The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Effect of 3 to 5 years of scheduled CEA and CT follow-up to detect recurrence of colorectal cancer: the FACS randomized clinical trial

Effect of 3 to 5 years of scheduled CEA and CT follow-up to detect recurrence of colorectal cancer: the FACS randomized clinical trial
Effect of 3 to 5 years of scheduled CEA and CT follow-up to detect recurrence of colorectal cancer: the FACS randomized clinical trial
Importance: intensive follow-up after surgery for colorectal cancer is common practice but is based on limited evidence.

Objective: to assess the effect of scheduled blood measurement of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and computed tomography (CT) as follow-up to detect recurrent colorectal cancer treatable with curative intent.

Design, setting, and participants: randomized clinical trial in 39 National Health Service hospitals in the United Kingdom; 1202 eligible participants were recruited between January 2003 and August 2009 who had undergone curative surgery for primary colorectal cancer, including adjuvant treatment if indicated, with no evidence of residual disease on investigation.

Interventions: participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 groups: CEA only (n?=?300), CT only (n?=?299), CEA+CT (n?=?302), or minimum follow-up (n?=?301). Blood CEA was measured every 3 months for 2 years, then every 6 months for 3 years; CT scans of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis were performed every 6 months for 2 years, then annually for 3 years; and the minimum follow-up group received follow-up if symptoms occurred.

Main outcomes and measures: he primary outcome was surgical treatment of recurrence with curative intent; secondary outcomes were mortality (total and colorectal cancer), time to detection of recurrence, and survival after treatment of recurrence with curative intent.

Results: after a mean 4.4 (SD, 0.8) years of observation, cancer recurrence was detected in 199 participants (16.6%; 95% CI, 14.5%-18.7%) overall; 71 of 1202 participants (5.9%; 95% CI, 4.6%-7.2%) were treated for recurrence with curative intent, with little difference according to Dukes staging (stage A, 5.1% [13/254]; stage B, 6.1% [34/553]; stage C, 6.2% [22/354]). Surgical treatment of recurrence with curative intent was 2.3% (7/301) in the minimum follow-up group, 6.7% (20/300) in the CEA group, 8% (24/299) in the CT group, and 6.6% (20/302) in the CEA+CT group. Compared with minimum follow-up, the absolute difference in the percentage of patients treated with curative intent in the CEA group was 4.4% (95% CI, 1.0%-7.9%; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 3.00; 95% CI, 1.23-7.33), in the CT group was 5.7% (95% CI, 2.2%-9.5%; adjusted OR, 3.63; 95% CI, 1.51-8.69), and in the CEA+CT group was 4.3% (95% CI, 1.0%-7.9%; adjusted OR, 3.10; 95% CI, 1.10-8.71). The number of deaths was not significantly different in the combined intensive monitoring groups (CEA, CT, and CEA+CT; 18.2% [164/901]) vs the minimum follow-up group (15.9% [48/301]; difference, 2.3%; 95% CI, ?2.6% to 7.1%).

Conclusions and relevance: among patients who had undergone curative surgery for primary colorectal cancer, intensive imaging or CEA screening each provided an increased rate of surgical treatment of recurrence with curative intent compared with minimal follow-up; there was no advantage in combining CEA and CT. If there is a survival advantage to any strategy, it is likely to be small
0098-7484
263-270
Primrose, John N.
d85f3b28-24c6-475f-955b-ec457a3f9185
Perera, Rafael
e99a2819-c326-461c-8526-980b64458c22
Gray, Alastair
0ecaf719-32ca-402c-9af5-78fd0538a2cf
Rose, Peter
5df71431-cc13-43ac-86da-8f26fa607b33
Fuller, Alice
4a45f083-3cba-45d1-9e70-781cc80c03a5
Corkhill, Andrea
e74ed394-38fb-4bfb-883d-681b2aeaf931
George, Steve
bdfc752b-f67e-4490-8dc0-99bfaeb046ca
Mant, David
d2e30212-70ec-48c9-b80a-a45cf4bcc46e
Primrose, John N.
d85f3b28-24c6-475f-955b-ec457a3f9185
Perera, Rafael
e99a2819-c326-461c-8526-980b64458c22
Gray, Alastair
0ecaf719-32ca-402c-9af5-78fd0538a2cf
Rose, Peter
5df71431-cc13-43ac-86da-8f26fa607b33
Fuller, Alice
4a45f083-3cba-45d1-9e70-781cc80c03a5
Corkhill, Andrea
e74ed394-38fb-4bfb-883d-681b2aeaf931
George, Steve
bdfc752b-f67e-4490-8dc0-99bfaeb046ca
Mant, David
d2e30212-70ec-48c9-b80a-a45cf4bcc46e

Primrose, John N., Perera, Rafael, Gray, Alastair, Rose, Peter, Fuller, Alice, Corkhill, Andrea, George, Steve and Mant, David (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. Journal of the American Medical Association, 311 (3), 263-270. (doi:10.1001/jama.2013.285718). (PMID:24430319)

Record type: Article

Abstract

Importance: intensive follow-up after surgery for colorectal cancer is common practice but is based on limited evidence.

Objective: to assess the effect of scheduled blood measurement of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and computed tomography (CT) as follow-up to detect recurrent colorectal cancer treatable with curative intent.

Design, setting, and participants: randomized clinical trial in 39 National Health Service hospitals in the United Kingdom; 1202 eligible participants were recruited between January 2003 and August 2009 who had undergone curative surgery for primary colorectal cancer, including adjuvant treatment if indicated, with no evidence of residual disease on investigation.

Interventions: participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 groups: CEA only (n?=?300), CT only (n?=?299), CEA+CT (n?=?302), or minimum follow-up (n?=?301). Blood CEA was measured every 3 months for 2 years, then every 6 months for 3 years; CT scans of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis were performed every 6 months for 2 years, then annually for 3 years; and the minimum follow-up group received follow-up if symptoms occurred.

Main outcomes and measures: he primary outcome was surgical treatment of recurrence with curative intent; secondary outcomes were mortality (total and colorectal cancer), time to detection of recurrence, and survival after treatment of recurrence with curative intent.

Results: after a mean 4.4 (SD, 0.8) years of observation, cancer recurrence was detected in 199 participants (16.6%; 95% CI, 14.5%-18.7%) overall; 71 of 1202 participants (5.9%; 95% CI, 4.6%-7.2%) were treated for recurrence with curative intent, with little difference according to Dukes staging (stage A, 5.1% [13/254]; stage B, 6.1% [34/553]; stage C, 6.2% [22/354]). Surgical treatment of recurrence with curative intent was 2.3% (7/301) in the minimum follow-up group, 6.7% (20/300) in the CEA group, 8% (24/299) in the CT group, and 6.6% (20/302) in the CEA+CT group. Compared with minimum follow-up, the absolute difference in the percentage of patients treated with curative intent in the CEA group was 4.4% (95% CI, 1.0%-7.9%; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 3.00; 95% CI, 1.23-7.33), in the CT group was 5.7% (95% CI, 2.2%-9.5%; adjusted OR, 3.63; 95% CI, 1.51-8.69), and in the CEA+CT group was 4.3% (95% CI, 1.0%-7.9%; adjusted OR, 3.10; 95% CI, 1.10-8.71). The number of deaths was not significantly different in the combined intensive monitoring groups (CEA, CT, and CEA+CT; 18.2% [164/901]) vs the minimum follow-up group (15.9% [48/301]; difference, 2.3%; 95% CI, ?2.6% to 7.1%).

Conclusions and relevance: among patients who had undergone curative surgery for primary colorectal cancer, intensive imaging or CEA screening each provided an increased rate of surgical treatment of recurrence with curative intent compared with minimal follow-up; there was no advantage in combining CEA and CT. If there is a survival advantage to any strategy, it is likely to be small

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 12 December 2013
e-pub ahead of print date: 14 January 2014
Published date: 15 January 2014
Organisations: Cancer Sciences, Clinical Trials Unit

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 362369
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/362369
ISSN: 0098-7484
PURE UUID: 4b377771-8e54-43d2-b7ef-763efff957b6
ORCID for John N. Primrose: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-2069-7605

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 24 Feb 2014 13:10
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 02:47

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Rafael Perera
Author: Alastair Gray
Author: Peter Rose
Author: Alice Fuller
Author: Andrea Corkhill
Author: Steve George
Author: David Mant

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×