Abstract
Purpose
To determine whether frequent measurement of tumor markers triggers early detection of colorectal cancer recurrence.
Methods
Of 1,651 consecutive patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery between 2010 and 2016, 1,050 were included. CEA and CA 19-9 were considered to be postoperative tumor markers and were measured every 3 months for 3 years, and then every 6 months for 2 years. Sensitivity analysis of elevated CEA and CA19-9 levels and multivariate analysis of factors associated with elevated CEA and CA19-9 levels were performed. The proportion of triggers for detecting recurrence was determined.
Results
The median follow-up period was 5.3 years. After applying the exclusion criteria, 1,050 patients were analyzed, 176 (16.8%) of whom were found to have recurrence. After excluding patients with persistently elevated CEA and CA19-9 levels before and after surgery from the 176 patients, 71 (43.6%) of 163 patients had elevated CEA levels and 35 (20.2%) of 173 patients had elevated CA19-9 levels. Sensitivity/positive predictive values for elevated CEA and CA19-9 levels at recurrence were 43.6%/32.3% and 20.2%/32.4%, respectively. Lymph node metastasis was a factor associated with both elevated CEA and CA19-9 levels at recurrence. Of the 176 patients, computed tomography triggered the detection of recurrence in 137 (78%) and elevated tumor marker levels in 13 (7%); the diagnostic lead interval in the latter 13 patients was 1.7 months.
Conclusion
Tumor marker measurements in surveillance after radical colorectal cancer resection contribute little to early detection, and frequent measurements are unnecessary for stage I patients with low risk of recurrence.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL et al (2021) Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 71:209–249
Cancer Statistics. Cancer Information Service, National Cancer Center, Japan (National Cancer Registry, Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare). Accessed 8 Aug 2022
Biller LH, Schrag D (2021) Diagnosis and treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: a review. JAMA 325:669–685
Rodríguez-Moranta F, Saló J, Arcusa A et al (2006) Postoperative surveillance in patients with colorectal cancer who have undergone curative resection: a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 24:386–393
Tjandra JJ, Chan MK (2007) Follow-up after curative resection of colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Dis Colon Rectum 50:1783–1799
Togashi K, Konishi F, Ozawa A et al (2000) Predictive factors for detecting colorectal carcinomas in surveillance colonoscopy after colorectal cancer surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 43:S47-53
Pita-Fernández S, Alhayek-Aí M, González-Martín C et al (2015) Intensive follow-up strategies improve outcomes in nonmetastatic colorectal cancer patients after curative surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Oncol 26:644–656
Yoshino T, Argilés G, Oki E et al (2021) Pan-Asian adapted ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for the diagnosis treatment and follow-up of patients with localised colon cancer. Ann Oncol 32:1496–1510
Meyerhardt JA, Mangu PB, Flynn PJ et al (2013) Follow-up care, surveillance protocol, and secondary prevention measures for survivors of colorectal cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline endorsement. J Clin Oncol 31:4465–4470
Engstrom PF, Arnoletti JP, Benson AB 3rd et al (2009) NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Colon cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 7:778–831
Hashiguchi Y, Muro K, Saito Y et al (2020) Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) guidelines 2019 for the treatment of colorectal cancer. Int J Clin Oncol 25:1–42
Primrose JN, Perera R, Gray A et al (2014) Effect of 3 to 5 years of scheduled CEA and CT follow-up to detect recurrence of colorectal cancer: the FACS randomized clinical trial. JAMA 311:263–270
Okamura R, Hasegawa S, Hida K et al (2017) The role of periodic serum CA19-9 test in surveillance after colorectal cancer surgery. Int J Clin Oncol 22:96–101
Shinkins B, Nicholson BD, Primrose J et al (2017) The diagnostic accuracy of a single CEA blood test in detecting colorectal cancer recurrence: Results from the FACS trial. PLoS One 12:e0171810
Park IJ, Choi GS, Lim KH et al (2009) Serum carcinoembryonic antigen monitoring after curative resection for colorectal cancer: clinical significance of the preoperative level. Ann Surg Oncol 16:3087–3093
Verberne CJ, Zhan Z, van den Heuvel E et al (2015) Intensified follow-up in colorectal cancer patients using frequent Carcino-Embryonic Antigen (CEA) measurements and CEA-triggered imaging: results of the randomized “CEAwatch” trial. Eur J Surg Oncol 41:1188–1196
McCall JL, Black RB, Rich CA et al (1994) The value of serum carcinoembryonic antigen in predicting recurrent disease following curative resection of colorectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 37:875–881
Verberne CJ, Wiggers T, Vermeulen KM et al (2013) Detection of recurrences during follow-up after liver surgery for colorectal metastases: Both carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and imaging are important. Ann Surg Oncol 20:457–463
Kang MC, Kang CH, Lee HJ et al (2008) Accuracy of 16-channel multi-detector row chest computed tomography with thin sections in the detection of metastatic pulmonary nodules. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 33:473–479
Chung CC, Hsieh CC, Lee HC et al (2011) Accuracy of helical computed tomography in the detection of pulmonary colorectal metastases. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 141:1207–1212
Takagawa R, Fujii S, Ohta M et al (2008) Preoperative serum carcinoembryonic antigen level as a predictive factor of recurrence after curative resection of colorectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 15:3433–3439
Tie J, Wang Y, Tomasetti C et al (2016) Circulating tumor DNA analysis detects minimal residual disease and predicts recurrence in patients with stage II colon cancer. Sci Transl Med 8:346ra92
Reinert T, Henriksen TV, Christensen E et al (2019) Analysis of plasma cell-free DNA by ultradeep sequencing in patients with stages I to III colorectal cancer. JAMA Oncol 5:1124–1131
Chen G, Peng J, Xiao Q et al (2021) Postoperative circulating tumor DNA as markers of recurrence risk in stages II to III colorectal cancer. J Hematol Oncol 14:80
Wang R, Zhao A, Cao N et al (2020) The value of circulation tumor DNA in predicting postoperative recurrence of colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis 35:1463–1475
Acknowledgements
We thank Miho Kobayashi for editing a draft of this manuscript.
Funding
The authors received no specific funding for this study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Conception/design (Yokota M); data acquisition (all authors); data interpretation (all authors); critical revisions (all authors); final approval (all authors).
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Yokota, M., Morikawa, A., Matsuoka, H. et al. Is frequent measurement of tumor markers beneficial for postoperative surveillance of colorectal cancer?. Int J Colorectal Dis 38, 75 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-023-04356-2
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-023-04356-2