‘Quality in, quality out’, a stepwise approach to evidence-based medicine for rare diseases promoted by multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1

Rare diseases pose specific challenges in the field of medical research to provide physicians with evidence-based guidelines derived from studies with sufficient quality. An example of these rare diseases is multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1), which is an autosomal dominant endocrine tumor syndrome with an estimated occurrence rate of 2–3 per 100,000. For this complex disease, characterized by multiple endocrine tumors, it proves difficult to perform both adequate and feasible studies. The opinion of patients themselves is of utmost importance to identify the gaps in the evidence-based medicine regarding clinical care. In the search for scientific answers to clinical research questions, the aim for best available evidence is obvious. Observational studies within patient cohorts, although prone to bias, seem the most feasible study design regarding the disease prevalence. Knowledge and adaptation to all types of bias is demanded in the strive for answers. Guided by our research on MEN1 patients, we elaborate on strategies to identify sufficient patients, to maximize and maintain patient enrolment and to standardize the data collection process. Preferably, data collection is performed prospectively, however, under certain conditions, data storage in a longitudinal retrospective database with a disease-specific framework is suitable. Considering the global challenges on observational research on rare diseases, we propose a stepwise approach from clinical research questions to scientific answers

Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia Type 1

Introduction: Multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) is a hereditary endocrine tumor syndrome characterized by the triad of primary hyperparathyroidism, duodenopancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs), and pituitary tumors. Patients are confronted with substantial morbidity and are consequently at risk for an impaired quality of life (QOL). Meticulous assessment of QOL and associated factors in a representative population is needed to understand the full spectrum of the burden of the disease. Patients and Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed using the national Dutch MEN1 cohort. Patients with a confirmed MEN1 mutation received the SF-36 Health Related Quality of Life questionnaire and questions regarding sociodemographic and medical history. Results: A total of 227 of 285 (80%) eligible MEN1 patients returned the questionnaires. Health-related QOL scores (HRQOL) in MEN1 patients were significantly lower for the majority of subscales of the SF-36 in comparison with the general Dutch population. The most consistent predictor for HRQOL was employment status, followed by the presence of a pituitary tumor. 16% of patients harboring a pNET and 29% of patients with a pituitary tumor according to the medical records, reported that they were unaware of such a tumor. These subgroups of patients had several significant better QOL scores than patients who were aware of their pNET or pituitary tumors. Conclusion: Patients with MEN1 have an impaired QOL in comparison with the general Dutch population warranting special attention within routine care. For daily practice, physicians should be aware of their patients' impaired QOL and of the impact of unemployment on QOL

Initiating pancreatic neuroendocrine tumour (pNET) screening in young MEN1 patients:results from the DutchMEN Study Group

Context: Nonfunctioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NF-pNETs) are highly prevalent and constitute an important cause of mortality in patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1). Still, the optimal age to initiate screening for pNETs is under debate. Objective: The aim of this work is to assess the age of occurrence of clinically relevant NF-pNETs in young MEN1 patients. Methods: Pancreatic imaging data of MEN1 patients were retrieved from the DutchMEN Study Group database. Interval-censored survival methods were used to describe age-related penetrance, compare survival curves, and develop a parametric model for estimating the risk of having clinically relevant NF-pNET at various ages. The primary objective was to assess age at occurrence of clinically relevant NF-pNET (size ≥†20 mm or rapid growth); secondary objectives were the age at occurrence of NF-pNET of any size and pNET-associated metastasized disease. Results: Five of 350 patients developed clinically relevant NF-pNETs before age 18 years, 2 of whom subsequently developed lymph node metastases. No differences in clinically relevant NF-pNET-free survival were found for sex, time frame, and type of MEN1 diagnosis or genotype. The estimated ages (median, 95% CI) at a 1%, 2.5%, and 5% risk of having developed a clinically relevant tumor are 9.5 (6.5-12.7), 13.5 (10.2-16.9), and 17.8 years (14.3-21.4), respectively. Conclusion: Analyses from this population-based cohort indicate that start of surveillance for NF-pNETs with pancreatic imaging at age 13 to 14 years is justified. The psychological and medical burden of screening at a young age should be considered

MEN1 redefined, a clinical comparison of mutation-positive and mutation-negative patients

Contains fulltext : 170909.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) is diagnosed when two out of the three primary MEN1-associated endocrine tumors occur in a patient. Up to 10-30 % of those patients have no mutation in the MEN1 gene. It is unclear if the phenotype and course of the disease of mutation-negative patients is comparable with mutation-positive patients and if these patients have true MEN1. The present study aims to describe and compare the clinical course of MEN1 mutation-negative patients with two out of the three main MEN1 manifestations and mutation-positive patients during long-term follow-up. METHODS: This is a cohort study performed using the Dutch MEN1 database, including > 90 % of the Dutch MEN1 population. RESULTS: A total of 293 (90.7 %) mutation-positive and 30 (9.3 %) mutation-negative MEN1 patients were included. Median age of developing the first main MEN1 manifestation was higher in mutation-negative patients (46 vs. 33 years) (P = 0.007). Mutation-negative patients did not develop a third main MEN1 manifestation in the course of follow-up compared to 48.3 % of mutation-positive patients (P < 0.001). Median survival in mutation-positive patients was estimated at 73.0 years (95 % CI, 69.5-76.5) compared to 87.0 years (95 % CI not available) in mutation-negative patients (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Mutation-positive and mutation-negative MEN1 patients have a different phenotype and clinical course. Mutation-negative patients develop MEN1 manifestations at higher age and have a life expectancy comparable with the general population. The apparent differences in clinical course suggest that MEN1 mutation-negative patients do not have true MEN1, but another MEN1-like syndrome or sporadic co-incidence of two neuro-endocrine tumors

Clues For Genetic Anticipation In Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia Type 1

CONTEXT: Multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) is a rare autosomal dominant hereditary disease caused by the loss of function of the MEN1 gene, a tumor-suppressor gene that encodes the protein menin. It is characterized by the occurrence of primary hyperparathyroidism (pHPT), duodenopancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (dpNET), pituitary tumors (PIT), adrenal adenomas, and bronchopulmonary (bp-NET), thymic, and gastric neuroendocrine tumors. More insight into factors influencing the age-related penetrance of MEN1 manifestations could provide clues for more personalized screening programs. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether genetic anticipation plays a role in the largest known MEN1 families in the Netherlands. METHODS: All Dutch MEN1 families with ≥ 10 affected members in ≥ 2 successive generations were identified. Age at detection of the different MEN1-related manifestations were compared among generations using regression analyses adjusted for competing risks. To correct for the beneficial effect of being under surveillance, manifestations occurring during surveillance were also separately compared. RESULTS: A total of 152 MEN1 patients from 10 families were included. A significantly decreased age at detection of pHPT, dpNET, PIT, and bp-NET was found in successive generations (P < 0.0001). Adjusted analyses led to the same results. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest the presence of genetic anticipation. However, due to a risk of residual bias, the results must be interpreted with caution. After independent validation in other cohorts and further translational research investigating the molecular mechanisms explaining this phenomenon in MEN1, the results might add to future, more personalized, screening protocols and earlier screening for future generations of MEN1 patients

Diagnosing pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors in patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 in daily practice

Background: In multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1), pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNETs) have a high prevalence and represent the main cause of death. This study aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the currently used conventional pancreatic imaging techniques and the added value of fine needle aspirations (FNAs). Methods: Patients who had at least one imaging study were included from the population-based MEN1 database of the DutchMEN Study Group from 1990 to 2017. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), FNA, and surgical resection specimens were obtained. The first MRI, CT, or EUS was considered as the index test. For a comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of MRI versus CT, patients with their index test taken between 2010 and 2017 were included. The reference standard consisted of surgical histopathology or radiological follow-up. ResultsA total of 413 patients (92.8% of the database) underwent 3,477 imaging studies. The number of imaging studies per patient increased, and a preference for MRI was observed in the last decade. Overall diagnostic accuracy was good with a positive (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of 88.9% (95% confidence interval, 76.0-95.6) and 92.8% (89.4-95.1), respectively, for PanNET in the pancreatic head and 92.0% (85.3-96.0) and 85.3% (80.5-89.1), respectively, in the body/tail. For MRI, PPV and NPV for pancreatic head tumors were 100% (76.1-100) and 87.1% (76.3-93.6) and for CT, 60.0% (22.9-88.4) and 70.4% (51.3-84.3), respectively. For body/tail tumors, PPV and NPV were 91.3% (72.0-98.8) and 87.0% (75.3-93.9), respectively, for MRI and 100% (74.9-100) and 77.8% (54.3-91.5), respectively, for CT. Pathology confirmed a PanNET in 106 out of 110 (96.4%) resection specimens. FNA was performed on 34 lesions in 33 patients and was considered PanNET in 24 [all confirmed PanNET by histology (10) or follow-up (14)], normal/cyst/unrepresentative in 6 (all confirmed PanNET by follow-up), and adenocarcinoma in 4 (2 confirmed and 2 PanNET). Three patients, all older than 60 years, had a final diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Conclusion: As the accuracy for diagnosing MEN1-related PanNET of MRI was higher than that of CT, MRI should be the preferred (non-invasive) imaging modality for PanNET screening/surveillance. The high diagnostic accuracy of pancreatic imaging and the sporadic occurrence of pancreatic adenocarcinoma question the need for routine (EUS-guided) FNA

The future : medical advances in MEN1 therapeutic approaches and management strategies

Multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 is a rare autosomal inherited disorder associated with a high risk for patients to simultaneously develop tumors of the parathyroid glands, duodenopancreatic neuroendocrine tumors and tumors of the anterior pituitary gland. Early identification of MEN1 in patients enables presymptomatic screening of manifestations, which makes timely interventions possible with the intention to prevent morbidity and mortality. Causes of death nowadays have shifted toward local or metastatic progression of malignant neuroendocrine tumors. In early cohorts, complications like peptic ulcers in gastrinoma, renal failure in hyperparathyroidism, hypoglycemia and acute hypercalcemia were the primary causes of early mortality. Improved medical treatments of these complications led to a significantly improved life expectancy. The MEN1 landscape is still evolving, considering the finding of breast cancer as a new MEN1-related manifestation and ongoing publications on follow-up and medical care for patients with MEN1. This review aims at summarizing the most recent insights into the follow-up and medical care for patients with MEN1 and identifying the gaps for future research

Prognostic Factors for Survival of MEN1 Patients with Duodenopancreatic Tumors Metastatic to the Liver: Results from the DMSG

Objective: Duodenopancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (DP-NETs) develop in a majority of patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) and are the leading cause of death. Overall survival (OS) and prognostic factors for patients with liver metastases from DP-NETs are not known. Methods: This was a cohort study using the Dutch National MEN1 database, which includes >90% of the Dutch MEN1 population treated between 1990 and 2014. OS was assessed with time to event analysis, and prognostic factors were evaluated. Results: A total of 56% of the MEN1 patients (n = 220) were diagnosed with a DP-NET, of who 34 (15%) developed DP-NET liver metastases. Median age at liver metastases diagnosis was 53 years (range 31-74). Of those patients, 16 patients (47%) had died after a median follow up of 4 years (range 0.3-12.3). OS at 2, 5, and 10 years were 91%, 65%, and 50%, respectively. A trend towards worse survival was seen in males compared to females (5-year OS 58% versus 75%, P =.07) and also in patients with multiple liver metastases compared to patients with solitary liver metastasis (59 versus 83%, P =.09). Conclusion: Despite the fairly indolent course of DP-NET liver metastases in MEN1 patients, half of the population was deceased after 10 years. Sex and tumor load at diagnosis of liver metastases are possible prognostic factors for worse survival

High Fear of Disease Occurrence Is Associated with Low Quality of Life in Patients with Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia Type 1: Results from the Dutch MEN1 Study Group

Objective Multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) is a hereditary disease characterized by a high risk of developing primary hyperparathyroidism, duodenopancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, and pituitary tumors (PITs). It is unclear if having MEN1 leads to psychological distress because of fear of disease occurrence (FDO), thereby potentially affecting quality of life. Design A cross-sectional study was performed using the Dutch MEN1 cohort. All patients received the Cancer Worry Scale (a score ≥14 reflects high FDO), the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), and questions on sociodemographic and medical history. Results A total of 227 of 285 (80%) eligible patients with MEN1 completed the questionnaire. The mean (± standard deviation) age was 47 ± 15 years. Overall, patients experienced an FDO of 15.1 ± 4.7, with 58% of patients having a score ≥14. This is higher than reported in previous studies assessing fear of cancer recurrence in different cancer populations (31% to 52%). Adjusted for age and sex, the FDO score was negatively associated with almost all SF-36 subscales. In multivariable analysis, the diagnosis of a PIT, a pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor, and not being employed were associated with FDO (P < 0.05). Patients had higher FDO scores for their family members than for themselves. Conclusion The majority of patients with MEN1 have FDO for themselves and even more for their relatives. This psychological distress is associated with a lower health-related quality of life. Therefore, in the medical care for MEN1, emphasis should also be placed on FDO and quality of life