010). PET/CT pattern analysis for surgical staple line recurrence in patients with colorectal cancer. AJR American Journal of Roentgenology, 194(2), 414–421.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kitajima, K., Murakami, K., Yamasaki, E., Domeki, Y., Tsubaki, M., Sunagawa, M., et al. (2009). Performance of integrated FDG PET/contrast-enhanced CT in the diagnosis of recurrent colorectal cancer: Comparison with integrated FDG PET/non-contrast-enhanced CT and enhanced CT. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 36(9), 1388–1396.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Keogan, M. T., Lowe, V. J., Baker, M. E., McDermott, V. G., Lyerly, H. K., & Coleman, R. E. (1997). Local recurrence of rectal cancer: Evaluation with F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose PET imaging. Abdominal Imaging, 22(3), 332–337.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Staib, L., Schirrmeister, H., Reske, S. N., & Beger, H. G. (2000). Is (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in recurrent colorectal cancer a contribution to surgical decision making? American Journal of Surgery, 180(1), 1–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Fukunaga, H., Sekimoto, M., Ikeda, M., Higuchi, I., Yasui, M., Seshimo, I., et al. (2005). Fusion image of positron emission tomography and computed tomography for the diagnosis of local recurrence of rectal cancer. Annals of Surgical Oncology, 12(7), 561–569.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lonneux, M., Reffad, A. M., Detry, R., Kartheuser, A., Gigot, J. F., & Pauwels, S. (2002). FDG-PET improves the staging and selection of patients with recurrent colorectal cancer. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 29(7), 915–921.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Willkomm, P., Bender, H., Bangard, M., Decker, P., Grünwald, F., & Biersack, H. J. (2000). FDG PET and immunoscintigraphy with 99mTc-labeled antibody fragments for detection of the recurrence of colorectal carcinoma. Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 41(10), 1657–1663.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Selzner, M., Hany, T. F., Wildbrett, P., McCormack, L., Kadry, Z., & Clavien, P. A. (2004). Does the novel PET/CT imaging modality impact on the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer of the liver? Annals of Surgery, 240(6), 1027–1034.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ogunbiyi, O. A., Flanagan, F. L., Dehdashti, F., Siegel, B. A., Trask, D. D., Birnbaum, E. H., et al. (1997). Detection of recurrent and metastatic colorectal cancer: Comparison of positron emission tomography and computed tomography. Annals of Surgical Oncology, 4(8), 613–620.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Even-Sapir, E., Parag, Y., Lerman, H., Gutman, M., Levine, C., Rabau, M., et al. (2004). Detection of recurrence in patients with rectal cancer: PET/CT after abdominoperineal or anterior resection. Radiology, 232(3), 815–822.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Fiocchi, F., Iotti, V., Ligabue, G., Pecchi, A., Luppi, G., Bagni, B., et al. (2010). Contrast-enhanced MRI and PET-CT in the evaluation of patients with suspected local recurrence of rectal carcinoma. Medical Radiology, 115(6), 906–919.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Deleau, C., Buecher, B., Rousseau, C., Kraeber-Bodéré, F., Flamant, M., des Varannes, S. B., et al. (2011). Clinical impact of fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography scan/computed tomography in comparison with computed tomography on the detection of colorectal cancer recurrence. European Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 23(3), 275–281.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Takeuchi, O., Saito, N., Koda, K., Sarashina, H., & Nakajima, N. (1999). Clinical assessment of positron emission tomography for the diagnosis of local recurrence in colorectal cancer. British Journal of Surgery, 86(7), 932–937.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Moore, H. G., Akhurst, T., Larson, S. M., Minsky, B. D., Mazumdar, M., & Guillem, J. G. (2003). A case-controlled study of 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the detection of pelvic recurrence in previously irradiated rectal cancer patients. Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 197(1), 22–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bamba, Y., Itabashi, M., & Kameoka, S. (2011). Management of local recurrence of colorectal cancer: The role of PET/CT. Abdominal Imaging, 36(3), 322–326.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Schiepers, C., Penninckx, F., De Vadder, N., Merckx, E., Mortelmans, L., Bormans, G., et al. (1995). Contribution of PET in the diagnosis of recurrent colorectal cancer: Comparison with conventional imaging. European Journal of Surgical Oncology, 21(5), 517–522.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Han, A., Xue, J., Zhu, D., Zheng, J., Yue, J., & Yu, J. (2011). Clinical value of (18)F-FDG PET/CT in postoperative monitoring for patients with colorectal carcinoma. Cancer Epidemiology, 35(5), 497–500.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Smeets, P., Ham, H., Ceelen, W., Boterberg, T., Verstraete, K., & Goethals, I. (2010). Differentiation between peri-anastomotic inflammatory changes and local recurrence following neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy surgery for colorectal cancer using visual and semiquantitative analysis of PET-CT data. Quarterly Journal of Nuclear Medicine Molecular Imaging, 54(3), 327–332.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Ozkan, E., Soydal, C., Araz, M., & Aras, G. (2012). Serum carcinoembryonic antigen measurement, abdominal contrast-enhanced computed tomography, and fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the detection of colorectal cancer recurrence: A correlative study. Nuclear Medicine Communications, 33(9), 990–994.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Peng, J., He, Y., Xu, J., Sheng, J., Cai, S., & Zhang, Z. (2011). Detection of incidental colorectal tumors with 18F-labelled 2-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography scans: Results of a prospective study. Colorectal Disease, 13, e374–e378.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Chiewvit, S., Jiranantanakorn, T., Apisarnthanarak, P., Kanchaanapiboon, P., Hannanthawiwat, C., Ubolnuch, K., et al. (2013). Detection of recurrent colorectal cancer by 18F-FDG PET/CT comparison with contrast enhanced CT scan. Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand, 96(6), 703–708.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Panagiotidis, E., Quigley, A. M., Pencharz, D., Ardeshna, K., Syed, R., Sajjan, R., et al. (2014). (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in diagnosis of post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder. Leukemia & Lymphoma, 55(3), 515–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Munafo, M. R., & Flint, J. (2004). Meta-analysis of genetic association studies. Trends in Genetics, 20, 439–444.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Ioannidis, J. P., Boffetta, P., Little, J., O’Brien, T. R., Uitterlinden, A. G., et al. (2008). Assessment of cumulative evidence on genetic associations: Interim guidelines. International Journal of Epidemiology, 37, 120–132.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Glas, A. S., Lijmer, J. G., Prins, M. H., et al. (2003). The diagnostic odds ratio: A single indicator of test performance. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 56(11), 1129–1135.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors have declared that no competing interest exists.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Liaoning Cancer Hospital & Institute, Dalian Medical University Clinical Oncology College, Shenyang, 110042, China

    Tao Yu, Nan Meng, Da Chi, Yingjie Zhao, Kunzhe Wang & Yahong Luo

Authors
  1. Tao Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nan Meng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Da Chi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yingjie Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kunzhe Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yahong Luo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yahong Luo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yu, T., Meng, N., Chi, D. et al. Diagnostic Value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in Detecting Local Recurrent Colorectal Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of 26 Individual Studies. Cell Biochem Biophys 72, 443–451 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12013-014-0485-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12013-014-0485-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation