Sustentación de la idea

FDG-PET plays a pivotal role in the detection of recurrent disease, the assessment of residual masses after treatment, the localization of recurrence in patients with an unexplained rise of serum CEA, and in staging patients before surgical resection of local recurrence and metastatic disease.

FDG-PET is emerging as a potentially valuable technique in the prediction and evaluation of response of radiotherapy, systemic therapy, and combinations thereof. Correlation between changes in FDG uptake and overall patient survival remains a very worthwhile track of research to pursue. The preliminary findings call for systematic inclusion of FDG-PET in therapeutic trials to adequately position FDG-PET in treatment time lines in order to change current therapeutic concepts to individualized treatment of patients with advanced colorectal cancer.

Reference List

1. Ruers T, Bleichrodt RP: Treatment of liver metastases, an update on the possibilities and results. Eur J Cancer 38:1023-1033, 2002.

2. Chong G, Cunningham D: Gastrointestinal cancer: recent developments in medical oncology. Eur J Surg Oncol 31:453-460, 2005.

3. Punt CJ: New options and old dilemmas in the treatment of patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Ann Oncol 15:1453-1459, 2004.

4. Bennett JJ, Cao D, Posner MC: Determinants of unresectability and outcome of patients with occult colorectal hepatic metastases. J Surg Oncol 92:64-69, 2005.

5. Esteves FP, Schuster DM, Halkar RK: Gastrointestinal tract malignancies and positron emission tomography: an overview. Semin Nucl Med 36:169-181, 2006.

6. Kapiteijn E, Marijnen CA, Colenbrander AC et al: Local recurrence in patients with rectal cancer diagnosed between 1988 and 1992: a population-based study in the west Netherlands. Eur J Surg Oncol 24:528-535, 1998.

7. Phillips RK, Hittinger R, Blesovsky L et al: Local recurrence following ‘curative’ surgery for large bowel cancer: II. The rectum and rectosigmoid. Br J Surg 71:17-20, 1984.

8. Porter GA, Soskolne CL, Yakimets WW et al: Surgeon-related factors and outcome in rectal cancer. Ann Surg 227:157-167, 1998.

9. Kapiteijn E, Marijnen CA, Nagtegaal ID et al: Preoperative radiotherapy combined with total mesorectal excision for resectable rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 345:638-646, 2001.

10. Wibe A, Moller B, Norstein J et al: A national strategic change in treatment policy for rectal cancer--implementation of total mesorectal excision as routine treatment in Norway. A national audit. Dis Colon Rectum 45:857-866, 2002.

11. Improved survival with preoperative radiotherapy in resectable rectal cancer. Swedish Rectal Cancer Trial. N Engl J Med 336:980-987, 1997.

12. Adam IJ, Mohamdee MO, Martin IG et al: Role of circumferential margin involvement in the local recurrence of rectal cancer. Lancet 344:707-711, 1994.

13. Nagtegaal ID, van de Ven CJ, Marijnen CA et al: Low rectal cancer: a call for a change of approach in abdominoperineal resection. J Clin Oncol 23:9257-9264, 2005.

14. Valentini V, Glimelius B, Minsky BD et al: The multidisciplinary rectal cancer treatment: main convergences, controversial aspects and investigational areas which support the need for an European Consensus. Radiother Oncol 76:241-250, 2005.

15. Chessin DB, Kiran RP, Akhurst T et al: The emerging role of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the management of primary and recurrent rectal cancer. J Am Coll Surg 201:948-956, 2005.

16. Ogunbiyi OA, Flanagan FL, Dehdashti F et al: Detection of recurrent and metastatic colorectal cancer: comparison of positron emission tomography and computed tomography. Ann Surg Oncol 4:613-620, 1997.

17. Strauss LG, Clorius JH, Schlag P et al: Recurrence of colorectal tumors: PET evaluation. Radiology 170:329-332, 1989.

18. Ito K, Kato T, Tadokoro M et al: Recurrent rectal cancer and scar: differentiation with PET and MR imaging. Radiology 182:549-552, 1992.

19. Moore HG, Akhurst T, Larson SM et al: A case-controlled study of 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the detection of pelvic recurrence in previously irradiated rectal cancer patients. J Am Coll Surg 197:22-28, 2003.

20. Schiepers C, Penninckx F, De Vadder N et al: Contribution of PET in the diagnosis of recurrent colorectal cancer: comparison with conventional imaging. Eur J Surg Oncol 21:517-522, 1995. 21. Keogan MT, Lowe VJ, Baker ME et al: Local recurrence of rectal cancer: evaluation with F-18

fluorodeoxyglucose PET imaging. Abdom Imaging 22:332-337, 1997.

22. Valk PE, Bella-Columna E, Haseman MK et al: Whole-body PET imaging with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose in management of recurrent colorectal cancer. Arch Surg 134:503-511, 1999.

23. Flamen P, Stroobants S, Van Cutsem E et al: Additional value of whole-body positron emission tomography with fluorine-18-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose in recurrent colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 17:894-901, 1999.

24. Lonneux M, Reffad AM, Detry R et al: FDG-PET improves the staging and selection of patients with recurrent colorectal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 29:915-921, 2002.

25. Even-Sapir E, Parag Y, Lerman H et al: Detection of recurrence in patients with rectal cancer: PET/ CT after abdominoperineal or anterior resection. Radiology 232:815-822, 2004.

26. Whiteford MH, Whiteford HM, Yee LF et al: Usefulness of FDG-PET scan in the assessment of suspected metastatic or recurrent adenocarcinoma of the colon and rectum. Dis Colon Rectum 43:759-767, 2000.

27. Kalff V, Hicks RJ, Ware RE et al: The clinical impact of (18)F-FDG PET in patients with suspected or confirmed recurrence of colorectal cancer: a prospective study. J Nucl Med 43:492-499, 2002. 28. Staib L, Schirrmeister H, Reske SN et al: Is (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography

in recurrent colorectal cancer a contribution to surgical decision making? Am J Surg 180:1-5, 2000.

29. Gearhart SL, Frassica D, Rosen R et al: Improved staging with pretreatment positron emission tomography/computed tomography in low rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 13:397-404, 2006.

30. Haberkorn U, Strauss LG, Dimitrakopoulou A et al: PET studies of fluorodeoxyglucose metabolism in patients with recurrent colorectal tumors receiving radiotherapy. J Nucl Med 32:1485-1490, 1991.

31. Engenhart R, Kimmig BN, Strauss LG et al: Therapy monitoring of presacral recurrences after high-dose irradiation: value of PET, CT, CEA and pain score. Strahlenther Onkol 168:203-212, 1992. 32. Kubota R, Yamada S, Kubota K et al: Intratumoral distribution of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose in

vivo: high accumulation in macrophages and granulation tissues studied by microautoradiography. J Nucl Med 33:1972-1980, 1992.

33. Schiepers C, Haustermans K, Geboes K et al: The effect of preoperative radiation therapy on glucose utilization and cell kinetics in patients with primary rectal carcinoma. Cancer 85:803-811, 1999.

34. Amthauer H, Denecke T, Rau B et al: Response prediction by FDG-PET after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy and combined regional hyperthermia of rectal cancer: correlation with endorectal ultrasound and histopathology. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 31:811-819, 2004. 35. Liu FY, Chen JS, Changchien CR et al: Utility of 2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission

tomography in managing patients of colorectal cancer with unexplained carcinoembryonic antigen elevation at different levels. Dis Colon Rectum 48:1900-1912, 2005.

36. Minton JP, Hoehn JL, Gerber DM et al: Results of a 400-patient carcinoembryonic antigen second- look colorectal cancer study. Cancer 55:1284-1290, 1985.

37. Moertel CG, Fleming TR, Macdonald JS et al: An evaluation of the carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) test for monitoring patients with resected colon cancer. JAMA 270:943-947, 1993.

38. McCall JL, Black RB, Rich CA et al: The value of serum carcinoembryonic antigen in predicting recurrent disease following curative resection of colorectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 37:875-881, 1994.

39. Engaras B: Individual cutoff levels of carcinoembryonic antigen and CA 242 indicate recurrence of colorectal cancer with high sensitivity. Dis Colon Rectum 46:313-321, 2003.

40. Tutt AN, Plunkett TA, Barrington SF et al: The role of positron emission tomography in the management of colorectal cancer. Colorectal Dis 6:2-9, 2004.

41. Bast RC, Jr., Ravdin P, Hayes DF et al: 2000 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast and colorectal cancer: clinical practice guidelines of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. J Clin Oncol 19:1865-1878, 2001.

42. Pfister DG, Benson AB, III, Somerfield MR: Clinical practice. Surveillance strategies after curative treatment of colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 350:2375-2382, 2004.

43. Rosen M, Chan L, Beart RW, Jr. et al: Follow-up of colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Dis Colon Rectum 41:1116-1126, 1998.

44. Renehan AG, Egger M, Saunders MP et al: Impact on survival of intensive follow up after curative resection for colorectal cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials. BMJ 324:813, 2002.

45. Flanagan FL, Dehdashti F, Ogunbiyi OA et al: Utility of FDG-PET for investigating unexplained plasma CEA elevation in patients with colorectal cancer. Ann Surg 227:319-323, 1998.

46. Maldonado A, Sancho F, Cerdan J et al: 16. FDG-PET in the Detection of Recurrence in Colorectal Cancer Based on Rising CEA Level. Experience in 72 Patients. Clin Positron Imaging 3:170, 2000. 47. Flamen P, Hoekstra OS, Homans F et al: Unexplained rising carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in

the postoperative surveillance of colorectal cancer: the utility of positron emission tomography (PET). Eur J Cancer 37:862-869, 2001.

48. Libutti SK, Alexander HR, Jr., Choyke P et al: A prospective study of 2-[18F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D- glucose/positron emission tomography scan, 99mTc-labeled arcitumomab (CEA-scan), and blind second-look laparotomy for detecting colon cancer recurrence in patients with increasing carcinoembryonic antigen levels. Ann Surg Oncol 8:779-786, 2001.

49. Zervos EE, Badgwell BD, Burak WE, Jr. et al: Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography as an adjunct to carcinoembryonic antigen in the management of patients with presumed recurrent colorectal cancer and nondiagnostic radiologic workup. Surgery 130:636-643, 2001.

50. Ruhlmann J, Schomburg A, Bender H et al: Fluorodeoxyglucose whole-body positron emission tomography in colorectal cancer patients studied in routine daily practice. Dis Colon Rectum 40:1195-1204, 1997.

51. Imbriaco M, Akhurst T, Hilton S et al: Whole-Body FDG-PET in Patients with Recurrent Colorectal Carcinoma. A Comparative Study with CT. Clin Positron Imaging 3:107-114, 2000.

52. Beets G, Penninckx F, Schiepers C et al: Clinical value of whole-body positron emission tomography with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose in recurrent colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 81:1666-1670, 1994. 53. Imdahl A, Reinhardt MJ, Nitzsche EU et al: Impact of 18F-FDG-positron emission tomography for

decision making in colorectal cancer recurrences. Langenbecks Arch Surg 385:129-134, 2000. 54. Fletcher RH: Carcinoembryonic antigen. Ann Intern Med 104:66-73, 1986.

55. Blokhuis TJ, van der Schaaf MC, van den Tol MP et al: Results of radio frequency ablation of primary and secondary liver tumors: long-term follow-up with computed tomography and positron emission tomography-18F-deoxyfluoroglucose scanning. Scand J Gastroenterol Suppl 93-97, 2004.

56. Simo M, Lomena F, Setoain J et al: FDG-PET improves the management of patients with suspected recurrence of colorectal cancer. Nucl Med Commun 23:975-982, 2002.

57. Bipat S, van Leeuwen MS, Comans EF et al: Colorectal liver metastases: CT, MR imaging, and PET for diagnosis--meta-analysis. Radiology 237:123-131, 2005.

58. Kinkel K, Lu Y, Both M et al: Detection of hepatic metastases from cancers of the gastrointestinal tract by using noninvasive imaging methods (US, CT, MR imaging, PET): a meta-analysis. Radiology 224:748-756, 2002.

59. Lai DT, Fulham M, Stephen MS et al: The role of whole-body positron emission tomography with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose in identifying operable colorectal cancer metastases to the liver. Arch Surg 131:703-707, 1996.

60. Vitola JV, Delbeke D, Sandler MP et al: Positron emission tomography to stage suspected metastatic colorectal carcinoma to the liver. Am J Surg 171:21-26, 1996.

61. Delbeke D, Vitola JV, Sandler MP et al: Staging recurrent metastatic colorectal carcinoma with PET. J Nucl Med 38:1196-1201, 1997.

62. Hustinx R, Paulus P, Jacquet N et al: Clinical evaluation of whole-body 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the detection of liver metastases. Ann Oncol 9:397-401, 1998. 63. Huebner RH, Park KC, Shepherd JE et al: A meta-analysis of the literature for whole-body FDG PET

detection of recurrent colorectal cancer. J Nucl Med 41:1177-1189, 2000.

64. Topal B, Flamen P, Aerts R et al: Clinical value of whole-body emission tomography in potentially curable colorectal liver metastases. Eur J Surg Oncol 27:175-179, 2001.

65. Arulampalam T, Costa D, Visvikis D et al: The impact of FDG-PET on the management algorithm for recurrent colorectal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med 28:1758-1765, 2001.

66. Johnson K, Bakhsh A, Young D et al: Correlating computed tomography and positron emission tomography scan with operative findings in metastatic colorectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 44:354-357, 2001.

67. Zhuang H, Sinha P, Pourdehnad M et al: The role of positron emission tomography with fluorine- 18-deoxyglucose in identifying colorectal cancer metastases to liver. Nucl Med Commun 21:793- 798, 2000.

68. Rohren EM, Paulson EK, Hagge R et al: The role of F-18 FDG positron emission tomography in preoperative assessment of the liver in patients being considered for curative resection of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer. Clin Nucl Med 27:550-555, 2002.

69. Hung GU, Shiau YC, Tsai SC et al: Value of 18F-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the evaluation of recurrent colorectal cancer. Anticancer Res 21:1375-1378, 2001. 70. Gambhir SS, Czernin J, Schwimmer J et al: A tabulated summary of the FDG PET literature. J Nucl

Med 42:1S-93S, 2001.

71. Berger KL, Nicholson SA, Dehdashti F et al: FDG PET evaluation of mucinous neoplasms: correlation of FDG uptake with histopathologic features. AJR Am J Roentgenol 174:1005-1008, 2000.

72. Wiering B, Krabbe PF, Jager GJ et al: The impact of fluor-18-deoxyglucose-positron emission tomography in the management of colorectal liver metastases. Cancer 104:2658-2670, 2005. 73. Stangl R, Altendorf-Hofmann A, Charnley RM et al: Factors influencing the natural history of

colorectal liver metastases. Lancet 343:1405-1410, 1994.

74. Abdalla EK, Vauthey JN, Ellis LM et al: Recurrence and outcomes following hepatic resection, radiofrequency ablation, and combined resection/ablation for colorectal liver metastases. Ann Surg 239:818-825, 2004.

75. Imamura H, Seyama Y, Kokudo N et al: Single and multiple resections of multiple hepatic metastases of colorectal origin. Surgery 135:508-517, 2004.

76. Stewart GD, O‘Suilleabhain CB, Madhavan KK et al: The extent of resection influences outcome following hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases. Eur J Surg Oncol 30:370-376, 2004. 77. Scheele J, Stangl R, Altendorf-Hofmann A et al: Indicators of prognosis after hepatic resection for

colorectal secondaries. Surgery 110:13-29, 1991.

78. Ruers TJ, Langenhoff BS, Neeleman N et al: Value of positron emission tomography with [F- 18]fluorodeoxyglucose in patients with colorectal liver metastases: a prospective study. J Clin Oncol 20:388-395, 2002.

79. Kalff V, Hicks R, Ware R et al: 29. F-18 FDG PET for Suspected or Confirmed Regional Recurrence of Colon Cancer. A Prospective Study of Impact and Outcome. Clin Positron Imaging 3:183, 2000. 80. Strasberg SM, Dehdashti F, Siegel BA et al: Survival of patients evaluated by FDG-PET before

hepatic resection for metastatic colorectal carcinoma: a prospective database study. Ann Surg 233:293-299, 2001.

81. Delbeke D, Martin WH, Sandler MP et al: Evaluation of benign vs malignant hepatic lesions with positron emission tomography. Arch Surg 133:510-515, 1998.

82. Fong Y, Saldinger PF, Akhurst T et al: Utility of 18F-FDG positron emission tomography scanning on selection of patients for resection of hepatic colorectal metastases. Am J Surg 178:282-287, 1999.

83. Meta J, Seltzer M, Schiepers C et al: Impact of 18F-FDG PET on managing patients with colorectal cancer: the referring physician‘s perspective. J Nucl Med 42:586-590, 2001.

84. Kronawitter U, Kemeny NE, Heelan R et al: Evaluation of chest computed tomography in the staging of patients with potentially resectable liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma. Cancer 86:229-235, 1999.

85. Miller E, Lerman H, Gutman M et al: The clinical impact of camera-based positron emission tomography imaging in patients with recurrent colorectal cancer. Invest Radiol 39:8-12, 2004. 86. Flamen P: Positron emission tomography in colorectal cancer. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol

16:237-251, 2002.

87. Strasberg SM, Dehdashti F, Siegel BA et al: Survival of patients evaluated by FDG-PET before hepatic resection for metastatic colorectal carcinoma: a prospective database study. Ann Surg 233:293-299, 2001.

88. Delbeke D, Martin WH: PET and PET-CT for evaluation of colorectal carcinoma. Semin Nucl Med 34:209-223, 2004.

89. Fernandez FG, Drebin JA, Linehan DC et al: Five-year survival after resection of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer in patients screened by positron emission tomography with F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG-PET). Ann Surg 240:438-447, 2004.

90. Feinstein AR, Sosin DM, Wells CK: The Will Rogers phenomenon. Stage migration and new diagnostic techniques as a source of misleading statistics for survival in cancer. N Engl J Med 312:1604-1608, 1985.

91. Votrubova J, Belohlavek O, Jaruskova M et al: The role of FDG-PET/CT in the detection of recurrent colorectal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging , 2006.

92. Cohade C, Osman M, Leal J et al: Direct comparison of (18)F-FDG PET and PET/CT in patients with colorectal carcinoma. J Nucl Med 44:1797-1803, 2003.

93. Park KC, Schwimmer J, Shepherd JE et al: Decision analysis for the cost-effective management of recurrent colorectal cancer. Ann Surg 233:310-319, 2001.

94. Zubeldia JM, Bednarczyk EM, Baker JG et al: The economic impact of 18FDG positron emission tomography in the surgical management of colorectal cancer with hepatic metastases. Cancer Biother Radiopharm 20:450-456, 2005.

95. Lejeune C, Bismuth MJ, Conroy T et al: Use of a decision analysis model to assess the cost- effectiveness of 18F-FDG PET in the management of metachronous liver metastases of colorectal cancer. J Nucl Med 46:2020-2028, 2005.

96. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA et al: New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 92:205-216, 2000.

97. Avril NE, Weber WA: Monitoring response to treatment in patients utilizing PET. Radiol Clin North Am 43:189-204, 2005.

98. Weber WA, Petersen V, Schmidt B et al: Positron emission tomography in non-small-cell lung cancer: prediction of response to chemotherapy by quantitative assessment of glucose use. J Clin Oncol 21:2651-2657, 2003.

99. Wieder HA, Brucher BL, Zimmermann F et al: Time course of tumor metabolic activity during chemoradiotherapy of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and response to treatment. J Clin Oncol 22:900-908, 2004.

100. Kostakoglu L, Coleman M, Leonard JP et al: PET predicts prognosis after 1 cycle of chemotherapy in aggressive lymphoma and Hodgkin’s disease. J Nucl Med 43:1018-1027, 2002.

101. Brun E, Kjellen E, Tennvall J et al: FDG PET studies during treatment: prediction of therapy outcome in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Head Neck 24:127-135, 2002.

102. Weber WA, Ott K, Becker K et al: Prediction of response to preoperative chemotherapy in adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction by metabolic imaging. J Clin Oncol 19:3058- 3065, 2001.

103. Losi L, Luppi G, Gavioli M et al: Prognostic value of Dworak grade of regression (GR) in patients with rectal carcinoma treated with preoperative radiochemotherapy. Int J Colorectal Dis 1-7, 2005.

104. Hughes R, Glynne-Jones R, Grainger J et al: Can pathological complete response in the primary tumour following pre-operative pelvic chemoradiotherapy for T3-T4 rectal cancer predict for sterilisation of pelvic lymph nodes, a low risk of local recurrence and the appropriateness of local excision? Int J Colorectal Dis 21:11-17, 2006.

105. Denecke T, Rau B, Hoffmann KT et al: Comparison of CT, MRI and FDG-PET in response prediction of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer after multimodal preoperative therapy: is there a benefit in using functional imaging? Eur Radiol 15:1658-1666, 2005.

106. Guillem JG, Puig-La CJ, Jr., Akhurst T et al: Prospective assessment of primary rectal cancer response to preoperative radiation and chemotherapy using 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Dis Colon Rectum 43:18-24, 2000.

107. Guillem JG, Moore HG, Akhurst T et al: Sequential preoperative fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography assessment of response to preoperative chemoradiation: a means for determining longterm outcomes of rectal cancer. J Am Coll Surg 199:1-7, 2004.

108. Calvo FA, Domper M, Matute R et al: 18F-FDG positron emission tomography staging and restaging in rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 58:528-535, 2004.

109. Rossi S, Buscarini E, Garbagnati F et al: Percutaneous treatment of small hepatic tumors by an expandable RF needle electrode. AJR Am J Roentgenol 170:1015-1022, 1998.