Chromogranin A Expression in Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors Is Associated With More Aggressive Clinical Behavior and a Poorer Prognosis

User-friendly prognostic model for rectal neuroendocrine tumours: In the era of precision management

In this letter, we explore into the potential role of the recent study by Zeng et al. Rectal neuroendocrine tumours (rNETs) are rare, originate from peptidergic neurons and neuroendocrine cells, and express corresponding markers. Although most rNETs patients have a favourable prognosis, the median survival period significantly decreases when high-risk factors, such as larger tumours, poorer differentiation, and lymph node metastasis exist, are present. Clinical prediction models play a vital role in guiding diagnosis and prognosis in health care, but their complex calculation formulae limit clinical use. Moreover, the prognostic models that have been developed for rNETs to date still have several limitations, such as insufficient sample sizes and the lack of external validation. A high-quality prognostic model for rNETs would guide treatment and follow-up, enabling the precise formulation of individual patient treatment and follow-up plans. The future development of models for rNETs should involve closer collaboration with statistical experts, which would allow the construction of clinical prediction models to be standardized and robust, accurate, and highly generalizable prediction models to be created, ultimately achieving the goal of precision medicine.

Critical updates in neuroendocrine tumors: Version 9 American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system for all cancer sites, including gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs), is meant to be dynamic, requiring periodic updates to optimize AJCC staging definitions. This entails the collaboration of experts charged with evaluating new evidence that supports changes to each staging system. GEP-NETs are the second most prevalent neoplasm of gastrointestinal origin after colorectal cancer. Since publication of the AJCC eighth edition, the World Health Organization has updated the classification and separates grade 3 GEP-NETs from poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma. In addition, because of major advancements in diagnostic and therapeutic technologies for GEP-NETs, AJCC version 9 advocates against the use of serum chromogranin A for the diagnosis and monitoring of GEP-NETs. Furthermore, AJCC version 9 recognizes the increasing role of endoscopy and endoscopic resection in the diagnosis and management of NETs, particularly in the stomach, duodenum, and colorectum. Finally, T1NXM0 has been added to stage I in these disease sites as well as in the appendix.

The Clinicopathological Significance of Tumor Cell Subtyping in Appendiceal Neuroendocrine Tumors: A Series of 135 Tumors

Appendiceal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are common and often are identified as incidental lesions at the time of appendectomy. The guidelines for management are based on tumor size, degree of invasion, and the Ki67 proliferation index. Most small bowel NETs are composed of serotonin-producing EC-cells, but there are multiple other neuroendocrine cell types. In the rectum, there are L-cell tumors that express peptide YY (PYY), glucagon-like peptides (GLPs), and pancreatic polypeptide (PP); they are thought to have a better prognosis than serotonin-producing tumors. We investigated whether the appendix has distinct neuroendocrine tumor types based on cell type and whether that distinction has clinical significance. We collected 135 appendiceal NETs from the pathology archives of UHN Toronto and UHCMC (Cleveland). We analyzed the expression of biomarkers including CDX2, SATB2, PSAP, serotonin, glucagon (that detects GLPs), PYY, and pancreatic polypeptide (PP) and correlated the results with clinicopathologic parameters. Immunohistochemistry identified three types of appendiceal NETs. There were 75 (56%) classified as EC-cell tumors and 37 (27%) classified as L-cell tumors; the remaining 23 (17%) expressed serotonin and one of the L-cell biomarkers and were classified as mixed. EC-cell tumors were significantly larger with more extensive invasion involving the muscularis propria, subserosa, and mesoappendix compared with L-cell tumors. Mixed tumors were intermediate in all of these parameters. Both EC-cell and mixed tumors had lymphatic and/or vascular invasion while L-cell tumors had none. Unlike EC-cell NETs, L-cell tumors were not associated with lymph node metastasis. Tumor type correlated with pT stage and the only patient with distant metastatic disease in this series had an EC-cell tumor. Our study confirms that appendiceal NETs are not a homogeneous tumor population. There are at least three types of appendiceal NET, including EC-cell, L-cell, and mixed tumors. This information is important for surveillance of patients, as monitoring urinary 5HIAA levels is only appropriate for patients with serotonin-producing tumors, whereas measurement of GLPs and/or PP is more appropriate for patients with L-cell tumors. Our data also show that tumor type is of significance with EC-cell tumors exhibiting the most aggressive behavior.

Impact of grade on workup of rectal neuroendocrine tumors: a retrospective cohort study : Grade impact on workup of rectal NETs

BACKGROUND

Rectal neuroendocrine tumors (RNETs) are often discovered on screening colonoscopy. Indications for staging and definitive resection are inconsistent in current guidelines. We evaluated the role of grade in guiding staging and procedural decision-making.

METHODS

Patients with biopsy confirmed RNETs between 2004 and 2015 were reviewed. Baseline characteristics, staging investigations (biochemical and imaging), and endoscopic/surgical treatment were recorded. Associations between grade, preoperative staging, interventions, and survival were determined using Fisher-Freeman-Halton Exact, log-rank, and Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

Amongst 139 patients with RNETs, 9% were aged ≥ 75 years and 44% female. Tumor grade was: 73% grade 1 (G1), 18%, grade 2 (G2) and 9% grade 3 (G3). Staging investigations were performed in 52% of patients. All serum chromogranin A and 97% of 24-hour urine 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid tests were normal. The large majority of staging computed tomography (CT) scans were negative (76%) with subgroup analysis showing no G1 patients with CT identified distant disease compared with 38% of G2 and 50% of G3 patients (p < 0.001). G1 patients were more likely to achieve R0/R1 resections compared to G2 (95% vs. 50%, p < 0.001) and G1 patients had significantly better 5-year overall survival (G1: 98%, G2: 67%, G3: 10%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Tumor grade is important in preoperative workup and surgical decision-making. Biochemical staging may be omitted but staging CT should be considered for patients with grade ≥ 2 lesions. Anatomic resections should be considered for patients with grade 2 disease.

Endoscopic management of gastric, duodenal and rectal NETs: Position paper from the Italian Association for Neuroendocrine Tumors (Itanet), Italian Society of Gastroenterology (SIGE), Italian Society of Digestive Endoscopy (SIED)

The present paper reflects the position of the Italian Association for Neuroendocrine Tumors (Itanet), the Italian Society of Gastroenterology (SIGE), and the Italian Society of Digestive Endoscopy (SIED) regarding the management of patients affected by gastric, duodenal, and rectal neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) amenable to endoscopic treatment. The key questions discussed in this paper are summarized in Table 1. Data were extracted from the MEDLINE database through searches; expert opinions and recommendations are provided in accordance with the available scientific evidence and the authors' expertise. Recommendations are presented alongside a level of evidence and grade of recommendation based on the GRADE system. This paper specifically focuses on subgroups of NENs considered suitable for endoscopic management according to current international guidelines: i. well-differentiated gastric neuroendocrine tumors (gNET) type 1 < 2 cm and selected cases of type 3; ii. well-differentiated duodenal, non-functioning, non-ampullary NET with size < 2 cm; and well-differentiated rectal NET with size < 2 cm.

Clinicopathologic features and diagnostic challenges of small cluster pattern appendiceal neuroendocrine tumors

Appendiceal neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) can present with various growth patterns including the traditional triad of histologic patterns-insular, trabecular and tubular. A small cluster pattern was also found in this study and the literature on this specific morphology is limited. In this study, we conducted a comprehensive review of appendiceal NENs from our institution over a ten-year period. Clinical and demographic data were obtained from medical records. Immunohistochemical stains were performed with antibodies specific for synaptophysin, chromogranin, INSM1, CD56, serotonin and peptide YY. The small cluster pattern was found in 29.4 % of all cases evaluated. The tumor cells in these cases were predominantly located at the distal tip of the appendix, associated with fibrous obliteration. These tumors were smaller in size and tended towards less advanced tumor stage, with reduced incidence of lymphovascular and/or perineural invasion. Chromogranin expression was identified in 76 % of these cases. There is a heterogeneous hormone profile with 46.7 % serotonin and 33.3 % peptide YY. In conclusion, the small cluster pattern NENs present with unique histological features and hormone expression profile. Among the various neuroendocrine markers, INSM1 showed superior diagnostic performance, with high sensitivity and minimal non-specific staining.

Relation between WHO Classification and Location- and Functionality-Based Classifications of Neuroendocrine Neoplasms of the Digestive Tract

Practice of neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) of the digestive tract, which comprise of a highly diverse group of tumors with a rising incidence, faces multiple biological, diagnostic, and therapeutic issues. Part of these issues is due to misuse and misinterpretation of the classification and terminology of NENs of the digestive tract, which make it increasingly challenging to evaluate and compare the literature. For instance, grade 3 neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are frequently referred to as neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs) and vice versa, while NECs are, by definition, high grade and therefore constitute a separate entity from NETs. Moreover, the term NET is regularly misused to describe NENs in general, and NETs are frequently referred to as benign, while they should always be considered malignancies as they do have metastatic potential. To prevent misconceptions in future NEN-related research, we reviewed the most recent terminology used to classify NENs of the digestive tract and created an overview that combines the classification of these NENs according to the World Health Organization (WHO) with location- and functionality-based classifications. This overview may help clinicians and researchers in understanding the current literature and could serve as a guide in the clinic as well as for writing future studies on NENs of the digestive tract. In this way, we aim for the universal use of terminology, thereby providing an efficient foundation for future NEN-related research.

Endoscopic management of subepithelial lesions including neuroendocrine neoplasms: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

1: ESGE recommends endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) as the best tool to characterize subepithelial lesion (SEL) features (size, location, originating layer, echogenicity, shape), but EUS alone is not able to distinguish among all types of SEL.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2: ESGE suggests providing tissue diagnosis for all SELs with features suggestive of gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) if they are of size > 20 mm, or have high risk stigmata, or require surgical resection or oncological treatment.Weak recommendation, very low quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) or mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB) equally for tissue diagnosis of SELs ≥ 20 mm in size.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4: ESGE recommends against surveillance of asymptomatic gastrointestinal (GI) tract leiomyomas, lipomas, heterotopic pancreas, granular cell tumors, schwannomas, and glomus tumors, if the diagnosis is clear.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 5: ESGE suggests surveillance of asymptomatic esophageal and gastric SELs without definite diagnosis, with esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) at 3-6 months, and then at 2-3-year intervals for lesions < 10 mm in size, and at 1-2-year intervals for lesions 10-20 mm in size. For asymptomatic SELs > 20 mm in size that are not resected, ESGE suggests surveillance with EGD plus EUS at 6 months and then at 6-12-month intervals.Weak recommendation, very low quality evidence. 6: ESGE recommends endoscopic resection for type 1 gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms (g-NENs) if they grow larger than 10 mm. The choice of resection technique should depend on size, depth of invasion, and location in the stomach.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7: ESGE suggests considering removal of histologically proven gastric GISTs smaller than 20 mm as an alternative to surveillance. The decision to resect should be discussed in a multidisciplinary meeting. The choice of technique should depend on size, location, and local expertise.Weak recommendation, very low quality evidence. 8: ESGE suggests that, to avoid unnecessary follow-up, endoscopic resection is an option for gastric SELs smaller than 20 mm and of unknown histology after failure of attempts to obtain diagnosis.Weak recommendation, very low quality evidence. 9: ESGE recommends basing the surveillance strategy on the type and completeness of resection. After curative resection of benign SELs no follow-up is advised, except for type 1 gastric NEN for which surveillance at 1-2 years is advised.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 10: For lower or upper GI NEN with a positive or indeterminate margin at resection, ESGE recommends repeating endoscopy at 3-6 months and another attempt at endoscopic resection in the case of residual disease.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

Risk factors for lymph node metastasis and prognosis in colorectal neuroendocrine tumours

PURPOSE

The detection rate of colorectal neuroendocrine tumours (CR-NETs) is increasing, but their treatment is still controversial. Lymph node metastasis is an important reference index for the selection of treatment. The aim of our study was to investigate the factors associated with lymph node metastasis and prognosis of CR-NETs.

METHODS

The case characteristics of patients with colorectal neuroendocrine tumours from January 2011 to December 2020 were retrospectively analysed, including age, gender, tumour size, tumour location, lymph node metastasis, pathological grade and follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 195 cases of CR-NETs were included in this study. When 15 mm was used as the cut-off value, the sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve (AUC) of lymph node metastases were 95.9%, 95.2% and 0.986, respectively. Multivariate analysis suggested that tumour size ≥ 15 mm (OR: 30.517, 95% CI: 1.250 ~ 744.996, p = 0.036) and lymphovascular invasion (OR: 42.796, 95% CI: 2.882 ~ 635.571, p = 0.006) were independent risk factors for lymph node metastasis. Age ≥ 56 (HR: 7.434, 95% CI: 1.334 ~ 41.443, p = 0.022) and distant metastasis (HR: 24.487, 95% CI: 5.357 ~ 111.940, p < 0.001) were independent prognostic factors in multivariable analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

When the size of a CR-NET is ≥ 15 mm, the risk of lymph node metastasis is higher, and it is recommended to choose the surgical method carefully. Tumour size and lymphovascular invasion were independent risk factors for lymph node metastasis. Age ≥ 56 and distant metastasis were independent prognostic factors.