Liver Embolisation for Patients with Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: Systematic Review

Transarterial chemoembolization for liver metastases of a pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm: a single-center experience

Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is performed for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (PanNEN) liver metastases; however, the safety and efficacy of TACE procedures, especially for patients who have undergone previous pancreatic surgery, have not been established. We reviewed 48 TACE procedures (1-6 procedures/patient) performed on 11 patients with PanNEN liver metastases, including 16 TACE procedures (4-6 procedures/patient) for 3 patients with a history of biliary-enteric anastomosis. The overall tumor objective response rate was 94%. The incidence of Clavien‒Dindo grade ≥ 2 complications was 1/16 (6%) and 1/32 (3%), and the median time to untreatable progression was 31 (14-41) and 27 (2-60) months among patients with and without a history of biliary-enteric anastomosis, respectively. Although validation is needed in future studies, our experiences have shown that TACE treatment is a viable treatment option for PanNEN liver metastases, even after biliary-enteric anastomosis with experienced teams and careful patient follow-up.

Management of neuroendocrine tumor liver metastases

BACKGROUND

Neuroendocrine Tumors (NETs) are a group of tumors that arise from neuroendocrine cells, and are increasing in incidence worldwide. These tumors often metastasize to the liver, and management of these neuroendocrine tumor liver metastases (NELMs) requires a multi-disciplinary approach. We aim to provide a comprehensive update for treatment of NELMs.

METHODS

We completed a comprehensive systemic review of papers involving the diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes of NELMs. We identified 1612 records via Scopus database literature search. Two independent authors reviewed these records, with 318 meeting criteria for inclusion in the final systemic review.

RESULTS

Primary tumor resection with resection of liver metastases is the treatment of choice for patients with NELMs. Liver-directed therapies and liver transplantation can be considered for patients with unresectable liver metastases. Systemic medical therapy is used for managing tumor burden and symptoms caused by NELMs.

CONCLUSIONS

Advancement in liver-directed and targeted systemic therapies provide improved options for patients with unresectable tumors. Given the complexity of NELMs, management of NELMs necessitates multidisciplinary teams at comprehensive health centers.

SEOM-GETNE clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of gastroenteropancreatic and bronchial neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) (2022)

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are a heterogeneous family of tumors of challenging diagnosis and clinical management. Their incidence and prevalence continue to rise mainly due to an improvement on diagnostic techniques and awareness. Earlier detection, along with steadfast improvements in therapy, has led to better prognosis over time for advanced gastrointestinal and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. The aim of this guideline is to update evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of gastroenteropancreatic and lung NENs. Diagnostic procedures, histological classification, and therapeutic options, including surgery, liver-directed therapy, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy, and systemic hormonal, cytotoxic or targeted therapy, are reviewed and discussed, and treatment algorithms to guide therapeutic decisions are provided.

Developments in interventional management of hepatic metastases from neuroendocrine tumours

Neuroendocrine tumours commonly metastasise to the liver, particularly those arising from the intestinal tract and pancreas. Whilst surgery offers the only approach with intent to cure, the vast majority of patients with neuroendocrine liver metastases are ineligible. Liver-directed interventional therapies seek to exploit the patho-anatomy of the blood supply of hepatic metastases to deliver therapy to liver deposits. This may involve percutaneous ablation, bland embolization, or the selective infusion of chemotherapeutics, targeted agents or radiolabelled embolic material. Retrospective case series evidence has characterised objective response rates, disease control rates, and longer-term outcomes associated with each approach. Recent advances in this field include ongoing comparative trials of different techniques, but more importantly, combinations of interventional liver-directed therapies and other systemic therapy in multimodal treatment concepts.

Small bowel neuroendocrine tumours - casting the net wide

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Our aim is to provide an overview of small bowel neuroendocrine tumours (NETs), clinical presentation, diagnosis algorithm and management options. We also highlight the latest evidence on management and suggest areas for future research.

RECENT FINDINGS

Dodecanetetraacetic acid (DOTATATE) scan can detect NETs with an improved sensitivity than when compared with an Octreotide scan. It is complimentary to small bowel endoscopy that provides mucosal views and allows the delineation of small lesions undetectable on imaging. Surgical resection is the best management modality even in metastatic disease. Prognosis can be improved with the administration of somatostatin analogues and Evarolimus as second-line therapies.

SUMMARY

NETs are heterogenous tumours affecting most commonly the distal small bowel as single or multiple lesions. Their secretary behaviour can lead to symptoms, most commonly diarrhoea and weight loss. Metastases to the liver are associated with carcinoid syndrome.

Surgery, Liver Directed Therapy and Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy for Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor Liver Metastases

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) are described by the World Health Organization (WHO) classification by grade (1–3) and degree of differentiation. Grade 1 and 2; well differentiated PNETs are often characterized as relatively “indolent” tumors for which locoregional therapies have been shown to be effective for palliation of symptom control and prolongation of survival even in the setting of advanced disease. The treatment of liver metastases includes surgical and non-surgical modalities with varying degrees of invasiveness; efficacy; and risk. Most of these modalities have not been prospectively compared. This paper reviews literature that has been published on treatment of pancreatic neuroendocrine liver metastases using surgery; liver directed embolization and peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT). Surgery is associated with the longest survival in patients with resectable disease burden. Liver-directed (hepatic artery) therapies can sometimes convert patients with borderline disease into candidates for surgery. Among the three embolization modalities; the preponderance of data suggests chemoembolization offers superior radiographic response compared to bland embolization and radioembolization; but all have similar survival. PRRT was initially approved as salvage therapy in patients with advanced disease that was not amenable to resection or embolization; though the role of PRRT is evolving rapidly

ArTisaN trial protocol: a single Centre, open-label, phase II trial of the safety and efficacy of TheraSphere selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) in the treatment of inoperable metastatic (liver) neuroendocrine neoplasia (NENs)

BACKGROUND

Neuroendocrine neoplasias (NENs) are a rare type of malignancy that arise from the cells of the neuroendocrine system. Most patients present with advanced, unresectable disease, typically with metastases to the liver. The presence of liver metastases dictates prognosis and there has been a number of studies investigating therapies that reduce the burden of liver disease. Selective Internal Radiation Therapy (SIRT) allows the delivery of targeted high dose radiation directly to tumours, with relative sparing of the surrounding liver tissue. Here, we describe the design and rationale of ArtTisaN, a phase II study to assess efficacy and tolerability of SIRT using TheraSpheres for the management of liver metastases secondary to NENs.

METHODS

Twenty-four eligible participants will be recruited to receive SIRT with TheraSpheres. The primary objective is to determine the objective response rate to treatment, defined as the rate of best overall response in the treated liver volume. In addition, total hepatic response and overall response will be assessed according to RECIST 1.1. The second co-primary objective is to determine the incidence of adverse and serious adverse device events. The secondary objectives are progression free survival, overall survival and quality of life. Additional exploratory objectives include investigation of circulating biomarkers of response and identification of a radiomic signature of response.

DISCUSSION

This trial will provide prospective evidence on the efficacy of SIRT using TheraSpheres for the management of liver metastases.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT04362436 .

Predictive Factors for Resistant Disease with Medical/Radiologic/Liver-Directed Anti-Tumor Treatments in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: Recent Advances and Controversies

Simple Summary

Tumor resistance, both primary and acquired, is leading to increased complexity in the nonsurgical treatment of patients with advanced panNENs, which would be greatly helped by reliable prognostic/predictive factors. The importance in identifying resistance is being contributed to by the increased array of possible treatments available for treating resistant advanced disease; the variable clinical course as well as response to any given treatment approach of patients within one staging or grading system, the advances in imaging which are providing increasing promising results/parameters that correlate with grading/outcome/resistance, the increased understanding of the molecular pathogenesis providing promising prognostic markers, all of which can contribute to selecting the best treatment to overcome resistance disease. Several factors have been identified that have prognostic/predictive value for identifying development resistant disease and affecting overall survival (OS)/PFS with various nonsurgical treatments of patients with advanced panNENs. Prognostic factors identified for patients with advanced panNENs for both OS/PFSs include various clinically-related factors (clinical, laboratory/biological markers, imaging, treatment-related factors), pathological factors (histological, classification, grading) and molecular factors. Particularly important prognostic factors for the different treatment modalities studies are the recent grading systems. Most prognostic factors for each treatment modality for OS/PFS are not specific for a given treatment option. These advances have generated several controversies and new unanswered questions, particularly those related to their possible role in predicting the possible sequence of different anti-tumor treatments in patients with different presentations. Each of these areas is reviewed in this paper.

Abstract

Purpose: Recent advances in the diagnosis, management and nonsurgical treatment of patients with advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (panNENs) have led to an emerging need for sensitive and useful prognostic factors for predicting responses/survival. Areas covered: The predictive value of a number of reported prognostic factors including clinically-related factors (clinical/laboratory/imaging/treatment-related factors), pathological factors (histological/classification/grading), and molecular factors, on therapeutic outcomes of anti-tumor medical therapies with molecular targeting agents (everolimus/sunitinib/somatostatin analogues), chemotherapy, radiological therapy with peptide receptor radionuclide therapy, or liver-directed therapies (embolization/chemoembolization/radio-embolization (SIRTs)) are reviewed. Recent findings in each of these areas, as well as remaining controversies and uncertainties, are discussed in detail, particularly from the viewpoint of treatment sequencing. Conclusions: The recent increase in the number of available therapeutic agents for the nonsurgical treatment of patients with advanced panNENs have raised the importance of prognostic factors predictive for therapeutic outcomes of each treatment option. The establishment of sensitive and useful prognostic markers will have a significant impact on optimal treatment selection, as well as in tailoring the therapeutic sequence, and for maximizing the survival benefit of each individual patient. In the paper, the progress in this area, as well as the controversies/uncertainties, are reviewed.

Liver-Directed Therapies for Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To comprehensively synthesise and appraise the available evidence regarding therapies for metastatic neuroendocrine neoplasms that exploit the hepatic vasculature to deliver therapy to liver metastases.

RECENT FINDINGS

Various techniques including transarterial embolisation/chemoembolisation (TAE/TACE) and selective internal radiotherapy (SIRT, also termed radioembolisation [RE]) have been examined in patents with neuroendocrine liver metastases. Variations in the radioactive agents for selective internal radiotherapy (SIRT) have been explored, such as the use of Holmium-166, in addition to more established agents such as Yttrium-90. Recent trials have examined the safety and efficacy of combining liver-targeted therapy with systemic treatments, such as peptide receptor radionuclide therapy. More retrospective case series of liver-directed modalities will not provide additional knowledge. Randomised clinical trials have begun to compare the efficacy of different forms of liver-directed therapies, and also their combination with systemic treatment. Their results are expected to guide optimal treatment sequencing within multimodal concepts.

Advanced small-bowel well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumours: An international survey of practice on 3rd-line treatment

BACKGROUND

Somatostatin analogues are an established first-line therapy for well differentiated small bowel neuroendocrine tumours (Wd-SBNETs), while and peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) is frequently used as a second-line therapy. Adequate treatment selection of third-line treatment remains challenging due to the limited prospective data currently available on the best therapeutic sequence.

AIM

To understand current practice and rationale for decision-making by physicians in the 3^rd-line setting by building an online survey.

METHODS

Weighted average (WA) of likelihood of usage between responders (1 very unlikely; 4 very likely) was used to reflect the relevance of factors explored.

RESULTS

Replies from representatives of 28 centers were received (5/8/2020-21/9/2020); medical oncologist (53.6%), gastroenterologist (17.9%); United Kingdom (21.4%), Spain (17.9%), Italy (14.3%). Majority from European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) Centres of Excellence (57.1%), who followed ENETS guidelines (82.1%). Generally speaking, 3^rd-line treatment for Wd-SBNETs was: everolimus (EVE) (66.7%), PRRT (18.5%), liver embolization (LE) (7.4%) and interferon-alpha (IFN) (3.7%); chemotherapy (0%); decision was based on clinical trial data (59.3%), or personal experience (22.2%). EVE was most likely used if Ki-67 < 10% (WA 3.27/4) or age < 70 years (WA 3.23/4), in the 3^rd-line setting (WA 3.23/4); regardless of presence/absence of carcinoid syndrome (CS), rate of progression or extent of disease. Chemotherapy was mainly utilised only if rapid progression (within 6 mo) (WA 3.35/4), Ki-67 10%-20% (WA 2.77/4), negative somatostatin receptor imaging (WA 2.65/4) or high tumour burden (WA 2.77/4); temozolomide or streptozocin was used with capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) (57.7%), FOLFOX (5-FU combined with oxaliplatin) (23.1%). LE was selected if presence of CS (WA 3.24/4) or Ki-67 < 10% (WA 2.8/4), after progression to other treatments (WA 2.8/4). IFN was rarely used (WA 1.3/4).

CONCLUSION

Everolimus was the most frequently used therapeutic option in the third-line setting. The most important factors for decision-making included Ki-67, rate of progression, functionality and tumour burden; since this decision is based on multiple factors, it highlights the need for a multidisciplinary assessment.

Comparison of transarterial bland and chemoembolization for neuroendocrine tumours: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Treatment of hepatic metastases from neuroendocrine tumours improves survival and symptom relief. Hepatic arterial embolotherapy techniques include transarterial chemoembolization (tace) and bland embolization (tae). The relative efficacy of the techniques is controversial. The purpose of the present study was to use a meta-analysis and systematic review to compare tace with tae in the treatment of hepatic metastases.

Methods

A literature search identified studies comparing tace and tae for treatment of hepatic metastases. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (os), progression-free survival (pfs), radiographic response, complications, and symptom control. The hazard ratios (hrs) and odds ratios (ors) were estimated and pooled.

Results

Eight studies and 504 patients were included. No statistically significant differences between tace and tae were observed for os at 1, 2, and 5 years or for hrs [1-year or: 0.72; 95% confidence interval (ci): 0.27 to 1.94; p < 0.52; 2-year or: 0.69; 95% ci: 0.43 to 1.11; p < 0.12; 5-year or: 0.91; 95% ci: 0.37 to 2.24; p < 0.85; hr: 0.96; 95% ci: 0.73 to 1.24; p < 0.74]. No statistically significant differences between tace and tae were observed for pfs at 1, 2, and 5 years or for hrs (1-year or: 0.71; 95% ci: 0.38 to 1.55; p < 0.30; 2-year or: 0.83; 95% ci: 0.33 to 2.06; p < 0.69; 5-year or: 0. 91; 95% ci: 0.37 to 2.24; p < 0.85; hr: 0.99-1.74; 95% ci: 0.74 to 1.73; p < 0.97). Both techniques are safe and effective for symptom control.

Conclusions

No statistically significant differences between tace and tae were observed for os and pfs.

Perspectives on the current pharmacotherapeutic strategies for management of functional neuroendocrine tumor syndromes

Introduction: In the past, controlling the hormone-excess-state was the main determinant of survival in Functional-Neuroendocrine-Neoplasm-syndromes (F-NENs). This was difficult because the pharmacological-armamentarium available was limited. Recently, new therapeutic strategies have increased but it also generated controversies/uncertainties.Areas covered: The authors briefly review: established/proposed F-NENs; the rationale for treatments; the recommended initial-pharmacotherapeutic-approach to controlling F-NENs hormone-excess-state; the secondary-approaches if the initial approach fails or resistance develops; and the approach to deal with the malignant nature of the NEN. Also discussed are controversies/uncertainties related to new treatments.Expert opinion: Unfortunately, except for patients with insulinomas (>90-95%), gastrinomas (<20-40%), a minority with the other F-panNENs and 0-<1% with Carcinoid-syndrome is curative-surgery possible. Except for insulinomas, gastrinomas, and ACTHomas, long-acting somatostatin-analogs are the initial-pharmacological-treatments for hormone-excess-state. For insulinomas prior to surgery/malignancy, diazoxide is the initial drug-treatment; for gastrinomas, oral PPIs; and for ACTHomas, steroidogenesis inhibitors. There are now several secondary pharmacotherapeutic treatments. Surgery and liver-directed therapies also have a role in selected patients. Particularly promising is the recent results with PRRT for the hormone-excess-state, independent of its anti-growth effect. The sequence to use various agents and the approach to syndrome diagnosis while taking various agents remains unclear/controversial in many cases.