Understanding the Treatment Algorithm of Patients with Metastatic Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: A Single-Institution Retrospective Analysis Comparing Outcomes of Chemotherapy, Molecular Targeted Therapy, and Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy in 255 Patients

Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant therapy in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness and safety of neoadjuvant therapy in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs) and provide evidence-based suggestions for clinical treatment.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science were searched for articles published that analyzed the effectiveness and safety of GEP-NEN-targeted neoadjuvant therapy before March 2023. A confidence interval (CI) of 95%, a subgroup analysis, heterogeneity, and effect size (ES) were analyzed, and a meta-analysis of the literature was performed using the Stata BE17 software.

RESULTS

A total of 417 patients from 13 studies were included in this meta-analysis. The primary variables comprised the objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), surgical resection rate, and R0 resection rate with ES values of 0.42 (95% CI: 0.25-0.60), 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93-0.99), 0.67 (95% CI: 0.50-0.84), and 0.60 (95% CI: 0.54-0.67), respectively. The secondary variables were the incidence rates of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), Grade 3 or higher TRAEs, and surgical complications with ES values of 0.29 (95% CI: -0.03-0.21), 0.13 (95% CI: -0.07-0.33), and 0.35 (95% CI: 0.27-0.44), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant therapy is an effective and safe treatment method for GEP-NENs. However, further studies are required to determine the optimal regimen for this therapy in these tumors.

Neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and Objectives

Neoadjuvant therapy plays an increasingly important role in pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (pNENs), but the systematic evaluation of its efficacy is still lacking. The purpose of this study is to explore the role of neoadjuvant therapy in pNENs.

Methods

We systematically reviewed the literatures published online until October 1, 2021. Meta-analysis was conducted to generate proportion with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for tumor response, resection rate, R0 resection rate and survival time.

Results

Nine studies with 468 patients were involved in the systematic review. None of these patients met complete response (CR). Furthermore, 43.6% (95% CI [18.1, 69.0]) patients were expected to achieve partial response (PR), 51.3% (95% CI [27.9, 78.3]) to stable disease (SD), and 4.3% (95% CI [0.7, 7.9]) to progressive disease (PD). The estimate resection rate and R0 resection rate after neoadjuvant therapy were 68.2% (95% CI [44.5, 91.9]) and 60.2% (95% CI [53.5, 66.9]), respectively. There was no significant difference in resection rate between different chemotherapy regimens (41.67% vs 33.93%, P=0.453), as well as R0 resection rate (62.50% vs 68.30%, P=0.605). In terms of objective response rate (ORR), there was no significant difference between CAPTEM and FAS (41.67% vs 33.93%, P=0.453), while PRRT showed a higher ORR compared with chemotherapy, although there was also no statistical difference (49.06% vs 36.96%, P=0.154).

Conclusion

Neoadjuvant therapies could reduce the tumor size and stage of some borderline resectable or unresectable pNENs, and give some patients the chance of radical resection. However, according to the current data, the best treatment regimen for pNENs neoadjuvant therapy is still unknown.

Long-term treatment with streptozocin/5-fluorouracil chemotherapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: Case series

RATIONALE

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) are rare entities representing 1% to 3% of all malignant pancreatic neoplasms. Current guidelines recommend a combination of streptozocin (STZ) and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) for patients with metastatic well-differentiated pNETs requiring systemic therapy. The highest median progression-free survival rate reported in previous studies for this combination was 23 months (95% confidence interval 14.5-31.5). However, it remains unclear for how long this regimen can be safely administered.

PATIENT CONCERNS

We report about 3 therapy-naïve patients with metastatic G2 (Ki67 10%-15%) pNETs treated with STZ/5-FU, that achieved sustained disease control for longer than 36 months.

DIAGNOSIS

Metastatic, well-differentiated G2 pNETs.

INTERVENTIONS

Systemic chemotherapy with STZ/5-FU was administered until the disease progressed. In 1 case showing a mixed response, selected metastases of increasing size were additionally treated with surgery and brachytherapy.

OUTCOMES

In our 3 patients with metastatic G2 pNETs, STZ/5-FU induced long-term disease control over 44, 42, and 95 months, respectively. No side effects that led to treatment discontinuation were observed.

LESSONS

In patients with metastatic G2 pNETs achieving disease control, STZ/5-FU can be safely administered.

New Insights in PRRT: Lessons From 2021

Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) using radiolabeled somatostatin analogs has been used for over two decades for the treatment of well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), and the publication of the NETTER-1 trials has further strengthened its clinical use. However, many aspects of this treatment are still under discussion. The purpose of this review is to collect and discuss the new available evidence, published in 2021, on the use of ¹⁷⁷Lu-Oxodotreotide (DOTATATE) or ⁹⁰Y-Edotreotide (DOTATOC) in adult patients with NETs focusing on the following hot topics: 1) PRRT use in new clinical settings, broaden its indications; 2) the short- and long-term safety; and 3) the identification of prognostic and predictive factors. The review suggests a possible future increase of PRRT applications, using it in other NETs, as a neoadjuvant treatment, or for rechallenge. Regarding safety, available studies, even those with long follow-up, supported the low rates of adverse events, even though 1.8% of treated patients developed a second malignancy. Finally, there is a lack of prognostic and predictive factors for PRRT, with the exception of the crucial role of nuclear imaging for both patient selection and treatment response estimation.