Risk of metastasis and survival in patients undergoing different treatment strategies with T1 colonic neuroendocrine tumors

PURPOSE

The efficacy and safety of local excision (LE) for small (< 1‒2 cm) colonic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) is controversial due to the higher metastasis risk when compared with rectal NETs. The study aimed to evaluate the metastasis risk of T1 colonic NETs and compare patients' long-term prognosis after LE or radical surgery (RS).

METHODS

The Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database was used to identify patients with T1 colonic NETs (2004‒2015). Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess factors associated with metastasis risk. Propensity score matching was used to balance the variables. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated to estimate the prognosis of patients with T1N0M0 colonic NETs who underwent LE or RS.

RESULTS

Of the 610 patients with colonic NETs, 46 (7.54%) had metastasis at diagnosis. Tumor size (11-20 mm) (OR = 9.51; 95% confidence interval (CI): 4.32‒21.45; P < 0.001), right colon (OR = 15.79; 95% CI 7.20‒38.56; P < 0.001), submucosal infiltration (OR = 2.08; 95% CI 0.84‒5.57; P = 0.125) were independent risk factors associated with metastasis. Of the 515 patients with T1N0M0 colonic NETs, the overall long-term prognosis of LE was as good as that of RS groups (after matching, 5-year CSS: 97.9% vs. 94.6%, P = 0.450; 5-year OS: 92.7% vs. 85.6%, P = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

Tumor size (11‒20 mm) and site (right colon) are associated with metastasis in T1 colonic NETs. In the absence of metastasis, LE could be a viable option for 0‒10 mm T1 colonic NETs with well/moderate differentiation in the left colon in terms of long-term survival.

Diagnosis, treatment, and current concepts in the endoscopic management of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs) are rare tumors derived from the neuroendocrine cell system, which that have increased in incidence and prevalence in recent years. Despite improvements in radiological and metabolic imaging, endoscopy still plays a pivotal role in the number of GEP-NENs. Tumor detection, characterization, and staging are essential in management and treatment planning. Upper and lower gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy is essential for correct localization of the primary tumor site of GI NENs. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has an important role in the imaging and tissue acquisition of pancreatic NENs and locoregional staging of GI neuroendocrine tumors. Correct staging and histological diagnosis have important prognostic implications. Endoscopic operating techniques allow the removal of small GI NENs in the early stage of mucosal or submucosal invasion of the intestinal wall. Preoperative EUS-guided techniques may help the surgeon locate small and deep tumors, thus avoiding formal pancreatic resections in favor of parenchymal-sparing surgery. Finally, locoregional ablative treatments have been proposed in recent studies with promising results in selected patients.

Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) are the most common type of neuroendocrine tumors and are being increasingly identified in clinical practice. The diagnosis, staging, management, and surveillance of GEP-NETs rely heavily on endoscopy, and consequently, it is important for gastroenterologists to have a solid understanding of these tumors. This article reviews the presentation, diagnosis, and management of both localized and advanced GEP-NETs, with increased emphasis on the role of endoscopy, to enable gastroenterologists and other practitioners to have the necessary tools for the care of patients with these tumors.

Primary tumor location (right versus left side of the colon) and resection affect the survival of patients with liver metastases from colonic neuroendocrine carcinoma: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Colonic neuroendocrine carcinomas (co-NECs) are heterogeneous and aggressive, especially with regard to metastasis. Whether co-NECs on the right and left sides of the colon have different characteristics from colon adenocarcinoma is unknown.

METHODS

The co-NEC patients were selected from the 2010-2017 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) database. The right and left sides of the colon were separated by the splenic flexure. Coarsened exact matching (CEM) was performed to adjust for relevant factors before regression models were constructed.

RESULTS

A total of 669 pathologically diagnosed co-NEC patients with sufficient baseline data were identified from the SEER database. A total of 80.72% of the patients had co-NEC that originated from the right side of the colon, and their mean overall survival (mOS) was similar to that of the patients with left-sided co-NECs (right versus left: 22.30 m versus 22.55 m). A total of 44.84% of the patients were diagnosed with liver metastasis (46.68% right side versus 37.98% left side). In patients with liver metastasis, those with right-sided co-NECs had better survival than those with left-sided co-NECs (mOS right versus left: 15.37 m versus 9.62 m; adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.49-0.98, p = 0.035). To further investigate the survival benefits of primary site resection, we separated the patients who had liver metastasis according to the primary site and performed CEM to balance the groups (no patients underwent liver metastasis resection or intervention). The results suggested that primary surgery could benefit patients with both left- and right-sided co-NECs (adjusted HR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.33-0.77, p = 0.001 on the right side; HR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.16-0.89, p = 0.026 on the left side).

CONCLUSIONS

Co-NECs frequently originate on the right side and commonly develop liver metastasis. Right-sided co-NECs are associated with better survival than left-sided co-NECs after liver metastasis has occurred. Primary site resection is associated with prolonged survival in co-NEC patients with liver metastasis, regardless of the side from which the co-NEC has originated.

Quality of pathology reporting and adherence to guidelines in rectal neuroendocrine neoplasms: a Belgian national study

The incidence of neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN) in the rectum is rising since the introduction of colonoscopy screening programs. Guidelines, such as the European NeuroEndocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) algorithm, are mainly based on expert opinion. The goal of this nationwide study is to gain a better insight into the evolution in pathology reporting and adherence to the ENETS guidelines in Belgium. In Belgium, all NENs have to be reported to the Belgian Cancer Registry. We thoroughly reviewed all available pathology reports, coded as rectal NEN between 2004 and 2015, and reclassified according to World Health Organisation (WHO) classification 2019. To evaluate the adherence to the ENETS guidelines, population-based cancer registry data were linked with the medical procedures of the Belgian Health Insurance database. A total of 670 rectal NEN were retained and 16% of the cases needed reclassification. Annual incidence between 2004 and 2015 tripled from 0,20 to 0,61 per 100.000 inhabitants. Reporting of Ki67 proliferation index ameliorated most, while reporting of tumor size, lymphovascular and perineural invasion remained disappointing. Endoscopic ultrasound was performed in only 36.6% of the cases, while the mostly recommended mode of treatment (endoscopic/surgical/no resection) was followed in the majority of the cases. Incidence of rectal NEN in Belgium increased throughout the years and quality of pathology reporting improved especially after the WHO classification update in 2010. The growing awareness and knowledge among clinicians and pathologists in the community counters the need for centralization.

Development and validation of prognostic nomograms for patients with colon neuroendocrine neoplasms

BACKGROUND

Colon neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) have one of the poorest median overall survival (OS) rates among all NENs. The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging system-currently the most commonly used prediction model-has limited prediction accuracy because it does not include parameters such as age, sex, and treatment. The aim of this study was to construct nomograms containing various clinically important parameters to predict the prognosis of patients with colon NENs more accurately.

METHODS

Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, we performed a retrospective analysis of colon NENs diagnosed from 1975 to 2016. Data were collected from 1196 patients; almost half were female (617/1196, 51.6%), and the average age was 61.94 ± 13.05 years. Based on the age triple cut-off values, there were 396 (33.1%), 408 (34.1%), and 392 (32.8%) patients in age groups 0-55 years, 55-67 years, and ≥ 68 years, respectively. Patients were randomized into training and validation cohorts (3:1). Independent prognostic factors were used for construction of nomograms to precisely predict OS and cancer-specific survival (CSS) in patients with colon NENs.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis showed that age ≥ 68 years, sex, tumor size, grade, chemotherapy, N stage, and M stage were independent predictors of OS. In the validation cohort, the Concordance index (C-index) values of the OS and CSS nomograms were 0.8345 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8044-0.8646) and 0.8209 (95% CI, 0.7808-0.861), respectively. C-index also indicated superior performance of both nomograms (C-index 0.8347 for OS and 0.8668 for CSS) compared with the AJCC TNM classification (C-index 0.7159 for OS and 0.7366 for CSS).

CONCLUSIONS

We established and validated new nomograms for more precise prediction of OS and CSS in patients with colon NENs to facilitate individualized clinical decisions.

Update on gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

The incidence gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs) has dramatically risen over the last three decades, probably due to the increased detection of asymptomatic lesions. The diagnostic work-up for patients with suspected GEP-NENs is based on conventional imaging, endoscopy, pathology, and functional imaging, including ⁶⁸Gallium-DOTATATE PET and ¹⁸F-FDG PET. The choice of the best treatment strategy should be based on the evaluation of tumor-related features and patient's characteristics. A conservative management, consisting of active surveillance or endoscopic resection, has been advocated for patients with small, incidentally discovered, nonfunctioning tumors without features of aggressiveness. On the other hand, surgery with lymphadenectomy, also with a minimally invasive approach, represents the gold standard for the curative treatment of localized disease. Moreover, surgical resection plays an important role also in the context of a multimodal treatment strategy for patients with advanced GEP-NENs. Finally, a wide range of medical therapies, comprising somatostatin analogues, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy, target therapies and several chemotherapy regimens, can be offered to patients with advanced GEP-NENs not amenable of surgical resection, according to the biological and molecular features of their disease.