FDG-PETCT versus contrast-enhanced computed tomography in diagnosis of post-therapeutic colorectal cancer recurrence and metastases

Diagnostic Performance of F-18 FDG PET/CT in the Detection of Recurrent Colorectal Cancer: Correlation with Biochemical Markers and Conventional Imaging Modalities

Background/Objectives: Although the role of PET/CT imaging is well established in oncology, its diagnostic value in routine monitoring for recurrent colorectal cancer (CRC) is still controversial. The aim was to evaluate the diagnostic value of F-18 FDG PET/CT in detecting recurrent CRC in correlation with CEA, CA 19-9 levels, and conventional imaging modalities (CIM). Methods: Between 2009 and 2023, a retrospective study was performed including 134 CRC patients referred for PET/CT imaging on the suspicion of recurrence, based on elevated CEA and/or CA 19-9 and/or equivocal CIM findings. According to our institution's Tumor Board CRC protocol, after the initial treatment, which was dependent on the TNM stage (neoadjuvant therapy, primary resection, or adjuvant treatment), patients underwent a standard 5-year surveillance including CEA and CA 19-9 measurements, CIM, and colonoscopy, every six months. The statistics, including univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted using the IBM SPSS 20.0 statistical software. p-values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: Recurrent CRC was confirmed in 54/134 (40.3%) patients with elevated tumor markers. PET/CT showed high diagnostic performance in detecting recurrent CRC with sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy of 94.4%, 82.5%, 78.5%, 95.7%, and 87.3%, respectively. The CEA showed a high sensitivity of 98.1% but both low specificity and accuracy of 15% and 48.5%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for CA 19-9 and CIM for diagnosis of CRC recurrence were 44.4%, 67.5%, 58.2%, and 51.9%, 98.8%, 79.9%, respectively. The AUC for PET/CT, elevated CEA levels, CIM, and elevated CA 19-9 levels was 0.885 (95% CI: 0.824-0.946; p < 0.001), 0.844 (95% CI: 0.772-0.916; p < 0.001), 0.753 (95% CI: 0.612-0.844; p < 0.001), and 0.547 (95% CI: 0.442-0.652; p = 0.358), respectively. Univariate analysis showed that both PET/CT and CIM positive results were highly associated with CRC recurrence (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). At the same time, gender, mucinous tumor type, presence of initial lymph node metastasis (N+), and presence of initial distant metastasis (M+) had no significance (p = 0.211, p = 0.158, p = 0.583, and p = 0.201, respectively). Our multivariate analysis showed that independent predictors for CRC recurrence are positive PET/CT scans (p < 0.001), positive CIM results (p = 0.001), and elevated CA 19-9 levels (p = 0.023). Although CA 19-9 was not detected as a statistically significant predictor in the univariate analysis (p = 0.358), in a multivariate analysis it was recognized as a significant predicting factor in detecting the CRC recurrence (p = 0.023). Conclusions: F-18 FDG PET/CT showed high diagnostic efficacy in CRC recurrence detection, in correlation with CEA levels, CA 19-9 levels, and CIM. This imaging modality should be routinely integrated into the post-operative follow-op in patients with elevated tumor markers.

The Diagnostic Impact of Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography (CECT) in Evaluating Lymph Node Involvement in Colorectal Cancer: A Comprehensive Review

Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains a significant global health burden, necessitating accurate staging and treatment planning for optimal patient outcomes. Lymph node involvement is a critical determinant of prognosis in CRC, emphasizing the importance of reliable imaging techniques for its evaluation. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) has emerged as a cornerstone in CRC imaging, offering high-resolution anatomical detail and vascular assessment. This comprehensive review synthesizes the existing literature to evaluate the diagnostic impact of CECT in assessing lymph node involvement in CRC. Key findings highlight CECT's high sensitivity and specificity in detecting lymph node metastases, facilitating accurate staging and treatment selection. However, challenges such as limited resolution for small lymph nodes and potential false-positives call for a cautious interpretation. Recommendations for clinical practice suggest the integration of CECT into multidisciplinary treatment algorithms, optimizing imaging protocols and enhancing collaboration between radiologists and clinicians. Future research directions include refining imaging protocols, comparative effectiveness studies with emerging modalities, and prospective validation of CECT's prognostic value. Overall, this review stresses the pivotal role of CECT in CRC management and identifies avenues for further advancements in imaging-guided oncology care.

Follow-Up 18F-FDG PET/CT versus Contrast-Enhanced CT after Ablation of Liver Metastases of Colorectal Carcinoma-A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

PURPOSE

After a percutaneous ablation of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), follow-up investigations to evaluate potential tumor recurrence are necessary. The aim of this study was to analyze whether a combined 18F-Fluordesoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) scan is cost-effective compared to a contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT) scan for detecting local tumor progression.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A decision model based on Markov simulations that estimated lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) was developed. Model input parameters were obtained from the recent literature. Deterministic sensitivity analysis of diagnostic parameters based on a Monte-Carlo simulation with 30,000 iterations was performed. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) was set to $100,000/QALY.

RESULTS

In the base-case scenario, CE-CT resulted in total costs of $28,625.08 and an efficacy of 0.755 QALYs, whereas 18F-FDG PET/CT resulted in total costs of $29,239.97 with an efficacy of 0.767. Therefore, the corresponding incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 18F-FDG PET/CT was $50,338.96 per QALY indicating cost-effectiveness based on the WTP threshold set above. The results were stable in deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

Based on our model, 18F-FDG PET/CT can be considered as a cost-effective imaging alternative for follow-up investigations after percutaneous ablation of colorectal liver metastases.