Letter to the Editor
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Gastrointest Surg. Aug 27, 2025; 17(8): 107340
Published online Aug 27, 2025. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v17.i8.107340
Table 1 Advantages, disadvantages, and potential improvements for colorectal cancer surveillance modalities
Modality
Advantages
Disadvantages
Potential areas for improvement
CT scansHigh sensitivity for detecting distant metastases (88.9% diagnostic yield)[16]. Non-invasive, widely available[6]. Effective for both local and systemic recurrence[17]Radiation exposure, particularly cumulative risk in younger patients[6]. Variability in protocols (e.g., contrast use, slice thickness) affects sensitivity[16]Implement low-dose CT protocols to reduce radiation while maintaining sensitivity[6]. Standardize imaging protocols (e.g., thin-slice, contrast-enhanced) for consistent detection[16]
ColonoscopyDirect visualization and biopsy capability for local recurrence and metachronous neoplasms[16]. High specificity for colorectal lesions[12]. Allows therapeutic intervention (e.g., polyp removal)[11]Invasive, requiring sedation and bowel preparation[12]. Low detection rate for distant metastases (4.6%)[16]. Patient discomfort and adherence barriers[18]Enhance patient education and preparation to improve adherence[19]. Prioritize high-risk patients using ctDNA to reduce unnecessary procedures[20]. Explore less invasive alternatives (e.g., virtual colonoscopy)[6]
Tumor markers (CEA, CA19-9, ctDNA)Non-invasive, repeatable testing[21]. ctDNA offers high sensitivity for minimal residual disease (HR: 17.5 for recurrence)[14]. Guides risk-stratified surveillance[20].Low sensitivity for CEA/CA19-9 (about 40% of recurrences missed, especially lung)[21,22]. False positives (e.g., CEA elevations in non-malignant conditions)[23]Improve CEA/CA19-9 specificity via machine learning (e.g., microRNA integration)[24]. Standardize ctDNA protocols and reduce costs through subsidized programs[20]. Validate ctDNA in diverse populations to minimize false positives[14]