Surgery for GEP-NETs

Preoperative anemia: impact on short- and long-term outcomes following curative-intent resection of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

BACKGROUND

The effect of preoperative anemia on clinical outcomes of patients undergoing resection of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) has not been previously investigated. This study aimed to characterize how preoperative anemia affected short- and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing curative-intent resection of GEP-NETs.

METHODS

Patients who underwent curative-intent resection for GEP-NETs between January 1990 and December 2020 were identified from 8 major institutions. The last preoperative hemoglobin level was recorded; anemia was defined as <13.5 g/dL in males or <12.0 g/dL in females based on the guides of the American Society of Hematology. The effect of anemia on postoperative outcomes was assessed on uni- and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Among 1559 patients, the median age was 58 years (IQR, 48-66), and roughly one-half of the cohort was male (796 [51.1%]). Most patients had a pancreatic tumor (1040 [66.7%]), followed by small bowel (259 [16.6%]), duodenum (103 [6.6%]), stomach (66 [4.2%]), appendix (53 [3.4%]), and other locations (38 [2.6%]). The median preoperative hemoglobin level was 13.4 g/dL (IQR, 12.2-14.5). Overall, 101 (6.7%) and 119 (8.5%) patients received an intra- or postoperative packed red blood cell (pRBC) transfusion, respectively. A total of 972 patients (44.5%) experienced a postoperative complication. Although the overall incidence of complications was no different among patients who did (anemic: 48.7%) vs patients who did not (nonanemic: 47.3%) have anemia (P = .597), patients with preoperative anemia were more likely to develop a major (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥IIIa: 48.9% [anemic] vs 38.0% [nonanemic]; P = .006) and multiple (≥3 types of complications: 32.2% [anemic] vs 19.7% [anemic]; P < .001) complications. Of note, 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were 96.7%, 90.5%, and 86.6%, respectively. On multivariable analysis, anemia (hazard ratio, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.2-3.2; P = .006) remained associated with worse OS; postoperative pRBC transfusion was associated with an OS (5-year OS: 75.0% vs 87.7%; P = .017) and recurrence-free survival (RFS; 5-year RFS: 66.9% vs 76.5%; P = .047).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative anemia was commonly identified in roughly 1 in 3 patients who underwent curative-intent resection for GEP-NETs. Preoperative anemia was strongly associated with a higher risk of postoperative morbidity and worse long-term outcomes.

Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor (Pan-NET) Presented by Abdominal Pain: A Case Report and Literature Review

A pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (Pan-NET) is a rare neoplasm originating in the neuroendocrine system. Carcinoid syndrome occurs in approximately 19% of patients with functional Pan-NETs, typically when liver metastases occur. In this paper, we describe the case of a patient with a low-grade non-functional Pan-NET, but with a typical clinical presentation of carcinoid syndrome. An 81-year-old male was admitted to our Department of Internal Medicine at Cannizzaro Hospital (Catania, Italy) because of the onset of abdominal pain with nausea, loose stools, and episodic flushing. Firstly, an abdominal contrast-enhanced CT scan showed a small pancreatic hyper-vascular mass; then, a gallium-68 DOTATOC integrated PET/CT revealed an elevated expression of SSTR receptors. Serum chromogranin A and urinary 5-HIAA measurements were negative. We performed an endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) by a fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB), allowing the immunostaining of a small mass (0.8 cm) and the diagnosis of a low-grade (G1) non-functional Pan-NET (NF-Pan-NET). Surgery was waived, while a follow-up strategy was chosen. The early recognition of Pan-NETs, although rare, is necessary to improve the patient's survival. Although helpful to allow for immunostaining, EUS-FNB needs to be warranted in future studies comparing EUS-FNB to EUS-FNA (fine-needle aspiration), which is, to date, reported as the tool of choice to diagnose Pan-NETs.

What have we learnt from the past - would treatment decisions for GEP-NET patients differ between 2012 to 2016 by the new recommendations in 2022?

BACKGROUND

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) are a heterogeneous group of tumors with a broad range of local and systemic treatment options. Still a lack of data regarding treatment sequences exists. The aim of this study was to analyse outcomes in GEP-NETs depending on stage and treatment steps and compare our treatment decisions to the latest treatment recommendations of European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) 2020 for GEP-NETs.

METHODS

Patients were included in this retrospective single-center analysis from 2012-2016. All patients suffering from a GEP-NET, who were screened, treated or evaluated at ENETS Center in Zurich, Switzerland were included in analysis. Patients with any other diagnosis of NET were not included. We used Kaplan Meier estimator as well as Cox regression to compare survival rates between different sites of localization, grades or stages and treatment sequences.

RESULTS

Overall, we identified 256 GEP-NETs, most in advanced stage (62%) and located in small intestine tract or pancreatic gland. Survival depended on stage, grade, primary site and duration of response for the early systemic treatment. On average patients underwent 2.6 different treatment modalities, mostly depending on stage and higher tumor grade. Surgery was performed early but also in advanced stages, usually followed by Somatostatine-Agonist modalities. In distant disease (Stage IV), we investigated a positive effect of PFS after treatment with Somatostatine Analogues (SSA) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21 - 0.97; p = 0.04) and systemic treatment (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.26 - 0.99; p = 0.047) if patients underwent prior surgery or endoscopic resection. Kaplan Meier distributions predict shorter OS in distant disease (Stage IV), (Figure. 1; HR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.46 - 2.89; log-rank test, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This retrospective analysis presents a great overview of all patients', disease and treatment characteristics of GEP-NETs at ENETS Center in Zurich, Switzerland. We illustrated survival (PFS) depending on implemented therapies. According to these findings, we formed a suggested treatment algorithm for advanced GEP-NETs, which does not differ from the latest treatment recommendation by ESMO guidelines for GEP-NETs. The results of this project may define GEP-NET patients' selection for upcoming clinical prospective studies.

Diagnostic work-up and advancement in the diagnosis of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are a heterogeneous group of neoplasms ranging from well-differentiated, slowly growing tumors to poorly differentiated carcinomas. These tumors are generally characterized by indolent course and quite often absence of specific symptoms, thus eluding diagnosis until at an advanced stage. This underscores the importance of establishing a prompt and accurate diagnosis. The gold-standard remains histopathology. This should contain neuroendocrine-specific markers, such as chromogranin A; and also, an estimate of the proliferation by Ki-67 (or MIB-1), which is pivotal for treatment selection and prognostication. Initial work-up involves assessment of serum Chromogranin A and in selected patients gut peptide hormones. More recently, the measurement of multiple NEN-related transcripts, or the detection of circulating tumor cells enhanced our current diagnostic armamentarium and appears to supersede historical serum markers, such as Chromogranin A. Standard imaging procedures include cross-sectional imaging, either computed tomography or magnetic resonance, and are combined with somatostatin receptor scintigraphy. In particular, the advent of ¹¹¹In-DTPA-octreotide and more recently PET/CT and ⁶⁸Ga-DOTA-Octreotate scans revolutionized the diagnostic landscape of NENs. Likewise, FDG PET represents an invaluable asset in the management of high-grade neuroendocrine carcinomas. Lastly, endoscopy, either conventional, or more advanced modalities such as endoscopic ultrasound, capsule endoscopy and enteroscopy, are essential for the diagnosis and staging of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms and are routinely integrated in clinical practice. The complexity and variability of NENs necessitate the deep understanding of the current diagnostic strategies, which in turn assists in offering optimal patient-tailored treatment. The current review article presents the diagnostic work-up of GEP-NENs and all the recent advances in the field.

Survival Benefit of Surgical Resection for Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors With Oligometastatic Liver Metastasis: A Retrospective and Propensity Score-Matching Analysis

Background

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNETs) are a heterogeneous group of pancreatic malignancies. Surgical resection is the only curative treatment option for patients with localized PanNETs, yet the role of cancer-directed surgery (CDS) in the setting of oligometastatic liver metastasis remains a controversy.

Methods

All patients diagnosed with PanNETs and liver-only metastasis from 2010 to 2018 were identified from the SEER database. The biases of baseline characteristics between CDS and no-CDS cohorts were reduced by the propensity score-matching (PSM) method, and the prognostic role of CDS was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method and Cox regression models. Logistic regression analysis was utilized to identify factors associated with patients who underwent CDS.

Results

A total of 1,270 PanNET patients with oligometastatic liver metastasis were included and analyzed. Of these patients, 283 (22.3%) patients underwent CDS of the primary tumor, while the remaining 987 (77.7%) did not. The OS and CSS were significantly better in the CDS cohort regardless of the propensity score analysis. Multivariate analysis revealed that age, tumor differentiation, tumor location, and lymph node status were significantly associated with patients who were more likely to receive CDS.

Conclusion

Our study demonstrated that CDS was associated with survival benefits in selected patients with PanNETs and liver-only metastasis based on a large population database.

Gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms and precursor lesions: Case reports and literature review

RATIONALE

Gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms (g-NENs) represent a distinctive group of gastric tumors, stratified into different prognostic categories according to different histological characteristics, put forth in the 2018 World Health Organization classification system. The clinical presentations, as well as pathological features, represent important data in establishing the type of the tumor, in estimating the tumor behavior, and in selecting the best therapeutic strategy. In our case series we presented different clinical scenarios that may be encountered in practice regarding gastric NENs. We performed a literature review and discussed diagnostic strategy, current classification system, precursor lesions, and therapeutic options in g-NENs.

PATIENT CONCERNS

The first patient was a 41-year-old female with weight loss, persistent dyspeptic complaints and a history of pernicious anemia. In the second clinical case a 61-year-old man was admitted with heartburn, abdominal pain, diarrhea and mild iron deficiency anemia. The third patient was a 56-year-old male with a history of neoplasia, admitted for weight loss, dyspeptic complaints, and liver metastases.

DIAGNOSIS

All the 3 patients underwent upper endoscopy with targeted biopsies. Histopathological and laboratory evaluation, together with imagistic evaluation (abdominal ultrasound, endoscopic ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging) allowed the distinction between 3 different types of gastric tumors: type 1 enterochromaffin-like-cell G1 NET, type 2 enterochromaffin-like-cell G2 NET, and type 3 G2 NET with liver metastases.

INTERVENTIONS

Endoscopic polypectomy of the largest lesion was performed in patient with type 1 g-NET and autoimmune chronic atrophic gastritis, followed by regular endoscopic surveillance with biopsies. In type 2 g-NET associated with pancreatic gastrinoma, pancreaticoduodenectomy with total gastrectomy were performed. In type 3 g-NET, detected in metastatic stage, oncologic therapy was performed.

OUTCOMES

The patients follow-up was selected according to tumor behavior, from regular endoscopic surveillance to oncology follow-up. The prognosis was good in case 1, whilst poorer outcomes were associated with more aggressive tumors in case 2 and case 3.

LESSONS

g-NENs are rare tumors with distinct clinical and histological features. Our case series emphasized the role of close collaboration between clinician and pathologist, as well as the importance of a detailed pathology report.

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.

Nordic guidelines 2021 for diagnosis and treatment of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms

BACKGROUND

The diagnostic work-up and treatment of patients with gastroenteropancreatic (GEP) neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN) has undergone major advances and new methods are introduced. Furthermore, an update of the WHO classification has resulted in a new nomenclature for GEP-NEN that is implemented in the clinic.

AIM

These Nordic guidelines summarise the Nordic Neuroendocrine Tumour Group's current view on how to diagnose and treat GEP-NEN patients and aims to be useful in the daily practice for clinicians.

Multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN-1) and neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs)

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are relatively rare neoplasms with 6.4-times increasing age-adjusted annual incidence during the last four decades. NENs arise from neuroendocrine cells, which release hormones in response to neuronal stimuli and they are distributed into organs and tissues. The presentation and biological behaviour of the NENs are highly heterogeneous, depending on the organ. The increased incidence is mainly due to increased awareness and improved detection methods both in the majority of sporadic NENs (non-inherited), but also the inherited groups of neoplasms appearing in at least ten genetic syndromes. The most important one is multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN-1), caused by mutations in the tumour suppressor gene MEN1. MEN-1 has been associated with different tumour manifestations of NENs e.g. pancreas, gastrointestinal tract, lungs, thymus and pituitary. Pancreatic NENs tend to be less aggressive when arising in the setting of MEN-1 compared to sporadic pancreatic NENs. There have been very important improvements over the past years in both genotyping, genetic counselling and family screening, introduction and validation of various relevant biomarkers, as well as newer imaging modalities. Alongside this development, both medical, surgical and radionuclide treatments have also advanced and improved morbidity, quality of life and mortality in many of these patients. Despite this progress, there is still space for improving insight into the genetic and epigenetic factors in relation to the biological mechanisms determining NENs as part of MEN-1. This review gives a comprehensive update of current evidence for co-occurrence, diagnosis and treatment of MEN-1 and neuroendocrine neoplasms and highlight the important progress now finding its way to international guidelines in order to improve the global management of these patients.

Surgical Management of Neuroendocrine Tumours of the Pancreas

Neuroendocrine tumours of the pancreas (pNET) are rare, accounting for 1-2% of all pancreatic neoplasms. They develop from pancreatic islet cells and cover a wide range of heterogeneous neoplasms. While most pNETs are sporadic, some are associated with genetic syndromes. Furthermore, some pNETs are 'functioning' when there is clinical hypersecretion of metabolically active peptides, whereas others are 'non-functioning'. pNET can be diagnosed at a localised stage or a more advanced stage, including regional or distant metastasis (in 50% of cases) mainly located in the liver. While surgical resection is the cornerstone of the curative treatment of those patients, pNET management requires a multidisciplinary discussion between the oncologist, radiologist, pathologist, and surgeon. However, the scarcity of pNET patients constrains centralised management in high-volume centres to provide the best patient-tailored approach. Nonetheless, no treatment should be initiated without precise diagnosis and staging. In this review, the steps from the essential comprehensive preoperative evaluation of the best surgical approach (open versus laparoscopic, standard versus sparing parenchymal pancreatectomy, lymphadenectomy) according to pNET staging are analysed. Strategies to enhance the short- and long-term benefit/risk ratio in these particular patients are discussed.

Surgical management of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: an introduction

Introduction: Neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas (pNETs) represent only 1% to 2% of all pancreatic neoplasms. These tumors can be classified as functional or nonfunctional tumors; as sporadic or from a genetic origin; as neuroendocrine neoplasms or carcinoma. Over the last decade, diagnosis of pNETs has increased significantly mainly due to the widespread use of cross-sectional imaging. Those tumors are usually associated with a good prognosis. Surgery, the only curative option for those patients, should always be discussed, ideally in a multidisciplinary team setting.Areas covered: We discuss i), the preoperative management of pNETs and the importance of accurate diagnosis, localization, grading and staging with computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, endoscopic ultrasound, and nuclear medicine imaging; ii), surgical indications and iii), the surgical approach (standard pancreatectomy vs pancreatic-sparing surgery).Expert opinion: The treatment option of all patients presenting with pNETs should be discussed in a multidisciplinary team setting with surgeon's experienced in both pancreatic surgery and neuroendocrine tumor management. A complete preoperative imaging assessment - morphological and functional - must be performed. Surgery is usually recommended for functional pNETs, nonfunctional pNETs >2 cm (nf-pNETs) or for symptomatic nf-pNETs.

Survival outcomes and surgical intervention of small intestinal neuroendocrine tumors: a population based retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Small intestinal neuroendocrine tumors (SiNETs) without distant metastasis typically behave in an indolent manner, but there can be heterogeneity. We aimed to define the survival outcomes and impacts of surgical intervention.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted by using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Clinicopathologic features were analyzed in 4407 patients between 2000 and 2012. The cancer specific survival (CSS) was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariable Cox regression models with hazard ratios (HRs) were constructed to analyze survival outcomes and risk factors.

RESULTS

The adjusted incidence of early SiNETs is 1.3/100,000. Tumors are most commonly located in the ileum and are small (≤ 2 cm). The 5-year and 10-year CSS rates were 95.0% and 88.5%, respectively. Age > 50 years, large tumor size (> 2cm), poor differentiation, advanced T classification, and absence of surgical treatment were independent predictors of poor survival. Stratified analysis indicated that surgery significantly improved survival in patients that were white (HR, 0.45), > 50 years old (HR, 0.61), had duodenal tumors (HR, 0.43), large tumors (> 2cm) (HR, 0.32), advanced T classification (T3: HR, 0.29; T4: HR, 0.18) or well differentiation (HR, 0.55). There was no significant survival difference between local resection and radical resection (P =0.884).

CONCLUSIONS

Early SiNETs have a favorable prognosis. Surgical resection may improve outcomes, particularly in older patients and those with large tumors. More aggressive resections couldn't improve outcomes.

Is Multifocality an Indicator of Aggressive Behavior in Small Bowel Neuroendocrine Tumors?

OBJECTIVES

Many patients with small bowel neuroendocrine tumors (SBNETs) have multifocal tumors (MFTs), but the frequency of MFTs has varied widely across SBNET studies. It is also unclear whether patients with MFTs have more advanced disease or worse clinical course than do those with unifocal SBNETs. We set out to determine the frequency of multifocal and unifocal SBNETs and compare clinicopathologic factors, somatostatin receptor 2 expression, and survival.

METHODS

Clinicopathologic variables from 179 patients with surgically managed SBNETs were collected. Statistical comparisons were made using Welch t-test, Wilcoxon test, and Fisher's exact test. Survival was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Somatostatin receptor 2 expression was analyzed by quantitative polymerase chain reaction, and Ki-67 expression by immunohistochemistry.

RESULTS

Multifocal tumors were found in 45% of patients with SBNETs. Clinicopathologic factors such as grade, TNM stage, presence of distant metastases, mean somatostatin receptor 2 expression, success of imaging modalities, and preoperative and postoperative hormone levels were not significantly different between multifocal and unifocal groups. Progression-free survival and overall survival were also not significantly affected by multifocality.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicopathologic features and survival of patients with MFTs and unifocal tumors are remarkably similar. Although the etiology of MFTs is unclear, patients with MFTs do not have a more aggressive clinical course than patients with unifocal SBNETs.

Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy Outcomes in a North American Cohort With Metastatic Well-Differentiated Neuroendocrine Tumors

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to describe the outcomes of patients in the University of Iowa Neuroendocrine Tumor (NET) Database treated with peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT).

METHODS

One hundred thirty-five patients from the University of Iowa NET Database who received PRRT were analyzed, their characteristics were described, and survival was calculated.

RESULTS

The median age at diagnosis was 51 years, and 64% were men. The primary tumor was located in the small bowel (SBNET) in 37.8%, in the pancreas (PNET) in 26.0%, in the lung in 13.3%, in unknown primary in 9.6%, and in other sites in 13.3%. A radiographic response of any magnitude was observed in 65.8%, 11.1% had a mixed response, and 15.4% showed progression. The overall survival (OS) from the first PRRT was 40 months, and the median time to progression was 23.9 months. Higher pretreatment chromogranin A and pancreastatin levels predicted inferior OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy resulted in a relatively long OS and time to progression in heavily pretreated North American patients with advanced NETs. Elevated pretreatment chromogranin A and pancreastatin predicted shorter OS after therapy. Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy is a valuable treatment option in patients with advanced NETs, especially SBNETS.

Radiolabeled Somatostatin Analogue Therapy Of Gastroenteropancreatic Cancer

Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) has been utilized for more than two decades and has been accepted as an effective therapeutic modality in the treatment of inoperable or metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) or neuroendocrine tumors (NETs). The two most commonly used radiopeptides for PRRT, (90)Y-octreotide and (177)Lu-octreotate, produce disease-control rates of 68%-94%, with progression-free survival rates that compare favorably with chemotherapy, somatostatin analogues, and newer targeted therapies. In addition, biochemical and symptomatic responses are commonly observed. In general, PRRT is well tolerated with only low to moderate toxicity in most individuals. In line with the need to place PRRT in the therapeutic sequence of gastroenteropancreatic NENs, a recently sponsored phase III randomized trial in small intestine NENs treated with (177)Lu-octreotate vs high-dose octreotide long-acting release demonstrated that (177)Lu-octreotate significantly improved progression-free survival. Other strategies that are presently being developed include combinations with targeted therapies or chemotherapy, intra-arterial PRRT, and salvage treatments. Sophisticated molecular tools need to be incorporated into the management strategy to more effectively define therapeutic efficacy and for an early identification of adverse events. The strategy of randomized controlled trials is a key issue to standardize the treatment and establish the position of PRRT in the therapeutic algorithm of NENs.

Multivariate analysis of metastasis‑related risk factors for patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors based on clinicopathological and endoscopic features

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP‑NETs) are relatively uncommon. Unfortunately, epidemiological studies on the incidence of GEP‑NETs worldwide have reported a marked increase in the detection of these tumors. Although they often exhibit relatively indolent clinical courses, GEP‑NETs have the potential for lethal progression, especially in patients who present with advanced disease. Early detection and surgical removal is currently the only reliable curative treatment for GEP‑NET patients. The objective of this study was to analyze the clinicopathological characteristics of GEP‑NETs and explore the metastasis‑related risk factors of patients with GEP‑NETs. One hundred and forty‑six patients diagnosed pathologically with GEP‑NETs from January 2001 to January 2015 at the Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University were retrospectively evaluated. We retrieved and analyzed information concerning clinical characteristics and metastasis‑related risk factors, and used Chi‑square test and logistic regression analysis to analyze the clinicopathological characteristics of GEP‑NETs and explore the association between tumor metastasis and possible related risk factors. The results revealed that the most common clinical manifestations were abdominal pain (n=88), alteration in the character of stool (n=58) and melaena (n=33). Rectum (91/146, 62.3%) and stomach (19/146, 13.0%) were the main sites of metastasis. Both Chi‑square test and logistic regression analysis showed that tumor size (P<0.05), tumor type (P=0.008) and peritumoral lymphatic vessel density (LVD) (P=0.004) were significantly correlated with tumor metastasis. Neither Chi‑square test nor logistic regression analysis indicated that gender (P>0.05), age (P>0.05), tumor location (P>0.05), tumor number (P>0.05), chromaffin granule protein A [chromogranin A (CgA), P>0.05], synaptophysin (Syn, P>0.05) or intratumoral LVD (P>0.05) had a significant correlation with tumor metastasis. Chi‑square test revealed that tumor grade was significantly correlated with tumor metastasis. In conclusion, GEP‑NETs may occur in multiple sites of the digestive system and lack specific clinical manifestations. Tumor size, tumor type, peritumoral LVD, total LVD and tumor grade are metastasis‑related risk factors for GEP‑NET patients.

Retrospective analysis of the clinicopathological characteristics of gastrointestinal neuroendocrine neoplasms

The aim of the present study was to analyze and summarize the clinicopathological characteristics and factors affecting prognosis for patients with gastrointestinal neuroendocrine neoplasms (GINENs). Retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinicopathological data of 74 patients who were diagnosed with GINEN, and immunohistochemical methods were used to detect the expression levels of relevant markers [synaptophysin (Syn), chromogranin A (CgA) and Ki-67]. Among the 74 cases with GINEN, there were 39 males and 35 females, with an average age of 56.9 years. There were 32 neoplasms in the rectum, 29 in the stomach, 6 in the colon, 2 in the small intestine and 5 in the appendix. All 74 cases underwent surgical resection. According to the World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Digestive System (2010), the diagnosis of the 74 cases showed 41 cases (55.4%) of neuroendocrine tumor (NET; 25 cases of G1 and 16 cases of G2), 21 cases (28.4%) of neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) and 12 cases (16.2%) of mixed adenoneuroendocrine carcinoma (MANEC). Additionally, 19 cases had metastasis to lymph nodes. During 10-34 months of follow-up, 15 patients had distant metastasis and 24 patients succumbed, and the accumulative survival rate in 1 or 2 years was 87.8 and 74.3%, respectively. Six factors, namely neoplasm size, depth of invasion, lymph node metastasis, distant metastasis, pathological type and the expression or lack of expression of CgA, significantly affected the survival time of patients. Definitive diagnosis of GINEN mainly relies on pathological diagnosis. GINENs with different histopathological types and grading have different clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis: NETs are mainly early lesions with a good prognosis, whereas NECs and MANECs have high malignancy and strong invasion with a worse prognosis.

Use of radioactive substances in diagnosis and treatment of neuroendocrine tumors

Radionuclides are needed both for nuclear medicine imaging as well as for peptide-receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) of neuroendocrine tumors (NET). Imaging is important in the initial diagnostic work-up and for staging NETs. In therapy planning, somatostatin receptor imaging (SRI) is used when treatment is targeted at the somatostatin receptors as with the use of somatostatin analogues or PRRT. SRI with gamma camera technique using the tracer (111)In-DTPA-octreotide has for many years been the backbone of nuclear imaging of NETs. However, increasingly PET tracers for SRI are now used. (68)Ga-DOTATATE, (68)Ga-DOTATOC and (68)Ga-DOTANOC are the three most often used PET tracers. They perform better than SPECT tracers and should be preferred. FDG-PET is well suited for visualization of most of the somatostatin receptor-negative tumors prognostic in NET patients. Also (11)C-5-HTP, (18)F-DOPA and (123)I-MIBG may be used in NET. However, with FDG-PET and somatostatin receptor PET at hand we see limited necessity of other tracers. PRRT is an important tool in the treatment of advanced NETs causing complete or partial response in 20% and minor response or tumor stabilization in 60% with response duration of up to 3 years. Grade 3-4 kidney or bone marrow toxicity is seen in 1.5% and 9.5%, respectively, but are completely or partly reversible in most patients. (177)Lu-DOTATATE seems to have less toxicity than (90)Y-DOTATOC. However, until now only retrospective, non-randomized studies have been performed and the role of PRRT in treatment of NETs remains to be established.

A review on management discussions of small intestinal neuroendocrine tumors ‘midgut carcinoids’

European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society staging, together with the Ki67 grading system, has appeared as superior for classification of neuroendocrine tumors (NET). The management of small intestinal NET (SI-NET) has been overall controversial. Mesenteric metastases occur also with the smallest SI-NET, and the majority of patients risk to ultimately progress with liver metastases. 68Gallium (somatostatin receptor)/PET/CT has appeared as most sensitive for imaging, and fluorodeoxyglucose-PET is recommended to identify lesions with high proliferation. Our treatment policy for SI-NET is to initiate somatostatin analog treatment, and in order to prevent abdominal complications we recommend early intestinal resection for removal of primary tumors and clearance of lymph node metastases. Liver metastases are liberally treated by resection (or ablation), as this can efficiently palliate carcinoid syndrome-associated symptoms.

Can complementary 68Ga-DOTATATE and 18F-FDG PET/CT establish the missing link between histopathology and therapeutic approach in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors?

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEPNETs) are indolent neoplasms presenting unpredictable and unusual biologic behavior that causes many clinical challenges. Tumor size, existence of metastasis, and histopathologic classification remain incapable in terms of treatment decision and prognosis estimation. This study aimed to compare (68)Ga-DOTATATE and (18)F-FDG PET/CT in GEPNETs and to investigate the relation between the complementary PET/CT results and histopathologic findings in the management of therapy, particularly in intermediate-grade patients.

METHODS

The relation between complementary (68)Ga-DOTATATE and (18)F-FDG PET/CT results of 27 GEPNET patients (mean age, 56 y; age range, 33-79 y) and histopathologic findings was evaluated according to grade and localization using standardized maximum uptake values and Ki67 indices. Grade 2 (G2) patients were further evaluated in 2 groups as G2a (3%-9%) and G2b (10%-20%) according to Ki67 indices.

RESULTS

The sensitivity of (68)Ga-DOTATATE and (18)F-FDG PET/CT was 95% and 37%, respectively, and the positive predictive values were 93.8% and 36.2%, respectively. The sensitivity in detecting liver metastasis, lymph nodes, bone metastasis, and primary lesion was 95%, 95%, 90%, and 93% for (68)Ga-DOTATATE and 40%, 28%, 28%, and 75% for (18)F-FDG, respectively. Statistically significant differences were found between grades 1-2, 2a-2b, and 1-2b with respect to (68)Ga-DOTATATE PET/CT as well as between 1-2a and 1-2b with respect to (18)F-FDG PET/CT. However, no statistical differences were found between 1 and 2a (P > 0.05) for (68)Ga-DOTATATE and 2a and 2b (P = 0.484) for (18)F-FDG. The impact of the combined (18)F-FDG and (68)Ga-DOTATATE PET/CT on the therapeutic decision was 59%.

CONCLUSION

Combined (68)Ga-DOTATATE and (18)F-FDG PET/CT is helpful in the individual therapeutic approach of GEPNETs and can overcome the shortcomings of histopathologic grading especially in intermediate-grade GEPNETs.

Nordic guidelines 2014 for diagnosis and treatment of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms

BACKGROUND

The diagnostic work-up and treatment of patients with neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) has undergone major recent advances and new methods are currently introduced into the clinic. An update of the WHO classification has resulted in a new nomenclature dividing NENs into neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) including G1 (Ki67 index ≤ 2%) and G2 (Ki67 index 3-20%) tumours and neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs) with Ki67 index > 20%, G3. Aim. These Nordic guidelines summarise the Nordic Neuroendocrine Tumour Group's current view on how to diagnose and treat NEN-patients and are meant to be useful in the daily practice for clinicians handling these patients.

Clinicopathological characteristics and prognostic factors of gastric neuroendocrine carcinoma

AIM: To evaluate the clinical characteristics and prognostic factors of gastric neuroendocrine carcinoma (GNEC).

METHODS: The clinical data for 50 GNEC patients treated at our hospital between November 1, 2007 and March 31, 2014 were reviewed and analyzed retrospectively. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were plotted, and log-rank tests and Cox proportional hazards analysis were used for univariate and multivariate comparisons of overall survival (OS).

RESULTS: There were 44 neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) (G3) and 6 mixed adenoneuroendocrine carcinoma (MANEC) (G2-3) patients enrolled in this study. Among them, 39 were male and 11 were female, with a median age of 61.32±10.48 years. At presentation, 6 (12.0%) cases were diagnosed with stage Ⅱ, and the percentages of stage Ⅲ and Ⅳ patients was 68.0% and 20.0%, respectively. All of the cases received radical surgery for the primary and metastatic masses. 36 (72.0%) cases had lymph node metastasis and intravascular tumor thrombi were found in 17 (34.0%) cases. The percentage of patients receiving chemotherapy was 50.0% (25/50). The follow-up duration was 1 to 50 mo. 15 cases developed relapse and 18 patients died. Univariate analysis revealed that the ratio of neutrophils to lymphocytes (NLR), Ki67 and chemotherapy were significant prognostic factors (P < 0.05). Cox regression analysis showed that Ki67 was an independent prognostic factor.

CONCLUSION: GNEC is a relatively uncommon and highly aggressive malignancy, and Ki67 is an important independent prognostic factor.

Limitations of somatostatin scintigraphy in primary small bowel neuroendocrine tumors

BACKGROUND

Somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS; octreoscan) is used in neuroendocrine tumors to locate the primary tumor site and delineate the extent of disease. SRS has decreased sensitivity for small bowel neuroendocrine tumors (SBNETs). The reasons for SRS nonlocalization are not clear. We sought to determine factors that correlate with successful primary tumor localization by SRS in patients with resected SBNETs, and also identify factors that confound interpretation of SRS reports.

METHODS

Records of patients with resected SBNETs were reviewed for SRS results, tumor size, multifocality, N, and M status. Somatostatin receptor 2 (SSTR2) expression was analyzed in resected tumors by quantitative polymerase chain reaction. SRS reports were reviewed and categorized as localizing the primary tumor or not. A nuclear medicine physician independently reviewed available images.

RESULTS

Of 37 patients with preoperative SRS, the primary tumor was localized in 37%. Of all the factors tested, only small tumor size correlated significantly with SRS nonlocalization. Overexpression of SSTR2 was not significantly different between tumors that were or were not localized by SRS, regardless of tumor size. There were three instances where the SRS report did not agree with the nuclear medicine physician's interpretation as to whether SRS localized the primary tumor. In each case, uptake in mesenteric nodes was a confounding factor.

CONCLUSIONS

SBNETs <2 cm are most likely to be missed by SRS. SSTR2 expression did not correlate with SRS nonlocalization of the primary tumor. Uptake in mesenteric nodes may help indicate an SBNET primary but can also interfere with its visualization within the small bowel.

Zollinger-Ellison syndrome: recent advances and controversies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the recent advances and current controversies in patients with Zollinger-Ellison syndrome (ZES).

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent advances in the management of ZES include: improved understanding of the pathogenesis of gastrinoma and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, new prognostic classification systems, new diagnostic algorithms, more sensitive localization studies, new treatment strategies including improved control of gastric acid secretion and role for surgery, and new approaches to patients with advanced disease. Controversies include: the best approach to a patient with hypergastrinemia suspected of possibly having ZES, the appropriate gastrin assay to use, the role of surgery in patients with ZES, especially those with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1, and the precise order of therapeutic modalities in the treatment of patients with advanced disease.

SUMMARY

This review updates clinicians regarding important advances and controversies required to optimally diagnose and manage patients with ZES.