A classification prognostic score to predict OS in stage IV well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors

No validated prognostic tool is available for predicting overall survival (OS) of patients with well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (WDNETs). This study, conducted in three independent cohorts of patients from five different European countries, aimed to develop and validate a classification prognostic score for OS in patients with stage IV WDNETs. We retrospectively collected data on 1387 patients: (i) patients treated at the Istituto Nazionale Tumori (Milan, Italy; n = 515); (ii) European cohort of rare NET patients included in the European RARECAREnet database (n = 457); (iii) Italian multicentric cohort of pancreatic NET (pNETs) patients treated at 24 Italian institutions (n = 415). The score was developed using data from patients included in cohort (i) (training set); external validation was performed by applying the score to the data of the two independent cohorts (ii) and (iii) evaluating both calibration and discriminative ability (Harrell C statistic). We used data on age, primary tumor site, metastasis (synchronous vs metachronous), Ki-67, functional status and primary surgery to build the score, which was developed for classifying patients into three groups with differential 10-year OS: (I) favorable risk group: 10-year OS >= 70%; (II) intermediate risk group: 30% <= 10-year OS < 70%; (III) poor risk group: 10-year OS < 30%. The Harrell C statistic was 0.661 in the training set, and 0.626 and 0.601 in the RARECAREnet and Italian multicentric validation sets, respectively. In conclusion, based on the analysis of three 'field-practice' cohorts collected in different settings, we defined and validated a prognostic score to classify patients into three groups with different long-term prognoses

Association of Upfront Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy With Progression-Free Survival Among Patients With Enteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors

open57noIMPORTANCE Data about the optimal timing for the initiation of peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) for advanced, well-differentiated enteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors are lacking. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the association of upfront PRRT vs upfront chemotherapy or targeted therapy with progression-free survival (PFS) among patients with advanced enteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors who experienced disease progression after treatment with somatostatin analogues (SSAs). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This retrospective, multicenter cohort study analyzed the clinical records from 25 Italian oncology centers for patients aged 18 years or older who had unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic, well-differentiated, grades 1 to 3 enteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors and received either PRRT or chemotherapy or targeted therapy after experiencing disease progression after treatment with SSAs between January 24, 2000, and July 1, 2020. Propensity score matching was done to minimize the selection bias. EXPOSURES Upfront PRRT or upfront chemotherapy or targeted therapy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The main outcome was the difference in PFS among patients who received upfront PRRT vs among those who received upfront chemotherapy or targeted therapy. A secondary outcome was the difference in overall survival between these groups. Hazard ratios (HRs) were fitted in a multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model to adjust for relevant factors associated with PFS and were corrected for interaction with these factors. RESULTS Of 508 evaluated patients (mean ([SD] age, 55.7 [0.5] years; 278 [54.7%] were male), 329 (64.8%) received upfront PRRT and 179 (35.2%) received upfront chemotherapy or targeted therapy. The matched group included 222 patients (124 [55.9%] male; mean [SD] age, 56.1 [0.8] years), with 111 in each treatment group. Median PFS was longer in the PRRT group than in the chemotherapy or targeted therapy group in the unmatched (2.5 years [95%CI, 2.3-3.0 years] vs 0.7 years [95%CI, 0.5-1.0 years]; HR, 0.35 [95%CI, 0.28-0.44; P < .001]) and matched (2.2 years [95% CI, 1.8-2.8 years] vs 0.6 years [95%CI, 0.4-1.0 years]; HR, 0.37 [95%CI, 0.27-0.51; P < .001]) populations. No significant differences were shown in median overall survival between the PRRT and chemotherapy or targeted therapy groups in the unmatched (12.0 years [95%CI, 10.7-14.1 years] vs 11.6 years [95%CI, 9.1-13.4 years]; HR, 0.81 [95%CI, 0.62-1.06; P = .11]) and matched (12.2 years [95% CI, 9.1-14.2 years] vs 11.5 years [95%CI, 9.2-17.9 years]; HR, 0.83 [95%CI, 0.56-1.24; P = .36]) populations. The use of upfront PRRT was independently associated with improved PFS (HR, 0.37; 95%CI, 0.26-0.51; P < .001) in multivariable analysis. After adjustment of values for interaction, upfront PRRT was associated with longer PFS regardless of tumor functional status (functioning: adjusted HR [aHR], 0.39 [95%CI, 0.27-0.57]; nonfunctioning: aHR, 0.29 [95%CI, 0.16-0.56]), grade of 1 to 2 (grade 1: aHR, 0.21 [95%CI, 0.12-0.34]; grade 2: aHR, 0.52 [95%CI, 0.29-0.73]), and site of tumor origin (pancreatic: aHR, 0.41 [95%CI, 0.24-0.61]; intestinal: aHR, 0.19 [95%CI, 0.11-0.43]) (P < .001 for all). Conversely, the advantage was not retained in grade 3 tumors (aHR, 0.31; 95%CI, 0.12-1.37; P = .13) or in tumors with a Ki-67 proliferation index greater than 10% (aHR, 0.73; 95%CI, 0.29-1.43; P = .31). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this cohort study, treatment with upfront PRRT in patients with enteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors who had experienced disease progression with SSA treatment was associated with significantly improved survival outcomes compared with upfront chemotherapy or targeted therapy. Further research is needed to investigate the correct strategy, timing, and optimal specific sequence of these therapeutic options.openPusceddu, Sara; Prinzi, Natalie; Tafuto, Salvatore; Ibrahim, Toni; Filice, Angelina; Brizzi, Maria Pia; Panzuto, Francesco; Baldari, Sergio; Grana, Chiara M.; Campana, Davide; Davì, Maria Vittoria; Giuffrida, Dario; Zatelli, Maria Chiara; Partelli, Stefano; Razzore, Paola; Marconcini, Riccardo; Massironi, Sara; Gelsomino, Fabio; Faggiano, Antongiulio; Giannetta, Elisa; Bajetta, Emilio; Grimaldi, Franco; Cives, Mauro; Cirillo, Fernando; Perfetti, Vittorio; Corti, Francesca; Ricci, Claudio; Giacomelli, Luca; Porcu, Luca; Di Maio, Massimo; Seregni, Ettore; Maccauro, Marco; Lastoria, Secondo; Bongiovanni, Alberto; Versari, Annibale; Persano, Irene; Rinzivillo, Maria; Pignata, Salvatore Antonio; Rocca, Paola Anna; Lamberti, Giuseppe; Cingarlini, Sara; Puliafito, Ivana; Ambrosio, Maria Rosaria; Zanata, Isabella; Bracigliano, Alessandra; Severi, Stefano; Spada, Francesca; Andreasi, Valentina; Modica, Roberta; Scalorbi, Federica; Milione, Massimo; Sabella, Giovanna; Coppa, Jorgelina; Casadei, Riccardo; Di Bartolomeo, Maria; Falconi, Massimo; de Braud, FilippoPusceddu, Sara; Prinzi, Natalie; Tafuto, Salvatore; Ibrahim, Toni; Filice, Angelina; Brizzi, Maria Pia; Panzuto, Francesco; Baldari, Sergio; Grana, Chiara M.; Campana, Davide; Davì, Maria Vittoria; Giuffrida, Dario; Zatelli, Maria Chiara; Partelli, Stefano; Razzore, Paola; Marconcini, Riccardo; Massironi, Sara; Gelsomino, Fabio; Faggiano, Antongiulio; Giannetta, Elisa; Bajetta, Emilio; Grimaldi, Franco; Cives, Mauro; Cirillo, Fernando; Perfetti, Vittorio; Corti, Francesca; Ricci, Claudio; Giacomelli, Luca; Porcu, Luca; Di Maio, Massimo; Seregni, Ettore; Maccauro, Marco; Lastoria, Secondo; Bongiovanni, Alberto; Versari, Annibale; Persano, Irene; Rinzivillo, Maria; Pignata, Salvatore Antonio; Rocca, Paola Anna; Lamberti, Giuseppe; Cingarlini, Sara; Puliafito, Ivana; Ambrosio, Maria Rosaria; Zanata, Isabella; Bracigliano, Alessandra; Severi, Stefano; Spada, Francesca; Andreasi, Valentina; Modica, Roberta; Scalorbi, Federica; Milione, Massimo; Sabella, Giovanna; Coppa, Jorgelina; Casadei, Riccardo; Di Bartolomeo, Maria; Falconi, Massimo; de Braud, Filipp

Metastatic and locally advanced pancreatic endocrine carcinomas: analysis of factors associated with disease progression.

PURPOSE: Knowledge of clinical course of pancreatic endocrine carcinomas (PECs) is poor. This study aimed to determine the time to progression of advanced PECs, and to identify predictors capable of selecting subgroups with higher risk of progression. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this multicenter retrospective analysis, patients with advanced PECs were enrolled. Staging was according to European Neuroendocrine Tumors Society guidelines. Grading was based on proliferation index using Ki67 immunohistochemistry. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS), which was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. The Cox regression proportional hazard model was used to identify predictors for tumor progression. RESULTS: Two hundred two patients with PECs were enrolled, including 172 with well-differentiated and 30 with poorly differentiated endocrine carcinomas. There were 34 patients with stage III and 168 with stage IV tumors. G1 tumors were present in 19.7% of patients, whereas 60.1% of patients had G2 tumors, and the remaining 20.2% had G3 tumors. Disease progression occurred in 166 patients (82.2%), at a median interval of 10 months (interquartile range, 5 to 22) from diagnosis. Median PFS was 14 months. Different PFS were observed depending on G grade (P < .001) and tumor differentiation (P < .001) and in patients who did not receive any antitumor treatment (P = .002). The major risk factor for progression was the proliferation index Ki67 (hazard ratio, 1.02 for each increasing unit; P < .001). Overall 5-year survival was 44.1%. CONCLUSION: The vast majority of patients with advanced PECs undergo disease progression. The major risk factor for progression is Ki67 index, which should lead physicians dealing with PECs to plan appropriate follow-up programs and therapeutic strategies. PMID: 21555696 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Publication Types, MeSH Terms, Substances LinkOut - more resource

Gender-related differences in patients with carcinoid syndrome: new insights from an Italian multicenter cohort study

Background: The incidence of neuroendocrine neoplasm (NEN) and related carcinoid syndrome (CaS) has increased markedly in recent decades, and women appear to be more at risk than men. As per other tumors, gender may be relevant in influencing the clinical and prognostic characteristics of NEN-associated CS. However, specific data on carcinoid syndrome (CaS) are still lacking. Purpose: To evaluate gender differences in clinical presentation and outcome of CaS. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 144 CaS patients from 20 Italian high-volume centers was conducted. Clinical presentation, tumor characteristics, therapies, and outcomes (progression-free survival, PFS, overall survival, OS) were correlated to gender. Results: Ninety (62.5%) CaS patients were male. There was no gender difference in the site of primary tumor, tumor grade and clinical stage, as well as in treatments. Men were more frequently smokers (37.2%) and alcohol drinkers (17.8%) than women (9.5%, p = 0.002, and 3.7%, p = 0.004, respectively). Concerning clinical presentation, women showed higher median number of symptoms (p = 0.0007), more frequent abdominal pain, tachycardia, and psychiatric disorders than men (53.3% vs 70.4%, p = 0.044; 6.7% vs 31.5%, p = 0.001; 50.9% vs. 26.7%, p = 0.003, respectively). Lymph node metastases at diagnosis were more frequent in men than in women (80% vs 64.8%; p = 0.04), but no differences in terms of PFS (p = 0.51) and OS (p = 0.64) were found between gender. Conclusions: In this Italian cohort, CaS was slightly more frequent in males than females. Gender-related differences emerged in the clinical presentation of CaS, as well as gender-specific risk factors for CaS development. A gender-driven clinical management of these patients should be advisable

A classification prognostic score to predict OS in stage IV well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors

No validated prognostic tool is available for predicting overall survival (OS) of patients with well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (WDNETs). This study, conducted in three independent cohorts of patients from five different European countries, aimed to develop and validate a classification prognostic score for OS in patients with stage IV WDNETs. We retrospectively collected data on 1387 patients: (i) patients treated at the Istituto Nazionale Tumori (Milan, Italy; n = 515); (ii) European cohort of rare NET patients included in the European RARECAREnet database (n = 457); (iii) Italian multicentric cohort of pancreatic NET (pNETs) patients treated at 24 Italian institutions (n = 415). The score was developed using data from patients included in cohort (i) (training set); external validation was performed by applying the score to the data of the two independent cohorts (ii) and (iii) evaluating both calibration and discriminative ability (Harrell C statistic). We used data on age, primary tumor site, metastasis (synchronous vs metachronous), Ki-67, functional status and primary surgery to build the score, which was developed for classifying patients into three groups with differential 10-year OS: (I) favorable risk group: 10-year OS ≥70%; (II) intermediate risk group: 30% ≤ 10-year OS < 70%; (III) poor risk group: 10-year OS <30%. The Harrell C statistic was 0.661 in the training set, and 0.626 and 0.601 in the RARECAREnet and Italian multicentric validation sets, respectively. In conclusion, based on the analysis of three 'field-practice' cohorts collected in different settings, we defined and validated a prognostic score to classify patients into three groups with different long-term prognoses