Literature DB >> 27021493

Sensitivity of 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography for advanced colorectal neoplasms: a large-scale analysis of 7505 asymptomatic screening individuals.

Masau Sekiguchi1, Yasuo Kakugawa2, Takashi Terauchi3, Minori Matsumoto2, Hiroshi Saito4, Yukio Muramatsu3, Yutaka Saito2, Takahisa Matsuda2,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The sensitivity of 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) for advanced colorectal neoplasms among healthy subjects is not yet fully understood. The present study aimed to clarify the sensitivity by analyzing large-scale data from an asymptomatic screening population.
METHODS: A total of 7505 asymptomatic screenees who underwent both FDG-PET and colonoscopy at our Cancer Screening Division between February 2004 and March 2013 were analyzed. FDG-PET and colonoscopy were performed on consecutive days, and each examination was interpreted in a blinded fashion. The results of the two examinations were compared for each of the divided six colonic segments, with those from colonoscopy being set as the reference. The relationships between the sensitivity of FDG-PET and clinicopathological features of advanced neoplasms were also evaluated.
RESULTS: Two hundred ninety-one advanced neoplasms, including 24 invasive cancers, were detected in 262 individuals. Thirteen advanced neoplasms (advanced adenomas) were excluded from the analysis because of the coexistence of lesions in the same colonic segment. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of FDG-PET for advanced neoplasms were 16.9 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) 12.7-21.8 %], 99.3 % (95 % CI 99.2-99.4 %), 13.5 % (95 % CI 10.1-17.6 %), and 99.4 % (95 % CI 99.3-99.5 %), respectively. The sensitivity was lower for lesions with less advanced histological grade, of smaller size, and flat-type morphology, and for those located in the proximal part of the colon.
CONCLUSIONS: FDG-PET is believed to be difficult to use as a primary screening tool in population-based colorectal cancer screening because of its low sensitivity for advanced neoplasms. Even when it is used in opportunistic cancer screening, the limit of its sensitivity should be considered.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Advanced colorectal neoplasm; Colonoscopy; Colorectal cancer screening; Positron emission tomography

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27021493     DOI: 10.1007/s00535-016-1201-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0944-1174            Impact factor:   7.527


  44 in total

Review 1.  The Paris endoscopic classification of superficial neoplastic lesions: esophagus, stomach, and colon: November 30 to December 1, 2002.

Authors: 
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 9.427

Review 2.  Sano's capillary pattern classification for narrow-band imaging of early colorectal lesions.

Authors:  Toshio Uraoka; Yutaka Saito; Hiroaki Ikematsu; Kazuhide Yamamoto; Yasushi Sano
Journal:  Dig Endosc       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 7.559

3.  The potential usefulness of (18)F-FDG PET/CT for detecting colorectal carcinoma and adenoma in asymptomatic adults.

Authors:  Jae Pil Hwang; Sang-Keun Woo; Sang Yun Yoon; Su Young Jeong
Journal:  Ann Nucl Med       Date:  2014-10-31       Impact factor: 2.668

4.  Detectability of colorectal neoplasia with fluorine-18-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT).

Authors:  Tomoko Hirakawa; Jun Kato; Yoshihiro Okumura; Keisuke Hori; Sakuma Takahashi; Hideyuki Suzuki; Mitsuhiro Akita; Reiji Higashi; Shunsuke Saito; Eisuke Kaji; Toshio Uraoka; Sakiko Hiraoka; Kazuhide Yamamoto
Journal:  J Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-10-08       Impact factor: 7.527

Review 5.  The advanced adenoma as the primary target of screening.

Authors:  Sidney J Winawer; Ann G Zauber
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am       Date:  2002-01

6.  Second-generation colon capsule endoscopy compared with colonoscopy.

Authors:  Cristiano Spada; Cesare Hassan; Miguel Munoz-Navas; Horst Neuhaus; Jacques Deviere; Paul Fockens; Emmanuel Coron; Gerard Gay; Ervin Toth; Maria Elena Riccioni; Cristina Carretero; Jean P Charton; Andrè Van Gossum; Carolien A Wientjes; Sylvie Sacher-Huvelin; Michel Delvaux; Artur Nemeth; Lucio Petruzziello; Cesar Prieto de Frias; Rupert Mayershofer; Leila Amininejad; Leila Aminejab; Evelien Dekker; Jean-Paul Galmiche; Muriel Frederic; Gabriele Wurm Johansson; Paola Cesaro; Guido Costamagna
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2011-05-20       Impact factor: 9.427

7.  Effect of clinicopathologic factors on visibility of colorectal polyps with FDG PET.

Authors:  Masatoyo Nakajo; Seishi Jinnouchi; Yukie Tashiro; Hiroshi Shirahama; Eiichi Sato; Chihaya Koriyama; Masayuki Nakajo
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.959

8.  18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography has limited sensitivity for colonic adenoma and early stage colon cancer.

Authors:  Shai Friedland; Roy Soetikno; Marie Carlisle; Alan Taur; Tonya Kaltenbach; George Segall
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 9.427

9.  Screening for colorectal neoplasms with new fecal occult blood tests: update on performance characteristics.

Authors:  James E Allison; Lori C Sakoda; Theodore R Levin; Jo P Tucker; Irene S Tekawa; Thomas Cuff; Mary Pat Pauly; Lyle Shlager; Albert M Palitz; Wei K Zhao; J Sanford Schwartz; David F Ransohoff; Joseph V Selby
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2007-09-25       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 10.  Emerging concepts in colorectal neoplasia.

Authors:  Jeremy R Jass; Vicki L J Whitehall; Joanne Young; Barbara A Leggett
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 22.682

View more
  6 in total

1.  A scoring model for predicting advanced colorectal neoplasia in a screened population of asymptomatic Japanese individuals.

Authors:  Masau Sekiguchi; Yasuo Kakugawa; Minori Matsumoto; Takahisa Matsuda
Journal:  J Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-01-22       Impact factor: 7.527

2.  Performance of 18-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography for esophageal cancer screening.

Authors:  Masau Sekiguchi; Takashi Terauchi; Yasuo Kakugawa; Naoki Shimada; Yutaka Saito; Takahisa Matsuda
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-04-21       Impact factor: 5.742

3.  Combined SUVmax and localized colonic wall thickening parameters to identify high-risk lesions from incidental focal colorectal 18F-FDG uptake foci.

Authors:  Wenmin Xu; Hansen Li; Ziqian Guo; Linqi Zhang; Rusen Zhang; Long Zhang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-08-12       Impact factor: 5.738

4.  A Novel Theranostic Combination of Near-infrared Fluorescence Imaging and Laser Irradiation Targeting c-KIT for Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors.

Authors:  Shota Fujimoto; Naoki Muguruma; Koichi Okamoto; Takeshi Kurihara; Yasushi Sato; Yoshihiko Miyamoto; Shinji Kitamura; Hiroshi Miyamoto; Takahiro Taguchi; Koichi Tsuneyama; Tetsuji Takayama
Journal:  Theranostics       Date:  2018-03-21       Impact factor: 11.556

5.  Efficacy of 18-fluoro deoxy glucose-positron emission tomography computed tomography for the detection of colonic neoplasia proximal to obstructing colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Daisuke Hojo; Toshiaki Tanaka; Miwako Takahashi; Koji Murono; Shigenobu Emoto; Manabu Kaneko; Kazuhito Sasaki; Kensuke Otani; Takeshi Nishikawa; Keisuke Hata; Kazushige Kawai; Toshimitsu Momose; Hiroaki Nozawa
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 1.817

6.  Limited usefulness of serum carcinoembryonic antigen and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels for gastrointestinal and whole-body cancer screening.

Authors:  Masau Sekiguchi; Takahisa Matsuda
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-10-23       Impact factor: 4.379

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.