Literature DB >> 25852143

Variation in positron emission tomography use after colon cancer resection.

Christina E Bailey1, Chung-Yuan Hu1, Y Nancy You1, Harmeet Kaur1, Randy D Ernst1, George J Chang2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Colon cancer surveillance guidelines do not routinely include positron emission tomography (PET) imaging; however, its use after surgical resection has been increasing. We evaluated the secular patterns of PET use after surgical resection of colon cancer among elderly patients and identified factors associated with its increasing use. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used the SEER-linked Medicare database (July 2001 through December 2009) to establish a retrospective cohort of patients age ≥ 66 years who had undergone surgical resection for colon cancer. Postoperative PET use was assessed with the test for trends. Patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics were analyzed using univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses.
RESULTS: Of the 39,221 patients with colon cancer, 6,326 (16.1%) had undergone a PET scan within 2 years after surgery. The use rate steadily increased over time. The majority of PET scans had been performed within 2 months after surgery. Among patients who had undergone a PET scan, 3,644 (57.6%) had also undergone preoperative imaging, and 1,977 (54.3%) of these patients had undergone reimaging with PET within 2 months after surgery. Marriage, year of diagnosis, tumor stage, preoperative imaging, postoperative visit to a medical oncologist, and adjuvant chemotherapy were significantly associated with increased PET use.
CONCLUSION: PET use after colon cancer resection is steadily increasing, and further study is needed to understand the clinical value and effectiveness of PET scans and the reasons for this departure from guideline-concordant care.
Copyright © 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25852143      PMCID: PMC4438115          DOI: 10.1200/JOP.2014.001933

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Oncol Pract        ISSN: 1554-7477            Impact factor:   3.840


  21 in total

Review 1.  Update on postoperative colorectal cancer surveillance.

Authors:  Richard W Schwartz; Shaun McKenzie
Journal:  Curr Surg       Date:  2005 Sep-Oct

2.  Clinicopathology and outcomes for mucinous and signet ring colorectal adenocarcinoma: analysis from the National Cancer Data Base.

Authors:  John R Hyngstrom; Chung-Yuan Hu; Yan Xing; Y Nancy You; Barry W Feig; John M Skibber; Miguel A Rodriguez-Bigas; Janice N Cormier; George J Chang
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2012-04-04       Impact factor: 5.344

3.  A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation.

Authors:  M E Charlson; P Pompei; K L Ales; C R MacKenzie
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1987

4.  Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative data: differing perspectives.

Authors:  P S Romano; L L Roos; J G Jollis
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 6.437

5.  The impact of FDG-PET on the management algorithm for recurrent colorectal cancer.

Authors:  T Arulampalam; D Costa; D Visvikis; P Boulos; I Taylor; P Ell
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med       Date:  2001-10-20

6.  Physician follow-up and observation of guidelines in the post treatment surveillance of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Gabriela M Vargas; Kristin M Sheffield; Abhishek D Parmar; Yimei Han; Kimberly M Brown; Taylor S Riall
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 3.982

7.  Colorectal cancer surveillance: 2005 update of an American Society of Clinical Oncology practice guideline.

Authors:  Christopher E Desch; Al B Benson; Mark R Somerfield; Patrick J Flynn; Carol Krause; Charles L Loprinzi; Bruce D Minsky; David G Pfister; Katherine S Virgo; Nicholas J Petrelli
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-10-31       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Is (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in recurrent colorectal cancer a contribution to surgical decision making?

Authors:  L Staib; H Schirrmeister; S N Reske; H G Beger
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 2.565

9.  Concordance with ASCO guidelines for surveillance after colorectal cancer treatment: a population-based analysis.

Authors:  Jeffrey J Sisler; Bosu Seo; Alan Katz; Emma Shu; Daniel Chateau; Piotr Czaykowski; Debrah Wirtzfeld; Harminder Singh; Donna Turner; Patricia Martens
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2012-01-31       Impact factor: 3.840

Review 10.  Follow-up of patients with curatively resected colorectal cancer: a practice guideline.

Authors:  Alvaro Figueredo; R Bryan Rumble; Jean Maroun; Craig C Earle; Bernard Cummings; Robin McLeod; Lisa Zuraw; Caroline Zwaal
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2003-10-06       Impact factor: 4.430

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  A systematic review of patient perspectives on surveillance after colorectal cancer treatment.

Authors:  Julia R Berian; Amanda Cuddy; Amanda B Francescatti; Linda O'Dwyer; Y Nancy You; Robert J Volk; George J Chang
Journal:  J Cancer Surviv       Date:  2017-06-22       Impact factor: 4.442

2.  Reliability of Contrast CT and Positron Emission Tomography in Post-Surgical Colorectal Cancer and Its Association with Obesity.

Authors:  Safenaz Y El Sherity; Shymaa A Shalaby; Nayera E Hassan; Sahar A El-Masry; Rokia A El-Banna
Journal:  Open Access Maced J Med Sci       Date:  2019-07-27
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.