Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy for advanced gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors — from oncology perspective

Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy (PRRT) is a form of molecular targeted therapy which is performed by using a small peptide (somatostatin analogue — SSA) that is coupled with a radionuclide beta emitting radiation. PRRT is a nuclear medicine for the systemic treatment of non-resectable, metastasized well/moderately differentiated, neuroendocrine tumours (NET) with overexpression of somatostatin receptor. These types of tumours include gastroenteropancreatic neoplasm (GEP-NENs), e.g. arising from the small bowel (often called carcinoid tumours), the pancreas, duodenum or stomach, but also from the large bowel or the lung and many other tissues (so called diffuse neuroendocrine system). The goal of PRRT is irradiation of tumour cells, via direct binding into specific receptor, somatostatin receptors (SSTR) family, overexpressed on the cell membrane of the primary tumours as well as on the metastasis. Over many years of clinical use of PRRT with 90Y and current with 177Lu DOTA conjugated somatostatin analogues proved to be efficient therapy option for NETs, with tumour responses, base on radiological evaluation. Also, a clinical response with symptoms relief and improvement in quality of life based on standard EORTC questioners is seen. Additional, common NET biomarker reduction and, ultimately, an impact on overall survival (OS) of patients with advanced non-resectable often progressive NEN can be expected. PRRT with 90Y or 177Lu-labelled peptides is generally well tolerated by most of the patients. The acute side effects (Adverse Events — AEs) are usually mild; most of them are related to the co-administration of amino acids (AA), such as nausea and vomiting. Others are related to the radioisotopes, such as fatigue or the exacerbation of endocrine syndromes, which are very rarely and they occurs, only in patients with functional tumours and large tumours burden. Chronic and permanent damage has an effect on target organs, particularly the kidneys and the bone marrow, which are generally mild. Currently, when 177Lu DOTATATE is used, the potential risk to kidney damage is significantly reduced, compared to the previous usage of 90Y labelled analogues. Up to now, kidney and bone marrow toxicity limits the dose of radioactivity of PRRT

Circulating Transcript Analysis (NETest) in GEP-NETs Treated With Somatostatin Analogs Defines Therapy

Context: Early and precise delineation of therapeutic responses are key issues in neuroendocrine neoplasm/tumor management. Imaging is currently used but exhibits limitations in sensitivity and specificity. The utility of biomarkers is unclear. Objective, Setting, and Design: This prospective cohort study (11 mo) sought to determine whether measurements of circulating neuroendocrine tumor transcripts (NETest) predict responses to somatostatin analogs (SSAs). Patients: The test set consisted of 35 SSA-treated gastroenteropancreatic-NETs (RECISTevaluated). The prospective set consisted of 28 SSA-treated Grade 1–Grade 2 GEP-NETs. Intervention(s): Whole blood for transcript analysis (NETest) and plasma for Chromogranin A (CgA) (baseline), were collected every 4 weeks (prior to SSA injection). Morphologic (multidetector computed tomography/MRI) and functional imaging (99mTc-[HYNIC, Tyr3]-Octreotide) was undertaken at entry and 6-month intervals until progression (RECIST 1.0). Main Outcome Measure(s): Treatment response. Results: Test set: NETest (≥80%; scale, 0–100%) differentiated stable (SD) and progressive (PD) disease (P < .0001). Prospective set: 28 patients (26/28 SD) undergoing standard SSA. Grading: 12 G1, 16 G2. SSA Response: progression-free survival: 315 days: 14 (50%) SD, 14 (50%) PD. NETest: Twenty had elevated (≥80%) values; 14 developed PD; six, SD. CgA: Twelve of 28 exhibited elevated baseline values and/or subsequent >25% increase; eight developed PD; four, SD. NETest (P = .002) and grade (P = .054) were the only factors associated with treatment response. Multiple regression analysis established that the NETest could predict disease progression (P = .0002). NETest changes occurred significantly earlier (146 d prior to progression vs 56 d CgA; P < .0001; χ2 = 19) and in more patients (100 vs 57%; P < .02). Conclusions: NETest values (80–100%) were more accurate and occurred at a significantly earlier time point than CgA and predicted SSA treatment response

Diagnostic imaging of neuroendocrine tumours

Guzy neuroendokrynne (NET) stanowią heterogenną grupę nowotworów posiadających mechanizmy gromadzenia prekursorów amin biogennych oraz ekspresję specyficznych białek receptorowych na swojej błonie komórkowej, które pomagają w lokalizacji oraz w leczeniu. Guzy typu NET różnią się między sobą substancjami wydzielanymi przez komórki, obecnością czynności hormonalnej lub jej brakiem, objawami klinicznymi, cechami histopatologicznymi oraz rokowaniem. Pochodzą one z gruczołów wydzielania wewnętrznego (przysadka, przytarczyce, rdzeń nadnercza) oraz dodatkowo z komórek rozlanego systemu endokrynnego o lokalizacji w ścianie przewodu pokarmowego, trzustce, tarczycy, grasicy czy w oskrzelach. Guzy NET o pochodzeniu GEP-NET stanowią większość tego typu guzów (> 70% wszystkich NET). Badania obrazowe i ocena swoistych markerów guzów NET umożliwiają identyfikację i ocenę stadium zaawansowania tych rzadkich nowotworów, a ponadto mają wartość prognostyczną. Najbardziej uniwersalną techniką obrazową wykorzystywaną w badaniu NET jest SRS. Innych badań obrazowych, takich jak spiralna wielorzędowa CT, MRI, endoskopowe oraz śródoperacyjne badanie USG, używa się do precyzyjnej anatomicznej lokalizacji zmian patologicznych. Kolejnym badaniem czynnościowym wykorzystywanym w diagnostyce NET jest scyntygrafia MIBG (metajodobenzyloguanidyna). Badanie to pozwala identyfikować przede wszystkim guz chromochłonny oraz MTC. W postaciach złośliwych guza chromochłonnego oraz raka rdzeniastego tarczycy znaczenie ma również badanie SRS. Bardzo ważnym aspektem wykorzystania technik obrazowych (zwłaszcza CT, SRS i MRI) jest ocena odpowiedzi na leczenie. Coraz większe znaczenie kliniczne w lokalizacji guzów NET ma badanie PET z użyciem nowych ligandów receptorowych wyznakowanych 68Ga. Wykorzystanie standardowego FDG PET stosuje się w guzach NET o wysokiej złośliwości.Neuroendocrine tumours (NET) consists of a heterogeneous group of neoplasms, that are able to express cell membrane neuroamine uptake mechanisms and/or specific receptors, such as somatostatin receptors, which can be used in the localization and treatment of these tumours. Conventionally NETs may present with a wide variety of functional or nonfunctional endocrine syndromes and may be familial and have other associated tumors, also they have different histology pattern and prognosis. They originate from endocrine glands such as the pituitary, the parathyroids, and the (neuroendocrine) adrenal, as well as endocrine islets within glandular tissue (thyroid or pancreatic) and cells dispersed between exocrine cells, such as endocrine cells of the digestive system (gastroenteropancreatic GEP-NET) and respiratory tracts. GEP-NET are the most common including more then 70% of all NETs.Imaging modalities and assessment of specific tumor markers offers high sensitivity in establishing the diagnosis and can also have prognostic significance. Most important single imaging technique in terms of initial identification and staging of GEP-NET seems to be somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS). Other investigations like helical computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), endoscopic and/or peri-operative ultrasonography are used for the precise localization of NET. Another one functional approach include MIBG (meta-iodobenzylguanidine scintigraphy). This technique is sensitive in the identification of chromaffin cell tumours pheochromocytoma, and also medullary thyroid carcinoma (MTC), although SRS seems to be very useful in the localization of malignant chromaffin cell tumours and MTC as well. The further localization and monitoring of the response to treatment CT, SRS and MRI are used with high diagnostic accuracy. More recently, positron emission tomography (PET) scanning is being increasingly used for the localization of NETs, due to develop new PET tracers (68Ga), the standard one FDG PET is currently used in groups of high malignant NET

What do we know about carcinoid heart disease in the present era?

Carcinoid heart disease (CHD) is a severe complication of carcinoid syndrome (CS) found primarily in patients with small intestine neuroendocrine neoplasms (SI-NENs). Patients who develop CHD have significantly worse morbidity and mortality outcomes, highlighting the importance of clinical practice recommendations for CHD screening, diagnosis, and treatment that are both consistent and practical. CHD is characterized by white plaque-like deposits on the endocardial surface of heart structures, generally affecting the right heart valves, causing tricuspid and pulmonary regurgitation and, less commonly, valve stenosis. Cardiac imaging is essential for both the diagnosis and management of CHD. Previously, imaging for CHD was mostly achieved by echocardiography, but more recently, imaging has become multimodal. N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid in the urine (u5-HIAA) are currently the most effective markers used in screening CS patients and evaluating CHD severity. Managing patients with CHD is challenging since both systemic malignant disease and cardiac involvement must be treated concurrently. Early diagnosis and surgical intervention when required are critical to patient prognosis, especially in those without primary tumor resection. Valve replacement surgery is the most effective treatment for patients with advanced carcinoid heart disease for alleviating cardiac symptoms and contributing to survival outcomes. To deliver effective patient treatment, multidisciplinary team collaboration is needed. This review summarizes current research findings on CHD pathogenesis, clinical and epidemiological features, useful biomarkers and imaging modalities, and treatment strategies

Evaluation of survival outcomes in patients with sporadic, advanced, unresectable well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors treated initially with octreotide LAR and subsequent therapeutical approaches on relapse. A real-world data set

Introduction. Somatostatin analogs (SSA) are widely used in the treatment of patients with well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (NET). There are limited reports about the role of octreotide LAR in first-line therapy of advanced pancreatic NET (pan-NET). This study aimed to evaluate the antiproliferative effect of octreotide LAR in patients with sporadic, advanced, unresectable pan-NET, based on progression-free survival (PFS). Material and methods. This was a retrospective analysis of 374 patients with pan-NET; 41 treated subjects were included. The primary endpoint was PFS defined as the time to disease progression (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors: RECIST). Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify predictors of PFS. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and second-line therapies after progression. Results. There were 13 (32%) patients with G1 pan-NET and 28 (68%) with pan-NET G2, 21 female and 20 male, with mean age 55.4 (range 29–87). Median PFS was 9.0 months (95% CI 4.7–24.0). Subgroup analysis revealed that G1 and no-bulky liver disease ( < 25% liver volume) were associated with significantly longer PFS. Univariate analysis confirmed a correlation between G1 [0.34 hazard rate (HR) of progression or death (95% CI 0.16–0.72)] and no-bulky liver disease HR = 0.31 (95% CI 0.13–0.71). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that only functional (secretory) pan-NET was associated as an independent factor with shorter PFS HR = 2.97 (95% CI 1.0–8.74). Median OS was 105.4 months (95% CI 40.0–172.0). After relapse following initial systemic therapy, the second line was used in 34 subjects, 3rd line in 18th, and 4th line in 9 subjects. Conclusions. Octreotide LAR shows moderate antiproliferative activity in pan-NET. Prolonged PFS may be associated with G1 and low-volume metastatic liver disease. In patients with progressive disease, various treatment options were used, which resulted in median OS of 105.4 months

Efficacy and safety of high-dose lanreotide autogel in patients with progressive pancreatic or midgut neuroendocrine tumours: CLARINET FORTE phase 2 study results

Lanreotide; Progression-free survival; SomatostatinLanreótido; Supervivencia libre de progresión; SomatostatinaLanreòtid; Supervivència lliure de progressió; SomatostatinaIntroduction This prospective, single-arm, phase 2 study assessed the efficacy and safety of lanreotide autogel (LAN) administered at a reduced dosing interval in patients with progressive neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) after LAN standard regimen. Methods Patients had metastatic or locally advanced, grade 1 or 2 midgut NETs or pancreatic NETs (panNETs) and centrally assessed disease progression on LAN 120 mg every 28 days. They were treated with LAN 120 mg every 14 days for up to 96 weeks (midgut cohort) or 48 weeks (panNET cohort). The primary end-point was centrally assessed progression-free survival (PFS). PFS by Ki-67 categories was analysed post hoc. Secondary end-points included quality of life (QoL) and safety. Results Ninety-nine patients were enrolled (midgut, N = 51; panNET, N = 48). Median (95% CI) PFS was 8.3 (5.6–11.1) and 5.6 (5.5–8.3) months, respectively. In patients with Ki-67 ≤ 10%, median (95% CI) PFS was 8.6 (5.6–13.8) and 8.0 (5.6–8.3) months in the midgut and panNET cohorts, respectively. Patients’ QoL did not deteriorate during the study. There were no treatment-related serious adverse events and only two withdrawals for treatment-related adverse events (both in the panNET cohort). Conclusions In patients with progressive NETs following standard-regimen LAN, reducing the dosing interval to every 14 days provided encouraging PFS, particularly in patients with a Ki-67 ≤ 10% (post hoc); no safety concerns and no deterioration in QoL were observed. Increasing LAN dosing frequency could therefore be considered before escalation to less well-tolerated therapies.This study was sponsored by Ipsen

Ocena bezpieczeństwa i efektywność jabłczanu sunitynibu w przerzutowych guzach neuroendokrynnych trzustki (NEN G1/G2) w zależności od liczby i rodzaju wcześniejszych linii terapeutycznych — doniesienie wstępne

Introduction: The objective of this paper was to assess the safety and efficacy of sunitinib malate in patients with well-differentiated metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (PNENs) who relapsed on standard therapy.Material and methods: Overall, eight patients with well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours/neoplasm (NET/NEN G1/G2, Ki-67 < 20%), who had relapsed on a standard therapy approach, were treated. All had non-resectable, progressive disease. All received therapy using a standard dose of sunitinib malate. Adverse events were evaluated using NCI-CTC AE v. 3.0.Results: Of the eight patients, seven had non-secretor and single secretor tumour (gastrinoma). Partial remission (PR) was noted in three patients (one after a single therapeutic line, two after two lines), five patients had stabilisation (SD) — including three individuals after three lines, one patient after two lines and another after a single line. Haematological adverse events: leukopenia (25%) — occurred in one patient after three lines and in one patient after two lines; anaemia (25%) — in one patient after three lines and in one patient after one therapeutic line. Mucocutaneous lesions were noted in 37.5% of patients after 2–3 lines of treatment. All of them experienced fatigue syndrome irrespective of the number of therapies. The majority of the patients simultaneously received somatostatin analogues, which did not exacerbate the toxicity profile. The median progression-free survival time (PFS) was 11 months.Conclusions: Sunitinib may be considered as a fairly well-tolerated and effective therapeutic option in progressive non-resectable PNEN patients in the second and subsequent lines of treatment, irrespective of the types of treatment previously applied. (Endokrynol Pol 2014; 65 (6): 472–478)Wstęp: Celem pracy była ocena bezpieczeństwa oraz analiza skuteczności jabłczanu sunitynibu u chorych z przerzutowymi wysokozróżnicowanymi guzami neuroendokrynnymi trzustki (PNET) w drugiej i kolejnych liniach leczenia.Materiał i metody: Analizie poddano 8 pacjentów z wysoko zróżnicowanymi guzami neuroendokrynnymi trzustki (NEN G1/G2, Ki-67 < 20%), u których wystąpiła progresja choroby i otrzymali sunitynib. Wszyscy chorzy byli w stadium nieoperacyjnym. Sunitynib był podawany w standardowej dawce. Działania niepożądane oceniono na podstawie kryteriów NCI-CTC AE v. 3.0.Wyniki: Leczono 8 pacjentów; 7 guzów nieaktywnych hormonalnie i 1 o typie gastrinoma. Częściową remisję (PR) uzyskano u 3 chorych (1 po 1 linii terapeutycznej, 2 — po 2 liniach), 5 chorych miało stabilizację (SD) — w tym 3 było po 3 liniach, 1 po 2 liniach i 1 po 1 linii terapeutycznej. Powikłania hematologiczne: leukopenia (25%) — wystąpiły u 1 pacjenta po 3 liniach i u 1 pacjenta po 2 liniach; niedokrwistość (25%) — u 1 pacjenta po 3 liniach i u 1 pacjenta po 1 linii terapeutycznej. U 37,5% chorych wystąpiły zmiany skórno-śluzówkowe po 2–3 liniach leczenia. U 100% chorych obserwowano zespół zmęczenia niezależnie od liczby terapii. Większość chorych jednocześnie otrzymywała SSA, co nie pogorszyło profilu toksyczności. Mediana czasu wolnego od progresji PFS (progression free survival) – wyniosła 11 miesięcy.Wnioski: Sunitynib może być rozważany, jako dość dobrze tolerowana, skuteczna opcja terapeutyczna u chorych z nieresekcyjnymi PNET w drugiej oraz kolejnych liniach leczenia, niezależnie od rodzaju uprzednio zastosowanych metod. (Endokrynol Pol 2014; 65 (6): 472–478

Nowotwory neuroendokrynne żołądka i dwunastnicy z uwzględnieniem gastrinoma — zasady postępowania (rekomendowane przez Polską Sieć Guzów Neuroendokrynnych)

W niniejszej pracy przedstawiono uaktualnione zalecenia grupy ekspertów Polskiej Sieci Guzów Neuroendokrynnych dotyczące zasad postępowania w nowotworach neuroendokrynnych żołądka i dwunastnicy z uwzględnieniem gastrinoma. Omówiono epidemiologię, patogenezę i obraz kliniczny tych nowotworów. Przedstawiono zalecenia dotyczące zasad postępowania diagnostycznego, z uwzględnieniem diagnostyki biochemicznej, histopatologicznej oraz lokalizacyjnej. Uwzględniono także zasady postępowania terapeutycznego, w tym leczenie endoskopowe i chirurgiczne, oraz omówiono możliwości leczenia farmakologicznego i radioizotopowego. Przedstawiono także zalecenia odnośnie monitorowania chorych z NEN żołądka, dwunastnicy z uwzględnieniem gastrinoma

Nowotwory neuroendokrynne żołądka i dwunastnicy z uwzględnieniem gastrinoma — zasady postępowania (rekomendowane przez Polską Sieć Guzów Neuroendokrynnych)

This paper presents the updated Polish Neuroendocrine Tumour Network expert panel recommendations on the management of neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) of the stomach and duodenum, including gastrinoma. The recommendations discuss the epidemiology, pathogenesis and clinical presentation of these tumours as well as their diagnosis, including biochemical, histopathological and localisation diagnosis. The principles of treatment are discussed, including endoscopic, surgical, pharmacological and radionuclide treatment. Finally, recommendations on patient monitoring are given. (Endokrynol Pol 2013; 64 (6): 444–458)W niniejszej pracy przedstawiono uaktualnione zalecenia grupy ekspertów Polskiej Sieci Guzów Neuroendokrynnych dotyczące zasad postępowania w nowotworach neuroendokrynnych żołądka i dwunastnicy z uwzględnieniem gastrinoma. Omówiono epidemiologię, patogenezę i obraz kliniczny tych nowotworów. Przedstawiono zalecenia dotyczące zasad postępowania diagnostycznego, z uwzględnieniem diagnostyki biochemicznej, histopatologicznej oraz lokalizacyjnej. Uwzględniono także zasady postępowania terapeutycznego, w tym leczenie endoskopowe i chirurgiczne, oraz omówiono możliwości leczenia farmakologicznego i radioizotopowego. Przedstawiono także zalecenia odnośnie monitorowania chorych z NEN żołądka, dwunastnicy z uwzględnieniem gastrinoma. (Endokrynol Pol 2013; 64 (6): 444–458

Pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms — management guidelines (recommended by the Polish Network of Neuroendocrine Tumours)

W niniejszej publikacji przedstawiono zaktualizowane zalecenia dotyczące diagnostyczno-terapeutycznego postępowania w nowo­tworach neuroendokrynnych trzustki (PNEN) zaproponowane przez Polską Sieć Guzów Neuroendokrynnych. Zawierają one nowe dane uzyskane w latach 2013–2016, które albo potwierdziły wcześniejsze wytyczne, albo doprowadziły do zmian lub utworzenia dodatkowych zaleceń. W diagnostyce duże znaczenie mają badania biochemiczne, obrazowe (anatomiczne i czynnościowe), jak również rozpoznanie histopatologiczne, które determinuje postępowanie z chorymi na PNEN i musi być potwierdzone badaniem immunohistochemicznym. Terapia PNEN wymaga współpracy wielodyscyplinarnej grupy doświadczonych specjalistów zajmujących się nowotworami neuroendokrynnymi. Leczenie chirurgiczne jest podstawową metodą postępowania w wielu przypadkach. Dalsza terapia wymaga wielokierunkowego działania, dlatego omówiono zasady bioterapii, leczenia radioizotopowego, celowanego leczenia molekularnego oraz chemioterapii.This article presents updated diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines for the management of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (PNEN), proposed by the Polish Network of Neuroendocrine Tumours. The guidelines contain new data received in the years 2013–2016, which confirm previous recommendations, and have led to modification of previous guidelines or have resulted in the formulation of new guidelines. Biochemical and imaging (anatomical and functional) tests are of great importance in diagnostics, as well as histopathological diagnosis to determine the management of PNEN patients, but they must be confirmed by an immunohistochemical examination. PNEN therapy requires collaboration among the members a multidisciplinary team of specialists experienced in the management of these neoplasms. Surgery is the basic form of treatment in many cases. Further therapy requires a multidirectional procedure; therefore, the rules of biotherapy, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy, molecular targeted therapy, and chemotherapy are discussed