| Theme | Surveillance after Treatment for Colorectal Tumors | |
|---|---|---|
| Title | Treatment and Surveillance for Colorectal Carcinoid | |
| Publish Date | 2018/07 | |
| Author | Masau Sekiguchi | Cancer Screening Center, National Cancer Center Hospital / Endoscopy Division, National Cancer Center Hospital / Division of Screening Technology, Center for Public Health Sciences, National Cancer Center |
| Author | Taku Sakamoto | Endoscopy Division, National Cancer Center Hospital |
| Author | Shigeki Sekine | Pat hology Division, National Cancer Center Hospital |
| Author | Hiroyuki Takamaru | Endoscopy Division, National Cancer Center Hospital |
| Author | Masayoshi Yamada | Endoscopy Division, National Cancer Center Hospital |
| Author | Hirokazu Taniguchi | Pat hology Division, National Cancer Center Hospital |
| Author | Takahisa Matsuda | Cancer Screening Center, National Cancer Center Hospital / Endoscopy Division, National Cancer Center Hospital / Division of Screening Technology, Center for Public Health Sciences, National Cancer Center |
| Author | Yutaka Saito | Endoscopy Division, National Cancer Center Hospital |
| [ Summary ] | Although colorectal carcinoids (neuroendocrine tumors; NETs) are increasingly found, there are still many unsolved issues concerning treatment and surveillance. Treatment strategy for colorectal carcinoids is determined based on the status of risk factors for metastasis, including tumor size, depth, Ki-67 index and mitotic index, lymphovascular invasion. Colorectal carcinoids having little risk of metastasis are indicated for endoscopic treatment; whereas, lesions at risk of metastasis require colectomies or rectectomies with lymphadenectomies. Careful determination of treatment is important because there is a great deal of difference concerning invasiveness between endoscopic treatment and radical operations. However, difficult situations are often encountered due to lack of high-quality data and evidence on a number of issues concerning colorectal carcinoids, including clinical significance of lymphovascular invasion in small lesions. Also in regard to surveillance, no consensus has been reached on surveillance programs for colorectal carcinoids. To improve the current situation, further investigation for colorectal carcinoids is warranted. | |