Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Clinical Significance of CEA and CA19-9 in Postoperative Follow-up of Colorectal Cancer

  • Colorectal Cancer
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

We evaluated the efficiency of CEA and CA19-9 as tools for diagnosing recurrence in the postoperative surveillance of colorectal cancer.

Materials and Methods

A total of 227 patients who underwent curative resection for colorectal cancer between 1999 and 2003 at our hospital received complete follow-up according to the schedule determined prospectively. Using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, performance of postoperative values of CEA or CA19-9 for detecting recurrence was assessed.

Results

The sensitivity (1.000) and specificity (0.978) of the postoperative values of CEA in the high preoperative CEA group were very high. Even in the normal preoperative CEA group, the area under the curve (AUC) of the ROC curve of CEA (0.740, 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.628–0.852) was significantly larger than 0.5 (P < 0.001). The postoperative values of CA19-9 showed high sensitivity (0.833) and specificity (0.900) in the high preoperative CA19-9 group, while the AUC of the ROC curve of the normal preoperative group was as small as 0.510 (95% CI, 0.376–0.644). In the high preoperative CA19-9 group, however, there was no significant difference between the AUC of CA19-9 (0.904, 95% CI, 0.786–1.000) and that of CEA (0.869, 95% CI, 0.744–0.994) (P = 0.334).

Conclusions

The measurement of CEA is an efficient way to detect recurrence. The efficiency of measuring CA19-9 for the purpose of detecting recurrence is low, especially in patients with a normal level of preoperative CA19-9. Even in patients with a high preoperative level of CA19-9, CEA might be able to fill the role of CA19-9.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Tjandra JJ, Chan MK. Follow-up after curative resection of colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2007;50:1783–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Rodriguez-Moranta F, Saló J, Arcusa A, Boadas J, Piñol V, Bessa X, et al. Postoperative surveillance in patients with colorectal cancer who have undergone curative resection: a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:386–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Desch CE, Benson AB 3rd, Somerfield MR, Flynn PJ, Krause C, Loprinzi CL, et al. Colorectal cancer surveillance: 2005 update of an American Society of Clinical Oncology practice guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:8512–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Figueredo A, Rumble RB, Maroun J, Earle CC, Cummings B, McLeod R, et al. Follow-up of patients with curatively resected colorectal cancer: a practice guideline. BMC Cancer. 2003;3:26.

    Google Scholar 

  5. McArdle C. ABC of colorectal cancer: effectiveness of follow up. BMJ. 2000;321:1332–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ohlsson B, Breland U, Ekberg H, Graffner H, Tranberg KG. Follow-up after curative surgery for colorectal carcinoma. Randomized comparison with no follow-up. Dis Colon Rectum. 1995;38:619–26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Grossmann I, de Bock GH, van de Velde CJ, Kievit J, Wiggers T. Results of a national survey among Dutch surgeons treating patients with colorectal carcinoma. Current opinion about follow-up, treatment of metastasis, and reasons to revise follow-up practice. Colorectal Dis. 2007;9:787–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Jeffery M, Hickey BE, Hider PN. Follow-up strategies for patients treated for non-metastatic colorectal cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007:CD002200.

  9. Secco GB, Fardelli R, Gianquinto D, Bonfante P, Baldi E, Ravera G, et al.. Efficacy and cost of risk-adapted follow-up in patients after colorectal cancer surgery: a prospective, randomized and controlled trial. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2002;28:418–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Locker GY, Hamilton S, Harris J, Jessup JM, Kemeny N, Macdonald JS, et al.. ASCO 2006 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in gastrointestinal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:5313–27.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Duffy MJ, van Dalen A, Haglund C, Hansson L, Klapdor R, Lamerz R, et al. Clinical utility of biochemical markers in colorectal cancer: European Group on Tumour Markers (EGTM) guidelines. Eur J Cancer. 2003;39:718–27.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kouri M, Pyrhonen S, Kuusela P. Elevated CA19-9 as the most significant prognostic factor in advanced colorectal carcinoma. J Surg Oncol. 1992;49:78–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Chen CC, Yang SH, Lin JK, Lin TC, Chen WS, Jiang JK, et al. Is it reasonable to add preoperative serum level of CEA and CA19-9 to staging for colorectal cancer? J Surg Res. 2005;124:169–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Morita S, Nomura T, Fukushima Y, Morimoto T, Hiraoka N, Shibata N. Does serum CA19-9 play a practical role in the management of patients with colorectal cancer? Dis Colon Rectum. 2004;47:227–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Eche N, Pichon MF, Quillien V, Gory-Delabaere G, Riedinger JM, Basuyau JP, et al. [Standards, options and recommendations for tumor markers in colorectal cancer]. Bull Cancer. 2001;88:1177–206.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Barillari P, Bolognese A, Chirletti P, Cardi M, Sammartino P, Stipa V. Role of CEA, TPA, and Ca 19-9 in the early detection of localized and diffuse recurrent rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 1992;35:471–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ueda T, Shimada E, Urakawa T. The clinicopathologic features of serum CA 19-9-positive colorectal cancers. Surg Today. 1994;24:518–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. JSCCR. Japanese Classification of Colorectal Carcinoma Second English Edition. Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum. 2009.

  19. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology. 1982;143:29–36.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Metz CE. ROC methodology in radiologic imaging. Invest Radiol. 1986;21:720–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology. 1983;148:839–43.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Chan I, Wells W 3rd, Mulkern RV, Haker S, Zhang J, Zou KH, et al. Detection of prostate cancer by integration of line-scan diffusion, T2-mapping and T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging; a multichannel statistical classifier. Med Phys. 2003;30:2390–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Zweig MH, Campbell G. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) plots: a fundamental evaluation tool in clinical medicine. Clin Chem. 1993;39:561–77.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Baker SG. The central role of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves in evaluating tests for the early detection of cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003;95:511–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Shlipak MG, Fried LF, Cushman M, Manolio TA, Peterson D, Stehman-Breen C, et al. Cardiovascular mortality risk in chronic kidney disease: comparison of traditional and novel risk factors. JAMA. 2005;293:1737–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Gardner IA, Greiner M. Receiver-operating characteristic curves and likelihood ratios: improvements over traditional methods for the evaluation and application of veterinary clinical pathology tests. Vet Clin Pathol. 2006;35:8–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Simel DL, Samsa GP, Matchar DB. Likelihood ratios with confidence: sample size estimation for diagnostic test studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 1991;44:763–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Choi BC. Slopes of a receiver operating characteristic curve and likelihood ratios for a diagnostic test. Am J Epidemiol. 1998;148:1127–32.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Fischer JE, Bachmann LM, Jaeschke R. A readers’ guide to the interpretation of diagnostic test properties: clinical example of sepsis. Intensive Care Med. 2003;29:1043–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Pencina MJ, D’Agostino RB Sr, D’Agostino RB Jr, Vasan RS. Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: from area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond. Stat Med. 2008;27:157–72 (discussion 207–12).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Lokich J, Ellenberg S, Gerson B, Knox WE, Zamcheck N. Plasma clearance of carcinoembryonic antigen following hepatic metastatectomy. J Clin Oncol. 1984;2:462–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Goonetilleke KS, Siriwardena AK. Systematic review of carbohydrate antigen (CA 19-9) as a biochemical marker in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2007;33:266–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Yoshimasu T, Maebeya S, Suzuma T, Bessho T, Tanino H, Arimoto J, et al. Disappearance curves for tumor markers after resection of intrathoracic malignancies. Int J Biol Markers. 1999;14:99–105.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Korner H, Soreide K, Stokkeland PJ, Soreide JA. Diagnostic accuracy of serum-carcinoembryonic antigen in recurrent colorectal cancer: a receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:417–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Park IJ, Choi GS, Lim KH, Kang BM, Jun SH. Serum carcinoembryonic antigen monitoring after curative resection for colorectal cancer: Clinical significance of the preoperative level. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:3087–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Nakayama T, Watanabe M, Teramoto T, Kitajima M. CA19-9 as a predictor of recurrence in patients with colorectal cancer. J Surg Oncol. 1997;66:238–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Yamashita K, Watanabe M. Clinical significance of tumor markers and an emerging perspective on colorectal cancer. Cancer Sci. 2009;100:195–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgery, Saga University, Saga, Japan

    Tomomi Yakabe MD, Kenji Sumi MD, PhD, Atsushi Miyoshi MD, PhD, Yoshihiko Kitajima MD, PhD, Hirokazu Noshiro MD, PhD & Kohji Miyazaki MD, PhD

  2. Department of Surgery, Fukuoka Red Cross Hospital, Fukuoka, Japan

    Yuji Nakafusa MD, PhD

  3. Department of Surgery, Saga Prefectural Hospital KOSEIKAN, Saga, Japan

    Seiji Sato MD, PhD

Authors
  1. Tomomi Yakabe MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yuji Nakafusa MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kenji Sumi MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Atsushi Miyoshi MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yoshihiko Kitajima MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Seiji Sato MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Hirokazu Noshiro MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Kohji Miyazaki MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yuji Nakafusa MD, PhD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yakabe, T., Nakafusa, Y., Sumi, K. et al. Clinical Significance of CEA and CA19-9 in Postoperative Follow-up of Colorectal Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 17, 2349–2356 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-010-1004-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-010-1004-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation