Neuroendocrine tumors metastatic to the liver: how to select patients for liver transplantation?

What Are the Place and Modalities of Surgical Management for Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms? A Narrative Review

Pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (panNENs) are a heterogeneous group of tumors derived from cells with neuroendocrine differentiation. They are considered malignant by default. However, their outcomes are variable depending on their presentation in the onset of hereditary syndromes, hormonal secretion, grading, and extension. Therefore, although surgical treatment has long been suggested as the only treatment of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms, its modalities are an evolving landscape. For selected patients (small, localized, non-functional panNENs), a "wait and see" strategy is suggested, as it is in the setting of multiple neuroendocrine neoplasia type 1, but the accurate size cut-off remains to be established. Parenchyma-sparring pancreatectomy, aiming to limit pancreatic insufficiency, are also emerging procedures, which place beyond the treatment of insulinomas and small non-functional panNENs (in association with lymph node picking) remains to be clarified. Furthermore, giving the fact that the liver is generally the only metastatic site, surgery keeps a place of choice alongside medical therapies in the treatment of metastatic disease, but its modalities and extensions are still a matter of debate. This narrative review aims to describe the current recommended surgical management for pancreatic NENs and controversies in light of the actual recommendations and recent literature.

The Need to Update Endpoints and Outcome Analysis in the Rapidly Changing Field of Liver Transplantation

Liver transplantation (LT) survival rates have continued to improve over the last decades, mostly due to the reduction of mortality early after transplantation. The advancement is facilitating a liberalization of access to LT, with more patients with higher risk profiles being added to the waiting list. At the same time, the persisting organ shortage fosters strategies to rescue organs of high-risk donors. This is facilitated by novel technologies such as machine perfusion. Owing to these developments, reconsideration of the current and emerging endpoints for the assessment of the efficacy of existing and new therapies is warranted. While conventional early endpoints in LT have focused on the damage induced to the parenchyma, the fate of the bile duct and the recurrence of the underlying disease have a stronger impact on the long-term outcome. In light of this evolving landscape, we here attempt to reflect on the appropriateness of the currently used endpoints in the field of LT trials.

Interventionelle und chirurgische Therapie non-kolorektaler Lebermetastasen

In der Vergangenheit wurden Resektionen oder Transplantationen wegen non-kolorektaler Lebermetastasen durch die Abwägung von geringem Überlebensvorteil und Komplikationsrate eher zurückhaltend indiziert. Mittlerweile zählt die Leberchirurgie jedoch zu den komplikationsarmen Standardverfahren in der Tumortherapie, die unter Einbettung in multimodale Therapiekonzepte zu einer deutlichen Steigerung des Patientenüberlebens führen.

Unresectable GIST liver metastases and liver transplantation: A review and theoretical basis for a new indication

BACKGROUND

Liver metastases from gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) can be found synchronously to a primary tumor and in the medium/long term after resection of a high-risk GIST. In these cases, treatment with tyrosine kinase inhibitors like imatinib has provided good results, but drug resistance is common after two years of treatment. Liver resection of potentially resectable metastases can improve the results of medical treatment. In cases of unresectability, the role of liver transplantation (LT) has not been well-studied.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A review of the literature was undertaken from January 1995 to December 2020 following the PRISMA and AMSTAR guidelines.

RESULTS

Fifteen cases were identified. In eight cases, the LT was carried out before 2002. Mutational status was only studied in seven cases. LT was performed in 12 cases with a deceased donor and in three cases with a living donor. After a mean follow-up of 52.4 months, overall survival was 86.6% with disease-free survival of 53.3% CONCLUSION: LT in the management of unresectable GIST metastases has rarely been performed. Although its application has a solid theoretical basis, its use understood as a radical extension of a standard resection can only be recommended within prospective studies by groups with considerable experience in both GIST and transplantation care.

Transplant Oncology: An Evolving Field in Cancer Care

Transplant oncology is an emerging concept of cancer treatment with a promising prospective outcome. The application of oncology, transplant medicine, and surgery to improve patients' survival and quality of life is the core of transplant oncology. Hepatobiliary malignancies have been treated by liver transplantation (LT) with significant improved outcome. In addition, as the liver is the most common site of metastasis for colorectal cancer (CRC), patients with CRC who have stable unresectable liver metastases are good candidates for LT, and initial studies have shown improved survival compared to palliative systemic therapy. The indications of LT for hepatobiliary malignancies have been slowly expanded over the years in a stepwise manner; however, they have only been shown to improve patient survival in the setting of limited systemic therapy options. This review illustrates the concept and history of transplant oncology as an evolving field for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma, intrahepatic biliary cancer, and liver-only metastasis of non-hepatobiliary carcinoma. The utility of immunotherapy in the transplant setting is discussed as well as the feasibility of using circulating tumor DNA for surveillance post-transplantation.

Liver Transplantation in Malignancies: A Comprehensive and Systematic Review on Oncological Outcome

Introduction

Liver transplantation (LT) is today's standard treatment for both end-stage liver disease and tumors; however, suitable grafts for LT are a scarce resource and outcome after LT is highly dependent on its underlying indication. Thus, patients must be carefully selected to optimize the number of life years gained per graft. This comprehensive and systematic review critically reflects the most recently published oncological outcome data after LT in malignancies based on the preoperative radiological findings.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted to detect preferentially most recent high-volume series or large database analysis on oncological outcomes after LT for both primary liver cancer and liver metastases between January 1, 2019, and November 14, 2020. A comprehensive review on the radiological assessment of the reviewed liver malignancies is included and its preoperative value for an outcome-driven indication reflected.

Results

Twenty most recent high-volume or relevant studies including a total number of 2,521 patients were identified including 4, 4, 4, 4, 3, and 1 publications on oncological outcome after LT for hepatocellular carcinoma, cholangiocellular carcinoma, hepatic epitheloid hemangioendothelioma, hepatoblastoma, and both metastatic neuroendocrine tumors and colorectal cancer, respectively. The overall survival is comparable to patients without tumors if patients with malignancies are well selected for LT; however, this is highly dependent on tumor entity, tumor stage, and both neoadjuvant and concomitant treatment.

Discussion/Conclusion

LT is a promising option for better survival in patients with malignant liver tumors in selected patients; however, the indication must be critically discussed prior to LT in every single case in the context of organ shortage.

Liver transplantation in malignant disease

Liver transplantation for malignant disease has gained increasing attention as part of transplant oncology. Following the implementation of the Milan criteria, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was the first generally accepted indication for transplantation in patients with cancer. Subsequently, more liberal criteria for HCC have been developed, and research on this topic is still ongoing. The evident success of liver transplantation for HCC has led to the attempt to extend its indication to other malignancies. Regarding perihilar cholangiocarcinoma, more and more evidence supports the use of liver transplantation, especially after neoadjuvant therapy. In addition, some data also show a benefit for selected patients with very early stage intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Hepatic epithelioid hemangioendothelioma is a very rare but nonetheless established indication for liver transplantation in primary liver cancer. In contrast, patients with hepatic angiosarcoma are currently not considered to be optimal candidates. In secondary liver tumors, neuroendocrine cancer liver metastases are an accepted but comparability rare indication for liver transplantation. Recently, some evidence has been published supporting the use of liver transplantation even for colorectal liver metastases. This review summarizes the current evidence for liver transplantation for primary and secondary liver cancer.

Management of Small Bowel Neuroendocrine Tumors

Small bowel neuroendocrine tumors (SBNETS) are slow-growing neoplasms with a noted propensity toward metastasis and comparatively favorable prognosis. The presentation of SBNETs is varied, although abdominal pain and obstructive symptoms are the most common presenting symptoms. In patients with metastases, hypersecretion of serotonin and other bioactive amines results in diarrhea, flushing, valvular heart disease, and bronchospasm, termed carcinoid syndrome. The treatment of SBNETs is multimodal and includes surgery, liver-directed therapy, somatostatin analogues, targeted therapy, and peptide receptor radionuclide therapy.

Younger Age Is Associated with Improved Survival in Patients Undergoing Liver Transplantation Alone for Metastatic Neuroendocrine Tumors

BACKGROUND

Neuroendocrine tumor (NET) metastases are a major cause of morbidity and mortality. The role of liver transplantation to treat unresectable metastases from NET is controversial.

METHODS

We evaluated outcomes of all patients undergoing "isolated" liver transplantation (LT) for metastatic NETs in the USA, from October 1988 through June 2018 using the UNOS dataset.

RESULTS

During the study period, 160,360 LTs were performed. Two hundred six adult patients underwent "isolated" LT for metastatic NETs. The mean (SD) age was 48.2 (11.7) years, ranging from 19 to 75 years; 117 (56.8%) patients were male. Overall 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year patient survival rates were 89.1%, 75.3%, 64.9%, and 46.1%, respectively. Tumor recurrence was seen in 70 of 206 patients who underwent LT (34%). The median time to recurrence was 28 months (range, 1 to 192 months) and median wait time for LT was 112 days. Tumor recurrence was significantly higher in transplanted patients waiting less than 6 months compared with those waiting more than 6 months (74.3% vs. 25.7%). Patients' age ≤ 45 years had significantly better survival compared with those > 45 years (p = 0.03). Younger patients with carcinoid tumors had better survival but this trend was not observed in the non-carcinoid group. On multivariable analysis, recipient age, donor age, cold ischemic time MELD score, and tumor recurrence were significant predictors of poor patient survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Waiting time longer than 6 months is associated to lower rates of tumor recurrence. Younger patients ≤ 45 years had significantly improved survival after LT for NET metastases.

Postrecurrence Survival After Liver Transplantation for Liver Metastases From Neuroendocrine Tumors

BACKGROUND

Liver metastases from neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) is an accepted indication for liver transplantation (LT). Despite strict patient selection, post-LT recurrence is observed in 30-50% of cases. Postrecurrence survival is poorly investigated as well as factors influencing postrecurrence outcomes.

METHODS

Consecutive patients treated at a single Institution for post-LT recurrence of NET between Jan 1st, 2004 and Dec 31th, 2018 were included. Baseline patients' characteristics, data on the primary tumor, pretransplant therapies, posttransplant recurrence and treatments and long-term outcomes were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients presented with post-LT NET recurrence occurring 82.9 months (IQR 29.4-119.1) from LT, and the most common sites were abdominal lymph nodes (59.4%), peritoneum (6.3%) and lungs (6.3%). Fourteen patients (43.8%) underwent surgery with radical intent. Five- and 10-years survival after recurrence were 76.3% and 45.5%, respectively. Only time from LT to recurrence had a significant impact on post recurrence survival, being 5-years OS 89.5% versus 0% for patients recurring > 24 months after LT versus ≤ 24 months, respectively (p=.001). Moreover, for patients with Mib-1 > 2% at recurrence, 5-years OS was 87.5% versus 0% for those undergoing surgery versus loco-regional or systemic treatments (p=0.011).

CONCLUSIONS

The presented results, although based on a retrospective and relatively small series, show that excellent long-term survival is observed after post-LT NET recurrence, particularly in those patients recurring long after LT (> 24 months). An aggressive surgical treatment might result in a new chance of cure for a selected subgroup of patients.

Oncologic indications of liver transplantation and deceased donor liver allocation in the United States

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Liver transplantation is a standard therapy for certain liver cancers. The majority of liver transplantation in the United States is through deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). A significant disparity between the demand of livers and patients awaiting liver transplantation still remains, relying on United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) to make policies to determine priority amongst recipients, including for patients with liver cancer. We review the scope of liver transplantation in patients with liver cancer with a focus on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA), and unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) with respect to current liver allocation policy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recently, liver allocation changed in the United States. Under the current allocation policy, select patients with HCC and hilar CCA (hCCA) receive priority with an exception score of median MELD score at transplant (MMAT)-3. There is scope for other liver cancers, such as iCCA and CRLM to be considered, as reasonable outcomes have been achieved in these patients outside of the United States through DDLT and living donor liver transplantation (LDLT).

SUMMARY

With the growing experience of liver transplantation for nonconventional oncologic indications, the current policy for prioritization of liver cancer within deceased donor liver allocation may need to be re-evaluated.

Uncommon indications for associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy: a systematic review

Associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) represents an innovative surgical technique used for the treatment of large hepatic lesions at high risk for post-resection liver failure due to a small future liver remnant. The most significant amount of literature concerns the use of ALPPS for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), cholangiocarcinoma (CCC), and colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). On the opposite, few is known about the role of ALPPS for the treatment of uncommon liver pathologies. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the current literature on this topic. A systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Eligible articles published up to February 2020 were included using the MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane databases. Among the 486 articles screened, 45 papers met the inclusion criteria, with 136 described cases of ALPPS for rare indications. These 136 cases were reported in 18 different countries. Only in two countries, namely Germany and Brazil, more than ten cases were observed. As for the ALPPS indications, we reported 41 (30.1%) cases of neuroendocrine tumor (NET) metastases, followed by 27 (19.9%) cases of gallbladder cancer (GBC), nine (6.6%) pediatric cases, six (4.4%) gastrointestinal stromal tumors, six (4.4%) adult cases of benign primary liver disease, four (2.9%) adult cases of malignant primary liver disease, and 43 (31.6%) adult cases of malignant secondary liver disease. According to the International ALPPS Registry data, less than 10% of the ALPPS procedures have been performed for the treatment of uncommon liver pathologies. NET and GBC are the unique pathologies with acceptable numerosity. ALPPS for NET appears to be a safe procedure, with satisfactory long-term results. On the opposite, the results observed for the treatment of GBC are poor. However, these data should be considered with caution. The rationale for treating benign pathologies with ALPPS appears to be weak. No definitive response should be given for all the other pathologies. Multicenter studies are needed with the intent to clarify the potentially beneficial effect of ALPPS for their treatment.

Transplant Oncology in Primary and Metastatic Liver Tumors: Principles, Evidence, and Opportunities

Transplant oncology defines any application of transplant medicine and surgery aimed at improving cancer patients' survival and/or quality of life. In practice, liver transplantation for selected hepato-biliary cancers is the only solid organ transplant with demonstrated efficacy in curing cancer. Four are the proposed future contributions of transplant oncology in hepato-biliary cancer (4-e). (1) evolutionary approach to cancer care that includes liver transplantation; (2) elucidation of self and non-self recognition systems, by linking tumor and transplant immunology; (3) exploration of innovative endpoints both in clinical and experimental settings taking advantage from the access to the entire liver explant; (4) extension of surgical limitation in the multidisciplinary approach to hepato-biliary oncology. The aim of this review is to define the principles of transplant oncology that may be applied to hepato-biliary cancer treatment and research, attempting to balance current evidences with future opportunities.

Currently available treatment options for neuroendocrine liver metastases

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN) are frequently characterized by a high propensity for metastasis to the liver, which appears to be a dominant site of distant-stage disease, affecting quality of life and overall survival. Liver surgery with the intention to cure is the treatment of choice for resectable neuroendocrine liver metastases (NELM), aiming to potentially prolong survival and ameliorate hormonal symptoms refractory to medical control. Surgical resection is indicated for patients with NELM from well-differentiated NEN, while its feasibility and complexity are largely dictated by the degree of liver involvement. As a result of advances in surgical techniques over the past decades, complex 1- and 2-stage, or repeat liver resections are performed safely and effectively by experienced surgeons. Furthermore, liver transplantation for the treatment of NELM should be anchored in a multimodal and multidisciplinary therapeutic strategy and restricted only to highly selected individual cases. A broad spectrum of interventional radiology treatments for NELM have recently been available, with expanding indications that are more applicable, as they are less limited by patient- and tumor-related parameters, being therefore important adjuncts or alternatives to surgery. Overall, liver-targeted treatment modalities may precede the administration of systemic molecular targeted agents and chemotherapy for patients with liver-dominant metastatic disease; these appear to be a crucial component of multimodal management of patients with NEN. In the present review, we discuss surgical and non-surgical liver-targeted treatment approaches for NELM, each complementing the other, with a view to assisting physicians in optimizing multimodal NEN patient care.

Expanding Indications for Liver Transplant: Tumor and Patient Factors

During the past few decades, liver transplant has developed from a high-mortality procedure to an almost routine procedure with good survival outcomes. The development of living donor liver transplant has increased the availability of liver grafts, and the scope of indications for liver transplant has been expanding ever since. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of such an expansion of scope. Various criteria have been proposed to expand the eligibility of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma exceeding the Milan criteria for liver transplant. Furthermore, liver transplant is increasingly performed as a treatment modality for cholangiocarcinoma, neuroendocrine liver metastasis and colorectal liver metastasis. The number of elderly patients receiving liver transplant is on the rise. Combined organ transplantation has also been adopted to treat patients with multiple organ failure. Going forward, further development of preoperative noninvasive predictors in tumor, patient and even donor factors is needed to identify patients at risk of poor outcomes and hence optimize patient management.

Neuroendocrine liver metastases: The role of liver transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Neuroendocrine tumor (NET) metastasis localized to the liver is an accepted indication for liver transplantation as such tumors have a low biological aggressiveness in terms of malignancy and are slow growing.

RECENT FINDINGS

The long-term results are comparable with and in some cases even better than those of transplantations performed for primary liver cancer. However, compared with nonmalignant conditions, neuroendocrine liver metastasis (NELM) may result in an inferior outcome of transplantation. In the face of the scarcity of donated organs and recent improved results of non-surgical treatment for NELM, controversy over patient selection and timing for liver transplantation continues.

SUMMARY

In this review, we provide an overview of the diagnostic work-up and selection criteria of patients with NELM being considered for liver transplantation. Thereafter, we provide a critical analysis of the reported outcomes of OLT.

Liver transplantation: current and future

PURPOSE

The aim of this paper is to summarize the allocation challenges facing the field of liver transplantation while providing examples of the expansion of indications for the procedure.

METHODS

UNOS allocation policy was reviewed as well as the recent literature describing expanded criteria for recipient candidate selection.

RESULTS

Liver allocation policy changes for deceased-donor organs remain gridlocked in legal and bureaucratic red tape. Meanwhile, the indications for liver transplantation are being expanded to include acute alcoholic hepatitis, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and colorectal metastasis, previously viewed as absolute contraindications, but under strict selection criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Attempting to meet the demand for livers, transplant centers are increasingly turning to living donor liver transplantation, protocols such as HCV-positive to HCV-negative transplants, and machine perfusion of marginal organs.

The Revolution in Indication for Liver Transplantation: Will Liver Metastatic Disease Overcome the End-Stage Liver Disease in the Next Future?

Indications for liver transplantation (LT) have constantly been evolving during the last few decades due to a better understanding of liver diseases and innovative therapies. Likewise, also the underlying causes of liver disease have changed. In the setting of transplant oncology, recent developments have pushed the boundaries of oncological indications for LT outside hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), especially for secondary liver tumors, such as neuroendocrine and colorectal cancer. In the next years, as more evidence emerges, LT could become the standard treatment for well-selected metastatic liver tumors. In this manuscript, we review and summarize the available evidence for LT in liver tumors beyond HCC with a focus on metastatic liver malignancies, highlighting the importance of these new concepts for future implications.

Liver Transplantation for Colorectal and Neuroendocrine Liver Metastases and Hepatoblastoma. Working Group Report From the ILTS Transplant Oncology Consensus Conference

Liver transplantation (LT) for unresectable colorectal liver metastases has long been abandoned because of dismal prognoses. After the dark ages, advances in chemotherapy and diagnostic imaging have enabled strict patient selection, and the pioneering study from the Oslo group has contributed to the substantial progress in this field. For unresectable neuroendocrine liver metastases, LT for patients who met the Milan criteria was able to achieve excellent long-term outcomes. The guidelines further adopted in the United States and Europe were based on these criteria. For hepatoblastoma, patients with unresectable and borderline-resectable disease are considered good candidates for LT; however, the indications are yet to be defined. In the budding era of transplant oncology, it is critically important to recognize the current status and unsolved questions for each disease entity. These guidelines were developed to serve as a beacon of light for optimal patient selection for LT and set the stage for future basic and clinical studies.

Recent developments and ongoing trials in transplant oncology

Over the past two decades since the introduction of the Milan criteria, the field of transplant oncology has undergone a rapid development with a rising proportion of liver transplantations being performed for oncological indications. For many patients with liver tumours, transplantation represents the only chance for cure. However, many challenges remain, such as the adequate patient selection, management of post-transplant recurrence and refinement of neoadjuvant treatment protocols. This review provides an overview of the current state of the art of liver transplantation for oncological indications such as hepatocellular carcinoma, cholangiocarcinoma, colorectal liver metastasis and metastatic neuroendocrine tumours. We also summarize the ongoing research and explore future trends. Clinical trials are currently studying new diagnostic modalities, innovative pharmacological treatments, novel surgical techniques, downstaging regimens and new indications for liver transplantation. These emerging results will continue to shape the field of transplant oncology and provide us with the necessary tools to better select, treat and follow patients with liver tumours qualifying for liver transplantation.

Comparison of different anti-Ki67 antibody clones and hot-spot sizes for assessing proliferative index and grading in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours using manual and image analysis

AIMS

Ki67 proliferative index (PI) is essential for grading gastroenteric and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (GEP NETs). Analytical and preanalytical variables can affect Ki67 PI. In contrast to counting methodology, until now little attention has focused on the question of clone equivalence and the effect of hot-spot size on Ki67 PI in GEP NETs. Using manual counting and image analysis, this study compared the Ki67 PI achieved using MM1, K2 and 30-9 to MIB1, a clone which has been validated for, and is referenced in, guidelines relating to assessment of Ki67 PI in GEP NETs.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Forty-two pancreatic NETs were each immunohistochemically stained for the anti-Ki67 clones MIB1, MM1, K2 and 30-9. Ki67 PI was calculated manually and by image analysis, the latter using three different hot-spot sizes. In manual comparisons using single hot-spot high-power fields, non-MIB1 clones overestimated Ki67 PI compared to MIB1, resulting in grading discordances. Image analysis shows good agreement with manual Ki67 PI but a tendency to overestimate absolute Ki67 PI. Increasing the size of tumour hot-spot from 500 to 2000 cells resulted in a decrease in Ki67 PI.

CONCLUSION

Different anti-Ki67 clones do not produce equivalent PIs in GEP NETs, and clone selection may therefore affect patient care. Increasing the hot-spot size decreases the Ki67 PI. Greater standardisation in terms of antibody clone selection and hot-spot size is required for grading GEP NETs. Image analysis is an effective tool for assisting Ki67 assessment and allows easier standardisation of the size of the tumour hot-spot.

The Landmark Series: Neuroendocrine Tumor Liver Metastases

BACKGROUND

Neuroendocrine tumors are becoming increasingly prevalent, with many patients presenting with or developing metastatic disease to the liver.

METHODS

In this landmark series paper, we highlight the critical studies that have defined the surgical management of neuroendocrine tumor liver metastases, as well as several randomized control trials which have investigated strategies for systemic control of metastatic disease.

RESULTS

Liver-directed surgical approaches and locally ablative procedures are recommended for patients with limited, resectable, and in some cases, nonresectable tumor burden. Angiographic liver-directed techniques, such as transarterial embolization, chemoembolization, and radioembolization, offer another approach for management in patients with liver-predominant disease. Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy is a promising therapy for patients with hepatic and/or extrahepatic metastases. Various systemic medical therapies are also available as adjunct or definitive therapy for patients with metastatic disease.

CONCLUSIONS

This article reviews current data regarding management of neuroendocrine liver metastases and highlights areas for future study.

Neuroendocrine liver metastases: a contemporary review of treatment strategies

Well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are globally increasing in prevalence and the liver is the most common site of metastasis. Neuroendocrine liver metastases (NELM) are heterogeneous in clinical presentation and prognosis. Fortunately, recent advances in diagnostic techniques and therapeutic strategies have improved the multidisciplinary management of this challenging condition. When feasible, surgical resection of NELM offers the best long-term outcomes. General indications for hepatic resection include performance status acceptable for major liver surgery, grade 1 or 2 tumors, absence of extrahepatic disease, adequate size and function of future liver remnant, and feasibility of resecting >90% of metastases. Adjunct therapies including concomitant liver ablation are generally safe when used appropriately and may expand the number of patients eligible for surgery. Among patients with synchronous resectable NELM, resection of the primary either in a staged or combined fashion is recommended. For patients who are not surgical candidates, liver-directed therapies such as transarterial embolization, chemoembolization, and radioembolization can provide locoregional control and improve symptoms of carcinoid syndrome. Multiple systemic therapy options also exist for patients with advanced or progressive disease. Ongoing research efforts are needed to identify novel biomarkers that will define the optimal indications for and sequencing of treatments to be delivered in a personalized fashion.

Systemic Treatment Selection for Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumours (PanNETs)

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (PanNETs) are rare diseases and a good example of how research is not only feasible, but also of crucial importance in the scenario of rare tumours. Many clinical trials have been performed over the past two decades expanding therapeutic options for patients with advanced PanNETs. Adequate management relies on optimal selection of treatment, which may be challenging for clinicians due to the fact that multiple options of therapy are currently available. A number of therapies already exist, which are supported by data from phase III studies, including somatostatin analogues and targeted therapies (sunitinib and everolimus). In addition, chemotherapy remains an option, with temozolomide and capecitabine being one of the most popular doublets to use. Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy was successfully implemented in patients with well-differentiated gastro-entero-pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours, but with certain questions waiting to be solved for the management of PanNETs. Finally, the role of immunotherapy is still poorly understood. In this review, the data supporting current systemic treatment options for locally advanced or metastatic PanNETs are summarized. Strategies for treatment selection in patients with PanNETs based on patient, disease, or drug characteristics is provided, as well as a summary of current evidence on prognostic and predictive biomarkers. Future perspectives are discussed, focusing on current and forthcoming challenges and unmet needs of patients with these rare tumours.

Surgical management of pancreatic neuroendocrine liver metastases

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNET) are a heterogeneous group of neoplasms that vary in their clinical presentation, behavior and prognosis. The most common site of metastasis is the liver. Surgical resection of neuroendocrine liver metastases (NELM) is thought to afford the best long-term outcomes when feasible. Initial preoperative workup should include surveillance for carcinoid syndrome, screening for evidence of liver insufficiency, and performance of imaging specific to neuroendocrine tumors such as a somatostatin receptor positron emission tomography scan. Standard surgical principles apply to hepatic surgery for NELM, namely prioritizing low central venous pressure anesthesia, minimizing blood loss, knowledge of liver anatomy, generous use of intraoperative ultrasound, as well as safe parenchymal transection techniques and practices to avoid bile leakage. Knowledge of established prognostic factors may assist with patient selection, which is important for optimizing short- and long-term outcomes of hepatic resection. Adjunct therapies such as concomitant liver ablation are used frequently and are generally safe when used appropriately. For patients with synchronous resectable NELM, resection of the primary either in a staged or combined fashion is recommended. Primary tumor resection in the setting of unresectable metastatic disease is more controversial, however generally recommended if morbidity is acceptable. For patients who are not surgical candidates, due to either patient performance status or burden of liver disease, several liver-directed therapies such as transarterial embolization, chemoembolization, and radioembolization are available to assist with locoregional control, extend progression-free survival (PFS), and improve symptoms of carcinoid syndrome. Multiple systemic therapy options exist for patients with metastatic PNET which are often prioritized for those patients with advanced or progressive disease. A systematic approach in a multi-disciplinary setting is likely to result in the best long-term outcomes for patients with pancreatic NELM. Ongoing research is needed to determine the optimal patient selection for hepatic surgery as well as the ideal treatment sequencing for those patients with NELM.

Liver transplantation in the treatment of unresectable hepatic metastasis from neuroendocrine tumors

Neuroendocrine tumors (NET) are rare neoplasms with generally indolent growth behavior. The liver is the most common site of NET metastasis. The NET metastatic spread to the liver are usually multiple tumors involving bilateral hemilivers. For patients with isolated NET metastasis to the liver, a complete extirpation (R0) resection of both the primary NET and liver metastasis provide the best chance of tumor recurrence-free patient survival. Orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) presents a viable treatment option for patients with unresectable liver metastasis from NET. Post-OLT outcomes for the patients of NET with liver metastasis (5-year overall survival rate 47-71%) are comparable to those for other indications. However, the high rate of recurrence after OLT (31-57%) remains a clinical obstacle. As such, it is imperative to consider each patient individually and identify prognostic factors that would impact post-OLT outcomes. This article focuses on the role of OLT in the definitive treatment of metastatic liver NET, review patient selection criteria predictive of survival outcomes and post-OLT outcomes for patients.

Current status of liver transplantation in North America

Liver transplantation is continuing to grow and evolve in North America. Changes in organ availability, recipient selection, indications and progressive approaches to oncologic treatment have occurred in the last five years. Despite increased activity in deceased and living donation in North America, there continues to be a high mortality on the waitlist as the recipient indications have changed over time which has led to new approaches to help patients with end-stage liver disease.

Advances in the Diagnosis and Management of Well-Differentiated Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

Neuroendocrine neoplasms constitute a diverse group of tumors that derive from the sensory and secretory neuroendocrine cells and predominantly arise within the pulmonary and gastrointestinal tracts. The majority of these neoplasms have a well-differentiated grade and are termed neuroendocrine tumors (NETs). This subgroup is characterized by limited proliferation and patients affected by these tumors carry a good to moderate prognosis. A substantial subset of patients presenting with a NET suffer from the consequences of endocrine syndromes as a result of the excessive secretion of amines or peptide hormones, which can impair their quality of life and prognosis. Over the past 15 years, critical developments in tumor grading, diagnostic biomarkers, radionuclide imaging, randomized controlled drug trials, evidence-based guidelines, and superior prognostic outcomes have substantially altered the field of NET care. Here, we review the relevant advances to clinical practice that have significantly upgraded our approach to NET patients, both in diagnostic and in therapeutic options.

The Eighth Edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer Distant Metastases Stage Classification for Metastatic Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors Might Be Feasible for Metastatic Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinomas

BACKGROUND

Significant modifications have been made to the 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) distant metastases (M) stage classification for metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNETs). We aimed to validate this revised classification among metastatic PanNET patients using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. We further sought to evaluate the feasibility of applying this classification to metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma (PanNEC) and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients.

METHODS

Stage IV pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm (PanNEN, including G1/G2 PanNET and G3 PanNEC classified according to the World Health Organization [WHO] 2010 grading scheme) and PDAC patients with metastatic disease diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 were identified and restaged according to the revised M stage classification for PanNET. Overall survival (OS) was compared using Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank test. Uni- and multivariate Cox regression models were utilized to identify prognostic factors.

RESULTS

A total of 1,371 stage IV PanNEN and 634 PDAC patients were included. Among PanNEN patients, liver (75.0%) was the most common metastatic site, followed by distant lymph nodes (8.5%), lung (8.4%), bone (7.3%), and brain (1.0%). The 5-year OS for PanNET patients with M1a, M1b, and M1c stage was 44.15, 53.32, and 19.70%, respectively. However, survival comparison showed no significant difference between M1a and M1b stages among PanNET patients. Similar findings were noted after applying this classification to PanNEC patients. Multivariate analysis showed that the age at diagnosis and the number of distant metastatic sites were independent prognostic factors for metastatic PanNEN patients. Interestingly, excellent survival discrimination by M stage among stage IV PDAC patients was noted (M1a vs. M1b vs. M1c, 5-year OS: 5.42, 2.46, and 0%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our study is the first large sample-based validation of the AJCC 8th M stage classification for PanNET. The revised classification did not effectively stratify metastatic PanNEN patients. However, further study is warranted to validate this classification for PanNET patients according to the WHO 2017 classification. Interestingly, the revised M stage classification might be feasible for PDAC patients with metastatic disease.

Liver Transplantation for Non-hepatocellular Carcinoma Malignancy: A Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation has become an effective treatment for selected patients with hepatocellular carcinoma with excellent outcomes. More recent reports have described improved outcomes in liver transplantation in a subset of patients with other malignancies like hilar cholangiocarcinoma, unresectable hepatic epithelioid hemangioendothelioma and hepatic metastasis from neuroendocrine tumors. However, hepatic angiosarcoma remains an absolute contraindication to liver transplantation because of the poor outcome.

OBJECTIVES

The present study aims to describe liver transplantation for non-hepatocellular carcinoma malignancy.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients and review of the literature was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 5 patients with non-hepatocellular carcinoma malignancy on explants histopathologic findings were identified. They presented hepatic epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (1), neuroendocrine tumor (1), angiosarcoma (1) and cholangiocarcinoma (2). The mean length of follow-up was 22.8 ± 37.67 (range, 2-90 months). Of 5 patients evaluated, 3 patients remain with stable graft function.

CONCLUSION

Future investigations are necessary to redefine the indications of liver transplantations to treat non-hepatocellular carcinoma malignancy and its limitation.

The prognostic analysis of different metastatic patterns in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors patients: A population based analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the prognostic value of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) with different metastatic patterns.

METHODS

Data of pNETs cases were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Result (SEER) database. They were classified according to the different metastatic patterns. We utilized chi-square test to compare the clinical and metastasis characteristics among different groups. We used Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank testing for survival comparisons. Adjusted HRs with 95% CIs was calculated using Cox regression model to estimate prognostic factors. P < .05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Among the 3909 patients, liver is the most metastatic organ, and isolated brain metastasis is the least common. At the same time, many patients have had multiple metastases. We studied the overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CCS) of the groups. OS: Non-organ metastasis: 5-year OS = 77.1%; Bone metastasis: median survival time (MST) = 56 m, 5-year OS = 42.7%; Liver metastasis: MST = 24 m, 5-year OS = 25.5%; Lung metastasis: MST = 14 m, 5-year OS = 33.7%; multiple metastases: MST = 7m, 5-year OS = 12.0%. CCS: Non-organ metastasis: 5-year OS = 84.2%; Bone metastasis: 5-year OS = 52.5%; Liver metastasis: MST = 27 m, 5-year OS = 28.6%; Lung metastasis: MST = 49 m, 5-year OS = 40.1%; multiple metastases: MST = 8 m, 5-year OS = 14.5%. In addition, the results showed that there were all statistical significances between the surgery and the no surgery group (all, P < .001). Multivariate analysis revealed that brain metastasis, multiple metastases, age over 60 years, unmarried, grade III/IV, regional/distant and no surgery were independently associated with decreased OS and CCS.

CONCLUSIONS

pNETs patients without organ metastasis had the best survival outcomes, while multiple had the worst outcomes. There were no significant differences in bone metastasis, liver metastasis and lung metastasis. Surgery was still an option for patients with metastasis.

Secondary non-resectable liver tumors: A single-center living-donor and deceased-donor liver transplantation case series

BACKGROUND

During the last decades, deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT) has gained a place in the therapeutic algorithm of well-selected patients harbouring non-resectable secondary liver tumors. Living-donor LT (LDLT) might represent a valuable means to further expand this indication for LT.

METHODS

Between 1985 and 2016, twenty-two adults were transplanted because of neuroendocrine (n = 18, 82%) and colorectal metastases (n = 4, 18%); 50% received DDLT and 50% LDLT. In LDLT, 4 (36%) right and 7 (64%) left grafts were used; the median graft-to-recipient-weight ratios (GRWR) were 1.03% (IQR 0.86%-1.30%) and 0.59% (IQR 0.51%-0.91%), respectively. Median post-LT follow-up was 64 months (IQR 17-107) in the DDLT group and 40 months (IQR 35-116) in the LDLT group. DDLT and LDLT recipients were compared in terms of overall survival, graft survival, postoperative complications and recurrence.

RESULTS

The 1- and 5-year actuarial patient survivals were 82% and 55% after DDLT, 100% and 100% after LDLT, respectively (P < 0.01). One- and 5-year actuarial graft survivals were 73% and 36% after DDLT, 91% and 91% after LDLT (P < 0.01). The outcomes of right or left LDLT were comparable. Donor hepatectomy proved safe, and one donor experienced a Clavien IIIb complication. Bilirubin peak was significantly lower after left hepatectomy compared with that after right hepatectomy [1.3 (IQR 1.2-2.2) vs. 3.3 (IQR 2.3-5.2) mg/dL; P = 0.02].

CONCLUSIONS

The more recent LDLT series compared favorably to our DDLT series in the treatment of secondary liver malignancies. The absence of portal hypertension and the use of smaller left grafts make recipient and donor surgeries safe. The safety of the procedures and lack of interference with the scarce allograft pool are expected to lead to a more frequent use of LDLT in the field of transplant oncology.

Liver transplantation for unresectable malignancies: Beyond hepatocellular carcinoma

Indications for liver transplantation have expanded over the past few decades owing to improved outcomes and better understanding of underlying pathologies. In particular, there has been a growing interest in the field of transplant oncology in recent years that has led to considerable developments which have pushed the boundaries of malignant indications for liver transplantation beyond hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In this article, we review and summarise the published evidence for liver transplantation in non-HCC primary and metastatic liver malignancies and highlight ongoing clinical trials that address unresolved questions therein. We also examine the current technical, immunological and oncological challenges that face liver transplantation in this growing field and explore potential approaches to overcome these barriers.

Evaluation and Management of Neuroendocrine Tumors of the Pancreas

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors are a diverse group of neoplasms with a generally favorable prognosis. Although they exhibit indolent growth, metastases are seen in roughly 60% of patients. Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors may produce a wide variety of hormones, which are associated with dramatic symptoms, but the majority are nonfunctional. The diagnosis and treatment of these tumors is a multidisciplinary effort, and management guidelines continue to evolve. This review provides a concise summary of the presentation, diagnosis, surgical management, and systemic treatment of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

Recent advances in liver transplantation for cancer: The future of transplant oncology

Liver transplantation is widely indicated as a curative treatment for selected patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. However, with recent therapeutic advances, as well as efforts to increase the donor pool, liver transplantation has been carefully expanded to patients with other primary or secondary malignancies in the liver. Cholangiocarcinoma, colorectal and neuroendocrine liver metastases, and hepatic epithelioid haemangioendothelioma are amongst the most relevant new indications. In this review we discuss the fundamental concepts of this ambitious undertaking, as well as the newest indications for liver transplantation, with a special focus on future perspectives within the recently established concept of transplant oncology.

Liver transplantation in patients with liver metastases from neuroendocrine tumors

The prevalence of metastatic disease in neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) is very high (60-80%) and cancer-related death among these patients is generally due to metastatic disease. Numerous treatment options for cure and disease control have been investigated for patients with neuroendocrine liver metastases (NELM). Despite the success of liver directed therapy on slowing tumor progression and palliating symptoms, the chance of being cured by liver resection is 40-50% and only roughly 20% of patients have potentially resectable disease. As such, there has been interest in liver transplantation (LT) as a potentially curative option for patients with unresectable disease. Several criteria have been proposed in order to balance long-term outcomes of patients with NELM and the problem of organ shortage including the Milan-NET criteria, the UNOS criteria and the ENETS guidelines. In the most representative studies, recurrence rate after LT has ranged from 30% to 60% with a 5-year OS ranging from 50% to 97%. This large variability is due to the retrospective nature of the studies available, which used different inclusion criteria. As such, outcomes and the prognostic factors associated with LT for NELM warrant further investigation.

[Oligometastases of neuroendocrine tumors-extent of surgery]

Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are rare neoplasms, which represent complex challenges in diagnosis and treatment. Even in the metastatic stage there are important differences in the type of tumor in comparison to gastrointestinal and pancreatic adenocarcinomas. Therefore, the disease courses are substantially different depending on the grade of differentiation. Even in the metastatic stage the 5‑year survival rates of G1 tumors is up to 83%. Approximately 20% of small intestine NETs additionally show hormone activity, which can compromise survival and the quality of life. For individual treatment decisions the special tumor biology of these tumors must be taken into consideration more so than for other tumor entities. Surgery always becomes important for these tumors when a R0 resection appears possible. Oligometastasis of the liver and the lymph drainage system can be meaningfully approached by surgical treatment. In selected patients with an isolated liver involvement, a liver transplantation can be considered; however, even tumor debulking can lead to improvement in the quality of life and survival, especially for hormone active tumors with a carcinoid syndrome which cannot be conservatively controlled. The aim of this review is to present the value of surgical treatment options in the case of (oligo)metastasized NETs.

The impact of surgery in metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a competing risk analysis

Aim The role of surgery in the treatment of metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) was controversial. The objectives of this study were to illustrate the impact of surgery in improving the prognosis of patients with metastatic PNETs and build nomograms to predict overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) based on a large population-based cohort. Methods Patients diagnosed with metastatic PNETs between 2004 and 2015 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database were retrospectively collected. Nomograms for estimating OS and CSS were established based on Cox regression model and Fine and Grey's model. The precision of the nomograms was evaluated and compared using concordance index (C-index) and the area under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC). Results The study cohort included 1966 patients with metastatic PNETs. It was shown that the surgery provided survival benefit for all groups of patients with metastatic PNETs. In the whole study cohort, 1-, 2- and 3-year OS and CSS were 51.5, 37.1 and 29.4% and 53.0, 38.9 and 31.1%, respectively. The established nomograms were well calibrated, and had good discriminative ability, with C-indexes of 0.773 for OS prediction and 0.774 for CSS prediction. Conclusions Patients with metastatic PNETs could benefit from surgery when the surgery tolerance was acceptable. The established nomograms could stratify patients who were categorized as tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) IV stage into groups with diverse prognoses, showing better discrimination and calibration of the established nomograms, compared with 8th TNM stage system in predicting OS and CSS for patients with metastatic PNETs.

Liver Resection for Neuroendocrine Tumor Liver Metastases Within Milan Criteria for Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

The role of liver transplant (LT) for neuroendocrine liver metastasis (NELM) has not been completely defined. While international guidelines included LT as a potential treatment for highly selected patients with advanced NELM, recently, LT has been proposed as an alternative curative treatment for NELM for patients meeting restrictive criteria (Milan criteria).

METHODS

Using a multi-institutional cohort of patients undergoing liver resection for NELM, the long-term outcomes of patients meeting Milan criteria (resected NET drained by the portal system, stable disease/response to therapies for at least 6 months, metastatic diffusion to < 50% of the total liver volume, a confirmed histology of low-grade, and ≤ 60 years) were investigated.

RESULTS

Among the 238 patients included in the study, 28 (12%) patients met the Milan criteria for LT with a 5-year OS of 83%. Furthermore, among patients meeting Milan criteria, subsets of patients with favorable clinic-pathological characteristics had 5-year OS rates greater than 90% including G1 patients (5-year OS, 92%), patients undergoing minor liver resection (5-year OS, 94%), patients with low number of NELM (1-2 NELM), and small tumor size (< 3 cm) (for both groups of patients, 5-year OS, 100%).

CONCLUSIONS

In our series, only 12% of patients met Milan criteria, and the 5-year OS after liver resection for this small selected group of patients was comparable with that reported in the literature for patients undergoing LT for NELM within Milan criteria. While LT might be the optimal treatment for patients with unresectable NELM, surgical resection should be the first option for patients with resectable NELM.