Table 2.
CEA and follow-up after CRC resection: selected studies
| Author | Year | Origin | Study type | Study summary | Endpoint | No. of patients | Age (yr), median (range) | Sex ratio (%male) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treasure [12] | 1984 (published in full 2014) | UK | RCT | 티evated CEA prompted randomization to either continued monitoring (conventional arm) or laparotomy (aggressive) | Survival | 216 | Conventional: 62 (35-75); aggressive: 64 (33-75) | Conventional: 63; aggressive: 56 |
| Makela [72] | 1995 | Finland | RCT | Intensive vs. conventional follow-up | Recurrence | 106 | Conventional: 69 (33-85); intensive: 63 (33-81) | Conventional: 50; intensive: 48 |
| Ohlsson [20] | 1995 | Sweden | RCT | No follow-up vs. intensive follow-up | Recurrence | 107 | - | 47.7 |
| Pietra [21] | 1998 | Italy | RCT | Conventional or intense follow-up | Recurrence | 207 | - | - |
| Primrose [15] | 2014 | UK | RCT | Intensive vs. minimal follow-up 3 different intensive groups | Detection and curative treatment of recurrence | 1,202 | CT: 69 (62-76); CEA: 69 (6375); CT & CEA: 70 (64-76); minimal: 70 (63-75) | CT: 61.2; CEA: 61.3; CT & CEA: 61.3; minimal: 61.3 |
| Verberne [16] | 2015 | Netherlands | RCT (stepped wedge) | Standard vs. intensive follow-up | CRC recurrence | 3,223 | 70 (26-95) | 56 |
| Wille-Jørgensen [13] | On-going trial | Europe | Multicenter randomized controlled trial | Intensive vs. nonintensive follow-up | CRC recurrence and mortality | - | - | - |
| Lepage [14] | On-going trial | France | Multicenter randomized controlled trial | Standard vs. intensive follow-up | 5-year overall survival | - | - | - |
RCT, randomized control trial; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; CRC, colorectal cancer; CT, computed tomography.