Systematic review: management of localised low-grade upper gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumours

Long-term outcomes of endoscopic resection for well-differentiated nonampullary duodenal neuroendocrine tumors

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Nonampullary duodenal neuroendocrine tumors (NAD-NETs) are rare, with limited evidence regarding endoscopic treatment. This study investigated the efficacy and safety of endoscopic resection of well-differentiated NAD-NETs and evaluated long-term outcomes, including local recurrence and metastasis.

METHODS

Seventy-eight patients with NAD-NETs who underwent endoscopic resection between January 2011 and August 2022 were included. Clinicopathologic characteristics and treatment outcomes were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

En-bloc resection was achieved for 74 tumors (94.9%) and R0 resection for 68 tumors (87.2%). Univariate analysis identified tumors in the second part of the duodenum, tumor size ≥10 mm, and muscularis propria invasion as risk factors for noncurative resection. Two patients with R1 resection (vertical margin involvement) and 2 patients with lymphovascular invasion underwent additional surgery. Four patients experienced adverse events (5.1%), including 2 cases of delayed bleeding and 2 cases of perforation, all successfully managed conservatively. During a median follow-up period of 62.6 months, recurrence and lymph node metastasis were only detected in 1 patient with R1 resection 3 months after the original procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic resection is safe and effective and provides a favorable long-term outcome for patients with well-differentiated NAD-NETs without regional lymph node or distant metastasis.

Gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms

Gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms (gNENs) display peculiar site-specific features among all NENs. Their incidence and prevalence have been rising in the past few decades. gNENs comprise gastric neuroendocrine carcinomas (gNECs) and gastric neuroendocrine tumours (gNETs), the latter further classified into three types. Type I anatype II gNETs are gastrin-dependent and develop in chronic atrophic gastritis and as part of Zollinger-Ellison syndrome within a multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 syndrome (MEN1), respectively. Type III or sporadic gNETs develop in the absence of hypergastrinaemia and in the context of a near-normal or inflamed gastric mucosa. gNECs can also develop in the context of variable atrophic, relatively normal or inflamed gastric mucosa. Each gNEN type has different clinical characteristics and requires a different multidisciplinary approach in expert dedicated centres. Type I gNETs are managed mainly by endoscopy or surgery, whereas the treatment of type II gNETs largely depends on the management of the concomitant MEN1. Type III gNETs may require both locoregional approaches and systemic treatments; NECs are often metastatic and therefore require systemic treatment. Specific data regarding the systemic treatment of gNENs are lacking and are derived from the treatment of intestinal NETs and NECs. An enhanced understanding of molecular and clinical pathophysiology is needed to improve the management and outcomes of patients' gNETs.

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.

ASO Practice Guidelines Series: Surgical Management of Gastrointestinal (Midgut) Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

Gastrointestinal midgut neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are a heterogeneous group of uncommon malignancies. For well-differentiated NENs, known as neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), surgery is a cornerstone of management in localized and metastatic disease. Because of heterogeneous tumor behaviour, association with endocrine syndrome, and prognosis, the management of NETs must be individualized to all these factors in addition to the primary site. With the fast pace of advancement in the field, both for therapies and understanding of tumoral etiology and behaviour, it is important for surgical oncologists to remain updated on guidelines recommendations and suggested treatment pathways. Those guidelines provide important guidance for management of NETs but are largely based on expert opinions and interpretation of retrospective evidence. This article reviews highlights of most recent practice guidelines for midgut (gastric, duodenal, small intestinal, and appendiceal) NETs.

Type 3 gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms: the rising promise of conservative endoscopic management

Gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms (g-NENs) are rare tumors arising from the gastric enterochromaffin-like cells. Recent data suggests an increased detection rate, attributed to more frequent esophagogastroduodenoscopies. While type 3 g-NENs were historically deemed aggressive, emerging research indicates potential for conservative management, especially endoscopic resection, in well-differentiated, small tumors. European guidelines now advocate for endoscopic intervention in selected cases, but North American guidelines remain more conservative. Key factors influencing outcomes are tumor size, grading, and depth of gastric wall infiltration. Endoscopic resection has shown promise for tumors confined to submucosal layers without lymphovascular invasion. Given the complexities, a multidisciplinary team approach is essential for management decisions. Current insights are largely based on retrospective studies, underscoring the need for prospective research to optimize endoscopic approaches.

Endoscopic Management of Gastro-Entero-Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumours: An Overview of Proposed Resection and Ablation Techniques

A literature search of MEDLINE/PUBMED was conducted with the aim to highlight current endoscopic management of localised gastro-entero-pancreatic NETs. Relevant articles were identified through a manual search, and reference lists were reviewed for additional articles. The results of the research have been displayed in a narrative fashion to illustrate the actual state-of-the-art of endoscopic techniques in the treatment of NETs. Localised NETs of the stomach, duodenum and rectum can benefit from advanced endoscopic resection techniques (e.g., modified endoscopic mucosal resection, endoscopic full thickness resection, endoscopic submucosal dissection) according to centre expertise. Radiofrequency thermal ablation can be proposed as an alternative to surgery in selected patients with localised pancreatic NETs.

Advances in Endoscopic Diagnosis and Treatment of Gastric Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

Gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms refer to a group of diseases that are relatively rare. They can be classified into three subtypes based on their clinical and histopathological features, and there are significant differences in diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis among the different subtypes. The incidence of gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms has been increasing globally in recent years with the localized disease being particularly evident. Gastrointestinal endoscopy is of irreplaceable importance for the diagnosis and management of g-NENs. Endoscopy with biopsy is the gold standard for the diagnosis of g-NENs. Ultrasound endoscopy can assess the depth of tumor invasion and the presence of lymphatic metastases, which is important for the development of treatment strategies. Meanwhile, for some small and low-risk lesions, endoscopic surveillance or endoscopic resection has satisfactory therapeutic results and prognosis. This means that even though the incidence has increased, advances in endoscopic techniques have allowed more patients to adopt a relatively conservative treatment strategy. However, the criteria for patients suitable for endoscopic surveillance or endoscopic resection remain controversial.

Role of Advanced Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in the Comprehensive Management of Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs), also called neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), are relatively uncommon, heterogenous tumors primarily originating in the gastrointestinal tract. With the improvement in technology and increasing use of cross-sectional imaging and endoscopy, they are being discovered with increasing frequency. Although traditionally considered indolent tumors with good prognoses, some NENs exhibit aggressive behavior. Timely diagnosis, risk stratification, and management can often be a challenge. In general, small NENs without local invasion or lymphovascular involvement can often be managed using minimally invasive advanced endoscopic techniques, while larger lesions and those with evidence of lymphovascular invasion require surgery, systemic therapy, or a combination thereof. Ideal management requires a comprehensive and accurate understanding of the stage and grade of the tumor. With the recent advancements, a therapeutic advanced endoscopist can play a pivotal role in diagnosing, staging, and managing this rare condition. High-definition white light imaging and digital image enhancing technologies like narrow band imaging (NBI) in the newer endoscopes have improved the diagnostic accuracy of traditional endoscopy. The refinement of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) over the past decade has revolutionized the role of endoscopy in diagnosing and managing various pathologies, including NENs. In addition to EUS-directed diagnostic biopsies, it also offers the ability to precisely assess the depth of invasion and lymphovascular involvement and thus stage NENs accurately. EUS-directed locoregional ablative therapies are increasingly recognized as highly effective, minimally invasive treatment modalities for NENs, particularly pancreatic NENs. Advanced endoscopic resection techniques like endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), endoscopic submucosal resection (EMR), and endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) have been increasingly used over the past decade with excellent results in achieving curative resection of various early-stage gastrointestinal luminal lesions including NENs. In this article, we aim to delineate NENs of the different segments of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract (esophagus, gastric, pancreatic, and small and large intestine) and their management with emphasis on the endoscopic management of these tumors.

European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) 2023 guidance paper for gastroduodenal neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) G1-G3

The aim of the present guidance paper was to update the previous ENETS guidelines on well-differentiated gastric and duodenal neuroendocrine tumours (NETs), providing practical guidance for specialists in the diagnosis and management of gastroduodenal NETs. Type II gastric NETs, neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs), and functioning duodenal NETs are not covered, since they will be discussed in other ENETS guidance papers.

The meaning of R1 resection after endoscopic removal of gastric, duodenal and rectal neuroendocrine tumors

INTRODUCTION

Well-differentiated gastric, duodenal, and rectal neuroendocrine neoplasms (NETs) are rare diseases usually managed by endoscopic treatment. Although several endoscopic techniques are available, the number of patients with incomplete (R1) resection is significant.

AREAS COVERED

This review focuses on the meaning of incomplete R1 findings after endoscopic resection in type I gastric NETs; nonfunctioning, non-ampullary duodenal NETs; and small rectal NETs. Data were identified by MEDLINE database search without publication date limitation.

EXPERT OPINION

An incomplete R1 finding may have no significant impact on a patient's clinical outcome, particularly in small G1 type I gastric NETs, which have an indolent course. A 'stepwise approach,' which uses more advanced endoscopic techniques, or minimally invasive surgery may be justified to achieve complete margin-free resection. This approach must balance the tumor features and the procedure-related risk of complications, particularly in the duodenum, where the role of deep endoscopic resections is limited due to the thin duodenal wall. Gastric and rectal NETs that are incompletely removed after initial resection are more easily amenable to deep endoscopic techniques. However, this might not be necessary for patients with comorbidities, elderly, or both due to the uncertainty of how R1 finding impacts a patient's clinical outcome.

Factors Predicting Type I Gastric Neuroendocrine Neoplasia Recurrence: A Single-Center Study

Type I gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms (gNENs) are associated with atrophic gastritis and have a high recurrence rate, which means frequent endoscopies are required. The objective of this study was to identify factors predicting the local recurrence of type I gNENs. The clinical course and the pathological and biochemical data of patients with type I gNENs treated at Bnai Zion Medical Center between 2006 and 2022 were analyzed retrospectively. Twenty-seven type I gNENs were evaluated. The follow-up period was 41 months (range: 11–288 months). Recurrence of the tumor occurred in 13/27 (48%) patients after 35 months (median (M), interquartile range (IQR): 21–67.5). Serum gastrin levels were significantly higher in patients with recurrent disease versus patients with non-recurrent disease (788 vs. 394 ng/L; p = 0.047), while the Ki-67 index was significantly lower in patients with recurrent disease versus patients with non-recurrent disease (1% vs. 3.5%; p = 0.035). Tumor size, mitotic count, and serum chromogranin A levels did not correlate with recurrence. The present study emphasizes the role of gastrin in the pathogenesis of gNEN recurrence and highlights the debate regarding the ability of the Ki-67 index to predict the clinical course of this disease.

Gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms: a primer for radiologists

Gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms are uncommon tumors with variable differentiation and malignant potential. Three main subtypes are recognized: type 1, related to autoimmune atrophic gastritis; type 2, associated with Zollinger-Ellison and MEN1 syndrome; and type 3, sporadic. Although endoscopy alone is often sufficient for diagnosis and management of small, indolent, multifocal type 1 tumors, imaging is essential for evaluation of larger, high-grade, and type 2 and 3 neoplasms. Hypervascular intraluminal gastric masses are typically seen on CT/MRI, with associated perigastric lymphadenopathy and liver metastases in advanced cases. Somatostatin receptor nuclear imaging (such as Ga-68-DOTATATE PET/CT) may also be used for staging and assessing candidacy for peptide receptor radionuclide therapy. Radiotracer uptake is more likely in well-differentiated, lower-grade tumors, and less likely in poorly differentiated tumors, for which F-18-FDG-PET/CT may have additional value. Understanding disease pathophysiology and evolving histologic classifications is particularly useful for radiologists, as these influence tumor behavior, preferred imaging, therapy options, and patient prognosis.

Endoscopic surveillance alone is feasible and safe in type I gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms less than 10 mm in diameter

PURPOSE

Type I gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms (g-NENs) have a low risk of metastasis and a generally favourable prognosis. Patients with small type I g-NENs (≤10 mm) frequently require no treatment, whereas those with larger polyps usually undergo resection. We evaluated the safety and outcomes of endoscopic surveillance after no initial treatment in selected patients with type I g-NENs.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of type I g-NEN patients across two European Neuroendocrine Tumour Society Centers of Excellence 2003-2019.

RESULTS

Following initial assessment, 87 of 115 patients with type I g-NEN (75 with polyps ≤10 mm) received no initial treatment and underwent endoscopic surveillance. 79/87 (91%) demonstrated no clinically meaningful change in tumour size or grade over a median 62 month follow up. Only two patients developed NEN progression that required a change in management and two other patients developed gastric adenocarcinoma/high grade dysplasia; all four initially had ≥11 mm g-NENs.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with ≤10 mm type I g-NENs were unlikely to develop clinically significant tumour progression and in most cases, resection was not needed. The endoscopic surveillance interval could therefore potentially be safely increased to every 2-3 years in such patients. However, lifelong surveillance is still advocated due to the additional risk of developing gastric adenocarcinoma.

Diagnostic features and management options for duodenal neuroendocrine neoplasms: a retrospective, multi-centre study

Duodenal neuroendocrine neoplasms (dNENs) are rare neoplasms but their incidence is on the rise. They are classified into 5 sub-types but there remains much heterogeneity in behaviour in particular of non-functioning dNENs. To retrospectively analyse outcomes for all types of dNENs, and highlight prognostic factors associated with worse outcome. 102 (57 m/45f.) patients were identified with mean age at diagnosis 62 (range 32–87) years. The majority were non-functioning tumours 87/102 and median size was 10 mm (range 0.9–130 mm). 83 patients had Stage I or II disease, of which 17 underwent endoscopic resection with R1 rate of 45% and complication rate 12%. 36 patients were kept under endoscopic surveillance. There were 11 deaths of which 4 were disease related. Age and Ki67 > 20% were associated with worse OS in all dNENs. In non-functioning dNENs Ki67 > 3% was a predictor of lymph nodes metastases with OR 18.2 (2.54–13) (p < 0.005) in univariate analyses and liver metastases with OR 6.79 (1.56–29.5) (p < 0.05) in the multivariate analysis. Lesions 11–20 mm in size had OR 11.1 (1.16–106) compared to lesions < 11 mm for the prediction of lymph node metastases in the multivariate analysis (p < 0.05). ROC analysis of size of non-functioning dNENs to predict LN metastases found < 15 mm had an AUROC of 0.9 (0.81–0.99) with a sensitivity of 85% and specificity of 88%. dNENs are increasing in incidence, however low grade and smaller lesions have an indolent course and the role of endoscopic resection and active surveillance needs to be reviewed.

State of the Art in Endoscopic Therapy for the Management of Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors

OPINION STATEMENT

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP NENs) comprise a heterogeneous group of slow growing tumors arising from the neuroendocrine cells of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Although they are considered relatively rare, their incidence is rising and it is believed that the more frequent use of endoscopy and imaging studies have at least in part contributed to the increased diagnosis especially of localized neoplasms. The management of these neoplasms should be guided by a multidisciplinary NEN team following appropriate staging investigations. Localized neoplasms of the GI tract may be suitable for endoscopic therapy, while patients with pancreatic NENs, unsuitable for surgery, should be considered for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided ablation. In this review, we discuss the evidence regarding endoscopic resection of luminal NENs and EUS-guided therapy of pancreatic NENs. The efficacy, safety, and other longer-term outcomes of these techniques are summarized. In conclusion, this review of endoscopic therapies for localized NENs may be a useful guide for NEN clinicians and endoscopists who are considering these therapeutic options for the management of focal GEP NENs.

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.

Therapeutic strategies for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms: State-of-the-art and future perspectives

Although gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs) have always been considered rare tumors, their incidence has risen over the past few decades. They represent a highly heterogeneous group of neoplasms with several prognostic factors, including disease stage, proliferative index (Ki67), and tumor differentiation. Most of these neoplasms express somatostatin receptors on the cell surface, a feature that has important implications in terms of prognosis, diagnosis, and therapy. Although International Guidelines propose algorithms aimed at guiding therapeutic strategies, GEP-NEN patients are still very different from one another, and the need for personalized treatment continues to increase. Radical surgery is always the best option when feasible; however, up to 80% of cases are metastatic upon diagnosis. Regarding medical treatments, as GEP-NENs are characterized by relatively long overall survival, multiple therapy lines are adopted during the lifetime of these patients, but the optimum sequence to be followed has never been clearly defined. Furthermore, although new molecular markers aimed at predicting the response to therapy, as well as prognostic scores, are currently being studied, their application is still far from being part of daily clinical practice. As they represent a complex disease, with therapeutic protocols that are not completely standardized, GEP-NENs require a multidisciplinary approach. This review will provide an overview of the available therapeutic options for GEP-NENs and attempts to clarify the possible approaches for the management of these patients and to discuss future perspectives in this field.

New Developments in Gastric Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

Purpose of Review

Gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms (g-NENs) are a rare type of stomach cancer. The three main subtypes have different pathogeneses, biological behaviours and clinical characteristics, so they require different management strategies. This article will provide an overview of g-NENs and highlight recent advances in the field.

Recent Findings

Molecular profiling has revealed differences between indolent and aggressive g-NENs, as well as a new somatic mutation responsible for some familial type I g-NENs. Novel biomarkers have been developed which will hopefully improve diagnosis, treatment, risk stratification and follow-up. Patient treatment is also changing, as evidence supports the use of less aggressive options (e.g. endoscopic surveillance or resection) in some patients with more indolent tumours.

Summary

g-NEN heterogeneity poses challenges in understanding and managing this rare disease. More basic science research is needed to investigate molecular pathogenesis, and future larger clinical studies will hopefully also further improve treatment and patient outcomes.

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.

Is local excision sufficient in selected grade 1 or 2 type III gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms?

PURPOSE

Type III gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms (g-NENs) have historically been regarded as aggressive tumours, hence current guidelines advocate radical surgery with lymph node dissection. Data on the roles of endoscopic or less extensive surgical resections are more limited. The aim of our study is to evaluate the clinicopathological features and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing endoscopic or limited surgical resection for localised grade 1 or 2 type III g-NENs when compared to radical surgery.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of all patients diagnosed with a localised grade 1 or 2 type III g-NENs across six tertiary NEN centers between 2006 and 2019.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients were diagnosed with a potentially resectable grade 1 or 2 type III g-NEN of whom 36 underwent either endoscopic or surgical resection. No statistically significant differences were found between the three resection groups in terms of patient age, tumour location, grade or size. Only tumour size was found to be significantly associated with poor clinical outcome (p = 0.012) and ROC curve analysis identified tumour size >10 mm as a negative predictor (AUC:0.8030, p = 0.0021). Tumours >10 mm were also more likely to be associated with lymph node metastases on imaging and histology (p = 0.039 and p = 0.026 respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Localised grade 1 or 2 type III g-NENs had a good prognosis in this series. Tumour size >10 mm was the most significant prognostic factor affecting patient outcome. Endoscopic resection or limited surgical resection is feasible and safe in small type III g-NENs which demonstrate favourable grade 1/2, well differentiated histology.

Survival and Disease Recurrence in Patients with Duodenal Neuroendocrine Tumours-A Single Centre Cohort

Simple Summary

Neuroendocrine tumours of the upper part of the small intestine are rare. They are slow growing but may spread to lymph nodes or other organs already when the tumours are small. Such tumours may be treated by endoscopic removal or by an operation. In the current study we present the treatment results of 32 patients with this rare tumour. We found that the long-term survival was long, and patients more often died from other diseases. The survival was associated with the growth rate of the tumours and whether all the tumour tissue could be removed. Endoscopic removal was sufficient for smaller tumours <10 mm, whereas a high proportion of tumours 10–20 mm have lymph node metastases that must be removed by an operation to make patients tumour free. None of the tumours that were perceived as cured after removal recurred after an average follow-up time of 4.8 years.

Abstract

Background: Duodenal neuroendocrine tumours (D-NETs) are rare but increasingly diagnosed. This study aimed to assess the overall survival and recurrence rate among patients treated for D-NETs. Methods: Patients with D-NETs were retrospectively reviewed with a median follow-up time of 4.8 years (range 0.0–17.2 years). Results: A total of 32 patients with median age 68.0 years were identified. Fifteen patients underwent surgery while ten patients underwent endoscopic treatment. Mean estimated overall survival for the entire population was 12.1 years (95% CI 9.5–14.7 years), while 5-year overall survival was 81.3%. Tumour grade G1 was associated with longer mean estimated survival compared to G2 tumours (13.2 years versus 4.4 years, p = 0.010). None of the 23 patients who underwent presumed radical endoscopic or surgical resection had disease recurrence during follow-up. Tumours <10 mm could be treated endoscopically whereas a high proportion of patients with tumours 10–20 mm should be considered for surgery. Conclusion: Patients with D-NETs had long overall survival, and mortality was more influenced by other diseases. Both endoscopic and surgical resections were effective as no recurrences were diagnosed during follow-up.

Gastric Neuroendocrine Tumors: Reappraisal of Type in Predicting Outcome

BACKGROUND

Type I gastric neuroendocrine tumors (GNETs) are typically managed either expectantly or endoscopically. In contrast, locoregional surgery has been recommended for patients with type III GNETs because of the risk of metastasis. This study aimed to identify predictors of outcome independent of type in a contemporary cohort of GNET patients.

METHODS

A single-institution retrospective cohort study of 121 patients with a pathologic diagnosis of primary GNET between January 2009 and June 2019 was performed. GNETs were designated as type 1 (n = 74) if atrophic gastritis was present, or as type III (n = 47) in the absence of atrophic gastritis. Demographic, clinical, and histopathologic factors were examined using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression to assess the impact of various factors on recurrence and overall survival.

RESULTS

Median follow-up for the entire cohort was 62.7 months. While there was no difference in OS in patients with different GNET types (p = 0.10), higher tumor grade (p = 0.02) and presence of nodal or distant metastases (p = 0.02) predicted worse survival on multivariable analysis. Among type III GNET patients, those with small (< 0.5 cm), grade 1 lesions ("low-risk") were less likely to develop metastases (0% versus 33%, p < 0.01) and more likely to survive (100% versus 67%, p < 0.01) at 5 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Size and tumor grade predict recurrence and survival in patients with GNETs irrespective of type. Small, low-grade type III GNETs are associated with minimal risk of progression and may be managed accordingly.

A "Watch and Wait" Strategy Involving Regular Endoscopic Surveillance Is Safe for Many Patients with Small, Sporadic, Grade 1, Non-Ampullary, Non-Functioning Duodenal Neuroendocrine Tumours

INTRODUCTION

Duodenal neuroendocrine tumours (d-NETs) are rare but are increasing in incidence. Current ENETS guidelines advocate resection of all localized d-NETs. However, "watch and wait" may be appropriate for some localized, small, grade 1, non-functioning, non-ampullary d-NETs. We evaluated whether patients with such d-NETs who chose "watch and wait" involving regular endoscopic surveillance had equivalent disease-related outcomes to patients undergoing endoscopic or surgical resection.

METHODS

Retrospective review of patients with histologically confirmed d-NETs at Liverpool ENETS Centre of Excellence 2007-2020.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine patients were diagnosed with d-NET of which 50 were sporadic, non-functioning, non-ampullary tumours. Patient treatment groups were similar in terms of age, gender, and tumour location and grade, but unsurprisingly, larger tumours (median diameter 17 mm [p < 0.0001]) were found in the surgically treated group. Five patients underwent surgical resection with no evidence of tumour recurrence or disease-related death. Twelve patients underwent endoscopic resection (ER), with 1 local recurrence detected during follow-up. Thirty patients (28 with d-NETs ≤10 mm) underwent "watch and wait" with resection only if tumours increased in size. The d-NETs in 28/30 patients remained stable or decreased in size over a median 27 months (IQR: 15-48, R: 3-98). In 7 patients, the d-NET was completely removed by avulsion during diagnostic biopsy and was not seen at subsequent endoscopies. Only 2 patients showed increased d-NET size during surveillance, of whom only one was fit for ER. No NET-related deaths were documented during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

All of the localized, ≤10 mm, grade 1, non-functioning, non-ampullary d-NETs in this cohort behaved indolently with very low risks of progression and no tumour-related deaths. "Watch and wait," therefore, appears to be a safe alternative management strategy for selected d-NETs.