These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of immunoscintigraphy and computerized tomography in identifying colorectal cancer: individual lesion analysis.
    Author: Corbisiero RM, Yamauchi DM, Williams LE, Esteban JM, Odom-Maryon T, Beatty JD.
    Journal: Cancer Res; 1991 Oct 15; 51(20):5704-11. PubMed ID: 1913688.
    Abstract:
    Monoclonal antibody scintigraphy with 111In-ZCE025 was used in presurgical staging of 45 patients prior to abdominal exploration for primary, recurrent or metastatic colorectal carcinoma. A total of 186 lesions were identified, of which 147 were evaluated by abdominal surgery and pathology. Sensitivity was 40.5% (49 of 121) for immunoscintigraphy (IS), 61.2% (74 of 121) for computerized tomography (CT), and 72.7% (88 of 121) for IS and CT combined. The positive predictive value was 83.1% (49 of 59) for IS and 88.1% (74 of 84) for CT. Sensitivity of IS was 100% (23 of 23) for primary tumors, 17.7% (11 of 62) for hepatic metastases, and 41.7% (15 of 36) for extrahepatic abdominal metastases. Of the 50 hepatic lesions evaluated by single-proton emission computerized tomography, 11 were localized by IS. Only one was visualized by planar scintigraphy. Sensitivity of CT was 87% (20 of 23) for primary tumors, 67.7% (42 of 62) for hepatic metastases, and 33.3% (12 of 36) for extrahepatic abdominal metastases. Sensitivity of IS combined with CT was 72.6% (45 of 62) for hepatic and 55.6% (20 of 36) for extrahepatic abdominal metastases. Of 24 malignant lesions measured by the pathologist to be less than 3.0 cm (maximum dimension), 7 (29.2%) were detected by IS and 3 (12.5%) by CT. Of 28 malignant lesions greater than 3.0 cm, 23 (82.1%) were detected by IS and 24 (85.7%) by CT. Overall, IS and CT complemented each other in presurgical staging of colorectal carcinoma. IS was of greater value for identification of extrahepatic and small metastases. CT was more effective for identification of hepatic metastases.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]