1
|
Pencharz D, Gnanasegaran G, Navalkissoor S. Theranostics in neuroendocrine tumours: somatostatin receptor imaging and therapy. Br J Radiol 2018; 91:20180108. [PMID: 30102557 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20180108] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Theranostics and its principles: pre-treatment selection of patients who are most likely to benefit from treatment by the use of a related, specific diagnostic test are integral to the treatment of patients with neuroendocrine tumours (NETs). This is due to NETs' important, but variable, somatostatin receptor (SSTR) expression, their heterogeneity and variation in site of primary and rate of progression. Only patients whose tumours have sufficient expression of SSTRs will benefit from SSTR-based radionuclide therapy and demonstrating this expression prior to therapy is essential. This article provides a relevant overview of NETs and the multiple facets of SSTR based theranostics, including imaging and therapy radionuclides; clinical efficacy and toxicity; patient selection and treatment and finally emerging radiopharmaceuticals and newer clinical applications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deborah Pencharz
- 1 Department of Nuclear Medicine, Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust , Brighton , UK
| | - Gopinath Gnanasegaran
- 2 Department of Nuclear Medicine, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust , London , UK
| | - Shaunak Navalkissoor
- 2 Department of Nuclear Medicine, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust , London , UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Pavel M, Jann H, Prasad V, Drozdov I, Modlin IM, Kidd M. NET Blood Transcript Analysis Defines the Crossing of the Clinical Rubicon: When Stable Disease Becomes Progressive. Neuroendocrinology 2017; 104:170-182. [PMID: 27078712 DOI: 10.1159/000446025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 75] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2016] [Accepted: 04/05/2016] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS A key issue in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) is early identification and prediction of disease progression. Clinical evaluation and imaging are limited due to the lack of sensitivity and disease indolence. We assessed the NETest as a predictive and prognostic marker of progression in a long-term follow-up study. METHODS GEP-NETs (n = 34) followed for a median 4 years (2.2-5.4) were evaluated. WHO tumor grade/stage grade 1: n = 17, grade 2: n = 14, grade 3: n = 1 (for 2, no grade was available); 31 (91%) were stage IV. Baseline and longitudinal imaging and blood biomarkers were available in all, and progression was defined per standard clinical protocols (RECIST 1.0). The NETest was measured by quantitative PCR of blood and multianalyte algorithmic analysis (disease activity scaled 0-100% with low <40% and high activity risk cutoffs >80%); chromogranin A (CgA) was measured by radioimmunoassay (normal <150 µg/l); progression-free survival (PFS) was analyzed by Cox proportional-hazard regression and Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS At baseline, 100% were NETest positive, and CgA was elevated in 50%. The only baseline variable (Cox modeling) associated with PFS was NETest (hazard ratio = 1.022, 95% confidence interval = 1.005-1.04; p < 0.012). Using Kaplan-Meier analyses, the baseline NETest (>80%) was significantly associated (p = 0.01) with disease progression (median PFS 0.68 vs. 2.78 years with <40% levels). The NETest was more informative (96%) than CgA changes (<under>></under>25%) in consistently predicting disease alterations (40%, p < 2 × 10-5, χ2 = 18). The NETest had an earlier time point change than imaging (1.02 ± 0.15 years). Baseline NETest levels >40% in stable disease were 100% prognostic of disease progression versus CgA (χ2 = 5, p < 0.03). Baseline NETest values <40% accurately (100%) predicted stability over 5 years (p = 0.05, χ2 = 3.8 vs. CgA). CONCLUSION The NETest correlated with a well-differentiated GEP-NET clinical status. The NETest has predictive and prognostic utility for GEP-NETs identifying clinically actionable alterations ∼1 year before image-based evidence of progression.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marianne Pavel
- Department of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Campus-Virchow-Klinikum, Berlin, Germany
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Ćwikła JB, Bodei L, Kolasinska-Ćwikła A, Sankowski A, Modlin IM, Kidd M. Circulating Transcript Analysis (NETest) in GEP-NETs Treated With Somatostatin Analogs Defines Therapy. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2015; 100:E1437-45. [PMID: 26348352 DOI: 10.1210/jc.2015-2792] [Citation(s) in RCA: 89] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
CONTEXT Early and precise delineation of therapeutic responses are key issues in neuroendocrine neoplasm/tumor management. Imaging is currently used but exhibits limitations in sensitivity and specificity. The utility of biomarkers is unclear. objective, setting, and design: This prospective cohort study (11 mo) sought to determine whether measurements of circulating neuroendocrine tumor transcripts (NETest) predict responses to somatostatin analogs (SSAs). PATIENTS The test set consisted of 35 SSA-treated gastroenteropancreatic-NETs (RECISTevaluated). The prospective set consisted of 28 SSA-treated Grade 1-Grade 2 GEP-NETs. INTERVENTION(S) Whole blood for transcript analysis (NETest) and plasma for Chromogranin A (CgA) (baseline), were collected every 4 weeks (prior to SSA injection). Morphologic (multidetector computed tomography/MRI) and functional imaging ((99m)Tc-[HYNIC, Tyr(3)]-Octreotide) was undertaken at entry and 6-month intervals until progression (RECIST 1.0). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S) Treatment response. RESULTS Test set: NETest (≥80%; scale, 0-100%) differentiated stable (SD) and progressive (PD) disease (P < .0001). Prospective set: 28 patients (26/28 SD) undergoing standard SSA. Grading: 12 G1, 16 G2. SSA Response: progression-free survival: 315 days: 14 (50%) SD, 14 (50%) PD. NETest: Twenty had elevated (≥80%) values; 14 developed PD; six, SD. CgA: Twelve of 28 exhibited elevated baseline values and/or subsequent >25% increase; eight developed PD; four, SD. NETest (P = .002) and grade (P = .054) were the only factors associated with treatment response. Multiple regression analysis established that the NETest could predict disease progression (P = .0002). NETest changes occurred significantly earlier (146 d prior to progression vs 56 d CgA; P < .0001; χ(2) = 19) and in more patients (100 vs 57%; P < .02). CONCLUSIONS NETest values (80-100%) were more accurate and occurred at a significantly earlier time point than CgA and predicted SSA treatment response.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jarosław B Ćwikła
- Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medical Sciences (J.Ć.), University of Warmia and Mazury, Olsztyn 10-558, Poland; Division of Nuclear Medicine (L.B.), European Institute of Oncology, Milan 20141, Italy; Department of Oncology (A.K.-Ć.), Maria Skłodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center, Institute of Oncology, Warsaw 44-101, Poland; Department of Radiology (A.S.), Hospital Ministry of Internal Affairs, Warsaw 02-507, Poland; Keewaydin Consulting, Inc. (I.M.M.), Woodbridge, Connecticut 06525; and Wren Laboratories (M.K.), Branford, Connecticut 06405
| | - Lisa Bodei
- Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medical Sciences (J.Ć.), University of Warmia and Mazury, Olsztyn 10-558, Poland; Division of Nuclear Medicine (L.B.), European Institute of Oncology, Milan 20141, Italy; Department of Oncology (A.K.-Ć.), Maria Skłodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center, Institute of Oncology, Warsaw 44-101, Poland; Department of Radiology (A.S.), Hospital Ministry of Internal Affairs, Warsaw 02-507, Poland; Keewaydin Consulting, Inc. (I.M.M.), Woodbridge, Connecticut 06525; and Wren Laboratories (M.K.), Branford, Connecticut 06405
| | - Agnieszka Kolasinska-Ćwikła
- Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medical Sciences (J.Ć.), University of Warmia and Mazury, Olsztyn 10-558, Poland; Division of Nuclear Medicine (L.B.), European Institute of Oncology, Milan 20141, Italy; Department of Oncology (A.K.-Ć.), Maria Skłodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center, Institute of Oncology, Warsaw 44-101, Poland; Department of Radiology (A.S.), Hospital Ministry of Internal Affairs, Warsaw 02-507, Poland; Keewaydin Consulting, Inc. (I.M.M.), Woodbridge, Connecticut 06525; and Wren Laboratories (M.K.), Branford, Connecticut 06405
| | - Artur Sankowski
- Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medical Sciences (J.Ć.), University of Warmia and Mazury, Olsztyn 10-558, Poland; Division of Nuclear Medicine (L.B.), European Institute of Oncology, Milan 20141, Italy; Department of Oncology (A.K.-Ć.), Maria Skłodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center, Institute of Oncology, Warsaw 44-101, Poland; Department of Radiology (A.S.), Hospital Ministry of Internal Affairs, Warsaw 02-507, Poland; Keewaydin Consulting, Inc. (I.M.M.), Woodbridge, Connecticut 06525; and Wren Laboratories (M.K.), Branford, Connecticut 06405
| | - Irvin M Modlin
- Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medical Sciences (J.Ć.), University of Warmia and Mazury, Olsztyn 10-558, Poland; Division of Nuclear Medicine (L.B.), European Institute of Oncology, Milan 20141, Italy; Department of Oncology (A.K.-Ć.), Maria Skłodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center, Institute of Oncology, Warsaw 44-101, Poland; Department of Radiology (A.S.), Hospital Ministry of Internal Affairs, Warsaw 02-507, Poland; Keewaydin Consulting, Inc. (I.M.M.), Woodbridge, Connecticut 06525; and Wren Laboratories (M.K.), Branford, Connecticut 06405
| | - Mark Kidd
- Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medical Sciences (J.Ć.), University of Warmia and Mazury, Olsztyn 10-558, Poland; Division of Nuclear Medicine (L.B.), European Institute of Oncology, Milan 20141, Italy; Department of Oncology (A.K.-Ć.), Maria Skłodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center, Institute of Oncology, Warsaw 44-101, Poland; Department of Radiology (A.S.), Hospital Ministry of Internal Affairs, Warsaw 02-507, Poland; Keewaydin Consulting, Inc. (I.M.M.), Woodbridge, Connecticut 06525; and Wren Laboratories (M.K.), Branford, Connecticut 06405
| |
Collapse
|