Serum CEA testing in the post-operative surveillance of colorectal carcinoma

Six hundred and sixty-three patients were followed with serial serum CEA measurements in addition to routine clinical surveillance after radical resection of colorectal carcinoma. Of 626 available for analysis, 366 (58.4%) remained clinically free of recurrence and had a normal CEA (less than 20 ng...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:British journal of cancer 1984-06, Vol.49 (6), p.689-693
Main Authors: Hine, K R, Dykes, P W
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Biomedical and Life Sciences
Biomedicine
Cancer Research
Carcinoembryonic Antigen - analysis
Colonic Neoplasms - diagnosis
Colonic Neoplasms - surgery
Drug Resistance
Epidemiology
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Molecular Medicine
Neoplasm Metastasis - diagnosis
Neoplasm Recurrence, Local - diagnosis
Oncology
original-article
Postoperative Period
Rectal Neoplasms - diagnosis
Rectal Neoplasms - surgery
Time Factors
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Six hundred and sixty-three patients were followed with serial serum CEA measurements in addition to routine clinical surveillance after radical resection of colorectal carcinoma. Of 626 available for analysis, 366 (58.4%) remained clinically free of recurrence and had a normal CEA (less than 20 ng ml-1) throughout and 89 (14.2%) had a temporary non-progressive rise in CEA with no evidence of secondary disease. Of 171 patients who developed proven or suggestive recurrence, 114 had a preceding rise in the serum CEA and in further 21 the CEA rose simultaneously with recurrence. In 36 patients secondary disease was detected while the CEA was still within normal limits. CEA was more effective as an early index of distant metastasis, thus in 76% of those patients with a preceding rise in CEA, the secondary disease was disseminated, whereas only 20% had localised recurrence. The pattern of rise in CEA was of no practical value in distinguishing localised from distant recurrence.
ISSN:0007-0920
1532-1827
DOI:10.1038/bjc.1984.109