Patient Survey of the Physical, Emotional, and Informational Challenges for Patients Living with Neuroendocrine Tumors

Consideration of quality-of-life in the treatment decision-making for patients with advanced gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

INTRODUCTION

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) are a complex and heterogenous family of solid malignancies that originate from neuroendocrine tissue in the gastrointestinal tract or pancreas. Most patients diagnosed with GEP-NETs present with advanced or metastatic disease, and quality of life (QoL) is often an important priority when selecting treatments for these patients. Patients with advanced GEP-NETs often experience a substantial and persistent symptom burden that undermines their QoL. Addressing a patient's individual symptoms through judicious selection of treatment may improve QoL.

AREAS COVERED

The objectives of this narrative review are to summarize the impact of advanced GEP-NETs on patient QoL, assess the potential value of current treatments for maintaining or improving patient QoL, and offer a clinical framework for how these QoL data can be translated to inform clinical decision-making for patients with advanced GEP-NETs.

EXPERT OPINION

Patients with advanced GEP-NETs experience a significant and persistent symptom burden that impacts their daily lifestyle, activities, work life, and financial health, leading to erosion of their QoL. Ongoing and future studies incorporating longitudinal QoL assessments and head-to-head treatment evaluations will further inform the incorporation of QoL into clinical decision-making.

Opportunities to Improve Symptom Control with Somatostatin Congeners in GEP-NETs: A Review of Key Issues

Octreotide acetate (octreotide) is the most prescribed and most studied somatostatin congener, or analog, for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP‐NETs) and carcinoid syndrome, the latter of which may be characterized by debilitating diarrhea and flushing. Approved in the U.S. more than 30 years ago, octreotide is widely used to control the symptoms of carcinoid syndrome and has been shown to demonstrate antiproliferative activity. The two formulations available in the U.S. include a subcutaneous immediate‐release (IR) injection introduced in 1989 and a long‐acting repeatable (LAR) intramuscular injection approved in 1999. Lanreotide depot (lanreotide), a more recent somatostatin congener, has been available in the U.S. since 2014.

Despite widespread use of octreotide LAR, several key challenges exist with the current depot‐based treatment paradigm. Studies indicate that LAR formulations are associated with continued unmet patient needs, owing in part to a loss of bioactivity over time that may necessitate progressive supplemental treatment with IR octreotide to adequately control symptoms. Clinicians should understand the key differences in the pharmacokinetic profiles of the LAR and IR formulations that may contribute to bioactivity loss and somatostatin receptor desensitization. In addition, there is a need to re‐evaluate the role of IR octreotide in combination with depot therapy to provide consistent bioavailability and better control of carcinoid syndrome symptoms.

The purpose of this review is to explore all these issues and to re‐establish a rationale for the IR formulation, particularly with respect to novel use cases and its use during the COVID‐19 pandemic.

This review explores key challenges with depot‐based treatment of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors with octreotide and the key differences between the LAR and IR formulations.