Efficacy of topotecan in pretreated metastatic poorly differentiated extrapulmonary neuroendocrine carcinoma

Patterns of Immunoreactivity with TTF-1 Antibodies 8G7G3/1 and SPT24 Suggest Distinct Immunoprofiles Between Most Pulmonary and Nonpulmonary Small Cell Carcinomas

Introduction. Small cell carcinoma can arise from various sites. Herein, we analyze the ability of 2 thyroid transcription factor-1 (TTF-1) antibodies (SPT24 and 8G7G3/1) to separate pulmonary from nonpulmonary small cell carcinoma. Materials and Methods. We analyzed 26 pulmonary and 83 nonpulmonary small cell carcinomas, and 14 Merkel cell carcinomas. Each tumor was stained with SPT24 and 8G7G3/1. Extent of nuclear staining was scored as diffuse (>50%), focal (11%-50%), rare (1%-10%), or negative (<1%). Results. All pulmonary small cell carcinomas were positive for SPT24 and 8G7G3/1. Four Merkel cell carcinomas (29%) were positive for SPT24 (ranging from rare-to-diffuse), while 2 (14%) showed rare expression with 8G7G3/1. For nonpulmonary small cell carcinomas, 69 (83%) were positive for SPT24 and 40 (48%) were positive for 8G7G3/1. For SPT24 positive tumors, the extent of 8G7G3/1 expression was equal in 17 (25%) and less in 52 tumors (75%), including 29 (42%) that were negative for 8G7G3/1. No nonpulmonary small cell carcinoma had more staining with 8G7G3/1 compared to SPT24. The differences in staining between 8G7G3/1 and SPT24 in the nonpulmonary cohort were statistically significant (P < 0.0001) with no significant difference between primary and metastatic lesions for 8G7G3/1 (P  =  0.66) or SPT24 (P  =  0.77). Conclusion. Most pulmonary small cell carcinomas are diffusely positive for both SPT24 and 8G7G3/1, whereas most nonpulmonary small cell carcinomas exhibit focal-to-no staining with 8G7G3/1 and significantly less staining with 8G7G3/1 compared to SPT24. However, these trends are not absolute and should be interpreted in conjunction with clinical and radiological findings.

Extrapulmonary Neuroendocrine Carcinomas: Current Management and Future Perspectives

Neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs) are poorly differentiated and highly aggressive epithelial neuroendocrine neoplasms. The most common primary site is the lung, but they may arise in every organ. Approximately 37% of extrapulmonary NECs (EP-NECs) occur in the gastroenteropancreatic (GEP) tract, followed by the genitourinary (GU) system and gynecological tract. As a result of their rarity, there is scant evidence to guide treatment recommendations, and a multidisciplinary approach is essential for the management of such patients. Platinum-based chemotherapy currently represents the standard of care for EP-NECs of any site, mirroring the management of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), but further approaches are still under investigation. Indeed, ongoing trials evaluating targeted therapies, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), and radionuclide therapy could provide potentially breakthrough therapeutic options. Given the relative dearth of evidence-based literature on these orphan diseases, the aim of this review is to provide an overview of the pathology and current treatment options, as well as to shed light on the most pressing unmet needs in the field.

Selection of Chemotherapy in Advanced Poorly Differentiated Extra-Pulmonary Neuroendocrine Carcinoma

Extra-pulmonary poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma is rare, and evidence for treatment has been limited. In this article, the evidence behind the cytotoxic chemotherapy choices used for metastatic or unresectable EP-PD-NEC is reviewed. In the first-line setting, etoposide and platinum chemotherapy or irinotecan and platinum have been demonstrated to be equivalent in a large phase III trial. Questions remain regarding the optimal number of cycles, mode of delivery, and the precise definition of platinum resistance in this setting. In the second-line setting, FOLFIRI has emerged as an option, with randomized phase 2 trials demonstrating modest, but significant, response rates. Beyond this, data are extremely limited, and several regimens have been used. Heterogeneity in biological behaviour is a major barrier to optimal EP-PD-NEC management. Available data support the potential role of the Ki-67 index as a predictive biomarker for chemotherapy response. A more personalised approach to management in future studies will be essential, and comprehensive multi-omic approaches are required to understand tumour somatic genetic changes in relation to their effects on the surrounding microenvironment.

Managing Metastatic Extrapulmonary Neuroendocrine Carcinoma After First-Line Treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Extrapulmonary neuroendocrine carcinoma (EP-NEC) is a rare, aggressive malignancy that can arise from any organ and frequently presents with distant metastases. Advanced disease has a poor prognosis with median overall survival (OS) rarely exceeding 1 year even with systemic therapy. The management paradigm of advanced/metastatic EP-NEC has been extrapolated from small cell lung cancer (SCLC) and commonly consists of 1st line therapy with etoposide and platinum (cisplatin or carboplatin), followed by alternative cytotoxic regimens at the time of progression. Only a minority of patients are able to receive 2nd line therapy, and cytotoxics derived from the SCLC paradigm such as topotecan or lurbinectedin have very limited activity. We aimed to evaluate emerging therapeutic options in the 2nd and later lines and survey potential future developments in this space.

RECENT FINDINGS

After a long period of stagnation in treatment options and outcomes, more promising regimens are gradually being utilized in the 2nd line setting including systemic therapy combinations such as FOLFIRI, FOLFOX, modified FOLFIRINOX, CAPTEM, and, more recently, novel checkpoint inhibitors such as nivolumab and ipilimumab. Simultaneously, advances in the understanding of disease biology are helping to refine patient selection and identify commonalities between NEC and their sites of origin which may eventually lead to additional targeted therapy options. While many questions remain, contemporary developments give grounds for optimism that improved outcomes for EP-NEC will soon be within reach.

SEOM-GETNE clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of gastroenteropancreatic and bronchial neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) (2022)

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are a heterogeneous family of tumors of challenging diagnosis and clinical management. Their incidence and prevalence continue to rise mainly due to an improvement on diagnostic techniques and awareness. Earlier detection, along with steadfast improvements in therapy, has led to better prognosis over time for advanced gastrointestinal and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. The aim of this guideline is to update evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of gastroenteropancreatic and lung NENs. Diagnostic procedures, histological classification, and therapeutic options, including surgery, liver-directed therapy, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy, and systemic hormonal, cytotoxic or targeted therapy, are reviewed and discussed, and treatment algorithms to guide therapeutic decisions are provided.

Potent molecular-targeted therapies for gastro-entero-pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs), which are characterized by neuroendocrine differentiation, can arise in various organs. NENs have been divided into well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) and poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs) based on morphological differentiation, each of which has a distinct etiology, molecular profile, and clinicopathological features. While the majority of NECs originate in the pulmonary organs, extrapulmonary NECs occur most predominantly in the gastro-entero-pancreatic (GEP) system. Although platinum-based chemotherapy is the main therapeutic option for recurrent or metastatic GEP-NEC patients, the clinical benefits are limited and associated with a poor prognosis, indicating the clinically urgent need for effective therapeutic agents. The clinical development of molecular-targeted therapies has been hampered due to the rarity of GEP-NECs and the paucity of knowledge on their biology. In this review, we summarize the biology, current treatments, and molecular profiles of GEP-NECs based on the findings of pivotal comprehensive molecular analyses; we also highlight potent therapeutic targets for future precision medicine based on the most recent results of clinical trials.

Expert Consensus Practice Recommendations of the North American Neuroendocrine Tumor Society for the management of high grade gastroenteropancreatic and gynecologic neuroendocrine neoplasms

High-grade neuroendocrine neoplasms are a rare disease entity and account for approximately 10% of all neuroendocrine neoplasms. Because of their rarity, there is an overall lack of prospectively collected data available to advise practitioners as to how best to manage these patients. As a result, best practices are largely based on expert opinion. Recently, a distinction was made between well-differentiated high-grade (G3) neuroendocrine tumors and poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas, and with this, pathologic details, appropriate imaging practices and treatment have become more complex. In an effort to provide practitioners with the best guidance for the management of patients with high-grade neuroendocrine neoplasms of the gastrointestinal tract, pancreas, and gynecologic system, the North American Neuroendocrine Tumor Society convened a panel of experts to develop a set of recommendations and a treatment algorithm that may be used by practitioners for the care of these patients. Here, we provide consensus recommendations from the panel on pathology, imaging practices, management of localized disease, management of metastatic disease and surveillance and draw key distinctions as to the approach that should be utilized in patients with well-differentiated G3 neuroendocrine tumors vs poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas.

Post-Topotecan Mixed Response and 'Redifferentiation-akin' Phenomenon on Dual Tracer PET-CT in Multiple Treatment-Resistant Metastatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasm

A 50-year-old female patient of heavily pre-treated (chemotherapy and multiple treatment-resistant) and progressive intermediate-grade metastatic neuroendocrine neoplasm is presented, wherein the lesions showed mixed response following topotecan treatment and multiple hepatic metastasis showed increase in the SSTR expression and decrease in FDG concentration on dual-tracer PET/CT ( ⁶⁸ Ga-DOTATATE and ¹⁸ F-FDG PET/CT). Such observation allowed ¹⁷⁷ Lu-DOTATATE PRRT to be considered for an advanced, symptomatic, and multiple treatment-resistant patient with limited palliative treatment options left.

Comparative Outcomes of Second-line Topoisomerase-I Inhibitor Therapies on Neuroendocrine Carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

This investigation aims to assess the outcomes for second-line therapies to treat extrapulmonary neuroendocrine carcinoma (EP-NEC) after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy.

METHODS

With IRB approval, we conducted a retrospective study of EP-NEC patients that progressed on first-line platinum chemotherapy from 2008 to 2018. Demographic data and treatment-related characteristics were collected and represented as descriptive statistics. The primary endpoints include overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). OS and PFS were estimated and stratified by site of primary (gastroenteropancreatic [GEP] versus non-GEP) and type of second-line therapy (irino/topotecan versus others). Log-rank test and Kaplan-Meier curves were used to compare survival distributions between groups.

RESULTS

Forty-seven patients met eligibility, with median age 65 (range 31-82), 62% male, and 83% White; 22 were GEP and 25 were non-GEP primary. Thirty patients (63.8%) received second-line therapy where 11 received irinotecan/topotecan (ir/to), while 19 received other agents (temozolomide, other platinum agents, gemcitabine, paclitaxel, pembrolizumab, and sunitinib). The median OS was 10.3 months in the ir/to group versus 13.4 months for other therapies, p = 0.10. The median PFS for ir/to therapy compared to other therapies was 2.0 months versus 1.8 months, respectively, p = 0.72. The OS and PFS with and without ir/to were not significantly different by the primary site (p = 0.61 and p = 0.21).

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

Many EP-NEC patients undergo second-line therapies. Interestingly, outcomes for ir/to-containing second-line therapies were not statistically different from other agents, regardless of the site of primary. With approval of new second-line therapies for small cell lung cancer, further research in therapeutic options is needed for this aggressive disease.

Bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI after failure of platinum-etoposide first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced neuroendocrine carcinoma (PRODIGE 41-BEVANEC): a randomised, multicentre, non-comparative, open-label, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

There is no standard second-line treatment after platinum-etoposide chemotherapy for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab, and FOLFIRI alone, in this setting.

METHODS

We did a randomised, non-comparative, open-label, phase 2 trial (PRODIGE 41-BEVANEC) at 26 hospitals in France. We included patients aged 18 years or older with locally advanced or metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma or neuroendocrine carcinoma of unknown primary origin, documented progressive disease during or after first-line platinum-etoposide chemotherapy, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1; block size of three), without stratification, to receive FOLFIRI (irinotecan 180 mg/m², calcium folinate 400 mg/m² or levofolinate 200 mg/m², and fluorouracil 400 mg/m² bolus then 2400 mg/m² over 46 h) plus bevacizumab 5 mg/kg or FOLFIRI alone, intravenously, every 2 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was overall survival at 6 months after randomisation, evaluated in the modified intention-to-treat population (all enrolled and randomly assigned patients who received at least one cycle of FOLFIRI). This study is now complete and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02820857.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 5, 2017, and Feb 8, 2022, 150 patients were assessed for eligibility and 133 were enrolled and randomly assigned: 65 to the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group and 68 to the FOLFIRI group. 126 patients (59 in the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group and 67 in the FOLFIRI group) received at least one cycle of FOLFIRI and were included in the modified intention-to-treat population, 83 (66%) of whom were male and 43 (34%) were female, and the median age of the patients was 67 years (IQR 58-73). The primary tumour location was colorectal in 38 (30%) of 126 patients, pancreatic in 34 (27%), gastro-oesophageal in 22 (17%), and unknown in 23 (18%). After a median follow-up of 25·7 months (95% CI 22·0-38·2), 6-month overall survival was 53% (80% CI 43-61) in the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group and 60% (51-68) in the FOLFIRI group. Grade 3-4 adverse events that occurred in at least 5% of patients were neutropenia (eight [14%] patients), diarrhoea (six [10%]), and asthenia (five [8%]) in the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group, and neutropenia (seven [10%]) in the FOLFIRI group. One treatment-related death (ischaemic stroke) occurred in the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group.

INTERPRETATION

The addition of bevacizumab did not seem to increase the benefit of FOLFIRI with regard to overall survival. FOLFIRI could be considered as a standard second-line treatment in patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma.

FUNDING

French Ministry of Health and Roche SAS.

Treatment Approaches and Outcome of Patients with Neuroendocrine Neoplasia Grade 3 in German Real-World Clinical Practice

BACKGROUND

Neuroendocrine neoplasia grade 3 (NEN G3) represents a rare and heterogeneous cancer type with a poor prognosis. The aim of our study was to analyze real-world data from the German NET Registry with a focus on therapeutic and prognostic aspects.

METHODS

NEN G3 patients were identified within the German NET Registry. Demographic data and data on treatments and outcomes were retrieved. Univariate analyses were performed using the Kaplan-Meier-method. Multivariate analysis was performed using a Cox proportional hazard model.

RESULTS

Of 445 included patients, 318 (71.5%) were diagnosed at stage IV. Well-differentiated morphology (NET G3) was described in 31.7%, 60% of cases were classified as neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC), and the median Ki67 value was 50%. First-line treatment comprised chemotherapy in 43.8%, with differences in the choice of regimen with regard to NET or NEC, and surgery in 41.6% of patients. Median overall survival for the entire cohort was 31 months. Stage, performance status and Ki67 were significant prognostic factors in multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The survival data of our national registry compare favorably to population-based data, probably mainly because of a relatively low median Ki67 of 50%. Nevertheless, the best first- and second-line approaches for specific subgroups remain unclear, and an international effort to fill these gaps is needed.

Exploring Real World Outcomes with Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Patients with Metastatic Extra-Pulmonary Neuroendocrine Carcinoma (EP-NEC)

Simple Summary

Extrapulmonary neuroendocrine carcinomas (EP-NEC) are a group of tumors which are often metastatic and characterized by poor outcomes. Platinum-etoposide chemotherapy is the current front-line therapy for metastatic EP-NEC, and has been adapted from small cell lung cancer. There are limited treatment options for patients with platinum-resistant EP-NEC, with no current established second-line standard of care. Recently, there has been mixed evidence for the role of immunotherapy in EP-NEC, with limited existing prospective data. In this multicenter retrospective analysis, we compared outcomes between patients with refractory EP-NEC who received single, dual immune check point inhibitors (ICPIs) and cytotoxic chemotherapy in the second-line setting. This real world experience suggests that utilizing ipilimumab and nivolumab in patients with second-line pretreated EP-NEC may be more effective than other existing treatment options.

Abstract

Background: Dual utilization of the immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPIs) nivolumab plus ipilimumab has demonstrated clinical promise in the treatment of patients with refractory high-grade neuroendocrine neo-plasms (NENs) in phase II clinical trials (DART SWOG 1609 and CA209), while single agent ICPIs have largely been ineffective for these types of tumors. While both trials demonstrated promising results in high grade NENs, there was no adequate description of the association between tumor differentiation (high-grade well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor vs poorly-differentiated extra-pulmonary neuroendocrine carcinoma (EP-NEC) and ICPI outcomes in the DART SWOG 1609 trial. Our study reports on the effectiveness and toxicity profile of dual ICPIs in a real world second-line EP-NEC patient population. Methods: Data on metastatic EP-NEC patients, treated with either ICPIs (single and dual ICPIs) or chemo-therapy in the second-line setting, were retrieved from databases of three comprehensive cancer centers. Associations between treatment characteristics and outcomes, including progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), were evaluated. Results: From 2007 to 2020, we identified 70 patients with metastatic EP-NEC (predominantly of gastro-enteropancreatic origin), of whom 42 patients (23 males, 19 females, median age 62 years old) were eligible for the final analysis. All patients were refractory to platinum etoposide doublet chemotherapy in the first-line setting. The median PFS for patients who received dual ICPIs (11 patients), single agent ICPI (8 patients), and cytotoxic chemotherapy (23 patients) was 258 days, 56.5 days, and 47 days, respectively (p = 0.0001). Median overall survival (OS) for those groups was not reached (NR), 18.7 months, and 10.5 months, respectively (p = 0.004). There were no significant differences in treatment outcomes in patients according to tumor mismatch repair (MMR) or tumor mutational burden (TMB) status. Grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs) were reported in 11.1% of the patients who received dual ICPIs; however, none of these AEs led to permanent treatment discontinuation. Conclusions: In the second-line setting, patients with EP-NECs treated with dual ICPIs (nivolumab plus ipilimumab) experienced improved PFS and OS compared to patients treated with single agent ICPI or cytotoxic chemotherapy. These results echo some of the current evidence for ICPIs in grade 3 NENs and need to be validated in future prospective studies.

Surgery in Patients with Gastro-Entero-Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Carcinomas, Neuroendocrine Tumors G3 and High Grade Mixed Neuroendocrine-Non-Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

OPINION STATEMENT

In the 2019 WHO guidelines, the classification of gastro-entero-pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP NEN) has changed from one being based on Ki-67 proliferation index alone to one that also includes tumor differentiation. Consequently, GEP NENs are now classified as well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor (NET), NET G1 (Ki-67 <3%), NET G2 (Ki-67 3-20%) and NET G3 (Ki-67 >20%), and poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) (Ki-67 >20%). It has been suggested that NET G3 should be treated as NET G2 with respect to surgery, while surgical management of NEC should be expanded from local disease to also include patients with advanced disease where curative surgery is possible. High grade mixed neuroendocrine-non-neuroendocrine neoplasms (MiNEN) have a neuroendocrine and a non-neuroendocrine component mostly with a poor prognosis. All studies evaluating the effect of surgery in NEC and MiNEN are observational and hold a risk of selection bias, which may overestimate the beneficial effect of surgery. Further, only a few studies on the effect of surgery in MiNEN exist. This review aims to summarize the data on the outcome of surgery in patients with GEP NET G3, GEP NEC and high grade MiNEN. The current evidence suggests that patients with NEN G3 and localized disease and NEN G3 patients with metastatic disease where curative surgery can be achieved may benefit from surgery. In patients with MiNEN, it is currently not possible to evaluate on the potential beneficial effect of surgery due to the low number of studies.

Systemic Treatment of Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Carcinoma

OPINION STATEMENT

Treatment recommendations for advanced gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinomas (GEP-NEC) are based on uncontrolled, mainly retrospective data. Chemotherapy can offer palliative relief, but long-lasting complete responses or cures are rare. The European Neuroendocrine Tumour Society (ENETS) and European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) recommend platinum-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment. This has been the golden standard since the late 1980s and has been evaluated in mostly retrospective clinical studies. However, progression is inevitable for most patients. Unfortunately, data on effective second-line treatment options are scant, and ENETS and ESMO recommendations propose fluorouracil- or temozolomide-based chemotherapy schedules. As such, there is a huge unmet need for improved care. Improved knowledge on GEP-NEC biology may provide a pathway towards more effective interventions including chemotherapy, targeted gene therapy, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy, as well as immune checkpoint inhibitors. The review summarises this current state of the art as well as the most promising developments for systemic therapy in GEP-NEC patients.

Phase II study of temozolomide monotherapy in patients with extrapulmonary neuroendocrine carcinoma

Extrapulmonary neuroendocrine carcinoma (EPNEC) is a lethal disease with a poor prognosis. Platinum-based chemotherapy is used as the standard first-line treatment for unresectable EPNEC. Several retrospective studies have reported the results of the utilization of temozolomide (TMZ) as a drug for the second-line treatment for EPNEC. Patients with unresectable EPNEC that were resistant to platinum-based combination chemotherapy were recruited for a prospective phase II study of TMZ monotherapy. A 200 mg/m2 dose of TMZ was given from day 1 to day 5, every 4 weeks. Response rate (RR) was evaluated as the primary end-point. The presence of O6 -methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) in EPNEC patients was also evaluated as exploratory research. Thirteen patients were enrolled in this study. Primary lesions were pancreas (n = 3), stomach (n = 3), duodenum (n = 1), colon (n = 1), gallbladder (n = 1), liver (n = 1), uterus (n = 1), bladder (n = 1), and primary unknown (n = 1). Each case was defined as pathological poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma from surgically resected and/or biopsied specimens. The median Ki-67 labeling index was 60% (range, 22%-90%). The RR was 15.4%, progression-free survival was 1.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0-2.7), overall survival (OS) was 7.8 months (95% CI, 6.0-9.5), and OS from first-line treatment was 19.2 months (95% CI, 15.1-23.3). No grade 3 or 4 hematological toxicity had occurred and there was one case of grade 3 nausea. One case presented MGMT deficiency and this case showed partial response. Temozolomide monotherapy is a feasible, modestly effective, and safe treatment for patients with unresectable EPNEC following platinum-based chemotherapy, especially those with MGMT deficiency.

Second-line treatment in patients with advanced extra-pulmonary poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is no standard second-line treatment for patients with advanced extra-pulmonary poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma (EP-PD-NEC). This study explored data evaluating second-line treatment in these patients.

METHODS

A search of MEDLINE and EMBASE identified studies reporting survival and/or response data for patients with EP-PD-NEC receiving second-line therapy. Association between various factors (age, gender, ECOG performance status, primary tumour location, morphology, Ki-67, treatment and grade 3/4 haematological toxicity) and response rate (RR), progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed with a mixed effects meta-regression weighted by individual study sample size. Due to a small sample size, associations were reported quantitatively, based on magnitude of beta coefficient rather than statistical significance.

RESULTS

Of 83 identified studies, 19 were eligible, including 4 prospective and 15 retrospective studies. Analysis comprised 582 patients, with a median number of 19 patients in each study (range 5-100). Median age was 59 years (range 53-66). Median RR was 18% (range 0-50; 0% for single-agent everolimus, temozolomide, topotecan; 50% with amrubicin), median PFS was 2.5 months (range 1.15-6.0) and median OS was 7.64 months (range 3.2-22.0). Studies with a higher proportion of patients with a Ki-67>55% had lower RR (β = -0.73) and shorter OS (β = -0.82).

CONCLUSION

Second-line therapy for patients with advanced EP-PD-NEC has limited efficacy and the variety of regimens used is diverse. Ki-67>55% is associated with worse outcomes. Prospective randomised studies are warranted to enable exploration of new treatment strategies.

Efficacy of Second-Line Chemotherapy in Extrapulmonary Neuroendocrine Carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

A platinum/etoposide doublet is standard first-line therapy for poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma (PD NEC); however, evidence to guide treatment beyond first-line regimens is lacking. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of second-line regimens in PD NEC.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of patients treated with second-line chemotherapy for PD NEC. Inclusion criteria were previous first-line therapy with platinum/etoposide, extrapulmonary PD NEC, and follow-up data. The primary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) after second-line therapy. Secondary end points included OS and PFS from first-line therapy.

RESULTS

Sixty-four patients were included. The median OS from initiation of second-line therapy was 6.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.9-8.9). The median PFS was 2.3 months (95% CI, 2.0-3.2). No second-line regimen showed a statistically significant difference in OS or PFS. There was a significant increase in OS for cisplatin first-line regimens compared with carboplatin (17.0 months [95% CI, 12.5-22.6] vs 11.7 months [95% CI, 8.0-14.0]).

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of current second-line therapy in PD NEC is poor. No second-line regimen showed statistically significant superiority. Cisplatin was associated with longer OS regardless of second-line regimen or age. However, unmeasured confounders such as performance status or comorbidities may explain this effect.

An Open-Label, Single-Arm, Two-Stage, Multicenter, Phase II Study to Evaluate the Efficacy of TLC388 and Genomic Analysis for Poorly Differentiated Neuroendocrine Carcinomas

BACKGROUND

The discovery of effective therapeutic options for treating metastatic poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) after prior platinum-based chemotherapy remains elusive. This study analyzed the efficacy of TLC388 (Lipotecan) Hydrochloride, a novel camptothecin analog, for pretreated patients with metastatic NEC.

METHODS

This single-arm, two-stage, phase II clinical trial was conducted at four community and academic centers in Taiwan. Patients aged 20 years or older with confirmed metastatic NEC and who had received prior systemic therapy with etoposide plus cisplatin were enrolled between July 2015 and May 2018. Patients received 40 mg/m² of TLC388 intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects. Gene mutations were analyzed by next-generation sequencing.

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients with a median age of 61 (range, 44-73) years, 18 of whom were men (78%), were enrolled. Patients received a median of 2 (range, 0-6) treatment cycles. Among 20 evaluable patients, 3 patients exhibited stable disease and no patient experienced a complete or partial remission, resulting in a disease control rate of 15%. Median progression-free survival was 1.8 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.4-15) months, and the median overall survival was 4.3 (95% CI, 1.7-15) months. The most common treatment-related hematologic adverse events at grade 3 or higher were leukopenia (22.7%), anemia (31.8%), and thrombocytopenia (18.2%). The most frequent mutated genes in 35 patients with NEC were ARSA, DPYD, HEXB, BRCA1, HPD, MYBPC3, BBS2, IL7R, HSD17B4, and PRODH.

CONCLUSION

TLC388 demonstrates limited antitumor activity in metastatic NEC. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02457273.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs) are rare and aggressive. Currently, effective therapeutic options for treating metastatic poorly differentiated NECs beyond platinum-based chemotherapy remain elusive. In this single-arm, multicenter, phase II study, 23 patients with NEC were enrolled and received TLC388 (Lipotecan) Hydrochloride, which is a novel camptothecin analog. The results demonstrated the disease control rate of 15%, the median progression-free survival of 1.8 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.4-15) months, and the median overall survival of 4.3 (95% CI, 1.7-15) months. Most importantly, several novel genetic mutations and pathways were identified. These results offer the opportunity to develop future treatment strategies in this rare cancer.

A Rare Case of Mixed Adenoneuroendocrine Carcinoma (MANEC) of the Gastroesophageal Junction with HER2/neu Overexpression and Distinct Orbital and Optic Nerve Toxicity after Intravenous Administration of Cisplatin

BACKGROUND

Mixed adenoneuroendocrine carcinomas (MANECs) are rare malignancies with both neuroendocrine and non-neuroendocrine components. To date, the prognosis of gastroenteropancreatic MANECs remains dismal, and treatment options are mainly based on guidelines for the treatment of pure neuroendocrine carcinomas or small cell lung cancer. Established first-line therapy in the metastatic situation is cisplatin and etoposide. Platinum derivatives are known to cause a variety of side effects also involving the visual system. Severe orbital and optic nerve toxicities have been described mainly after intracarotid infusion of cisplatin.

CASE REPORT

Herein we report a rare case of a 60-year-old male patient suffering from MANEC of the gastroesophageal junction with HER2/neu overexpression who developed severe orbital and ocular neurotoxicity (grade 3 according to CTCAE v4.03) after intravenous cisplatin.

CONCLUSION

We discuss diagnostic approaches and differential diagnoses in this clinical situation. Before starting treatment with intravenous and topical steroids, it is crucial to rule out meningeal and cerebral spread as well as paraneoplastic and endocrine syndromes.

Clinical characteristics, treatment outcomes and potential novel therapeutic options for patients with neuroendocrine carcinoma of the prostate

Background

Neuroendocrine carcinomas of the prostate (NEPCs) are rare tumors with poor prognosis. While platinum and etoposide-based chemotherapy regimens (PE) are commonly applied in first-line for advanced disease, evidence for second-line therapy and beyond is very limited.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of all patients with NEPCs including mixed differentiation with adenocarcinoma component and well differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (NETs, carcinoids) at two high-volume oncological centers between 12/2000 and 11/2017.

Results

Of 46 identified patients 39.1 % had a prior diagnosis of prostatic adenocarcinoma only, 43.5 % had a mixed differentiation at NEPC diagnosis, 67.4 % developed visceral metastases, 10.9 % showed paraneoplastic syndromes. Overall survival (OS) from NEPC diagnosis was 15.5 months, and significantly shorter in patients with a prior prostatic adenocarcinoma (5.4 vs. 32.7 months, p=0.005). 34 patients received palliative first-line systemic therapy with a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 6.6 months, mostly PE. Overall response rate (ORR) for PE was 48.1 %. 19 patients received second-line therapy, mostly with poor responses. Active regimens were topotecan (1 PR, 3 PD), enzalutamide (1 SD), abiraterone (1 SD), FOLFIRI (1 SD), and ipilimumab+nivolumab (1 PR). One patient with prostatic carcinoid was sequentially treated with octreotide, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy and everolimus, and survived for over 9 years.

Conclusions

EP in first-line shows notable ORR, however limited PFS. For second-line therapy, topotecan, FOLFIRI, enzalutamide, abiraterone and immune checkpoint blockade are treatment options. Prostatic carcinoids can be treated in analogy to well differentiated gastrointestinal NETs.

Evaluating bevacizumab in combination with FOLFIRI after the failure of platinum-etoposide regimen in patients with advanced poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma: The PRODIGE 41-BEVANEC randomized phase II study

INTRODUCTION

Patients with gastroenteropancreatic (GEP), metastatic or locally advanced, non-resectable, grade 3 poorly-differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) are treated with cisplatin (or carboplatin)-etoposide in first-line palliative chemotherapy (CT1). However, nearly all patients will develop resistance and there is no standard second-line treatment.

AIM

PRODIGE 41-BEVANEC is an academic randomized, phase II study designed to evaluate the efficacy of bevacizumab in combination with FOLFIRI after failure of CT1 in unknown primary NEC and GEP-NEC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The main eligibility criteria are age ≥18 years, metastatic (synchronous or metachronous) or locally advanced, non-resectable, grade 3 GEP-NEC, and documented progressive disease during or after CT1 therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 124 patients will be randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either 5 mg/kg bevacizumab with FOLFIRI, or FOLFIRI alone, every 14 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The hypothesis is to demonstrate a 6-month overall survival for at least 50% of the patients in bevacizumab arm versus 35% in the control arm (FOLFIRI alone). Secondary endpoints are objective response, response duration, progression-free survival, toxicity, and biochemical response.

CONCLUSION

The study is currently opened in France (NCT02820857). The first patient was randomized on September 6, 2017.

Efficacy of topotecan in pretreated metastatic poorly differentiated extrapulmonary neuroendocrine carcinoma

Therapeutic options for metastatic poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) after prior platinum-based chemotherapy are limited. Topotecan is an approved second-line chemotherapy for small cell lung cancer (SCLC). NEC is often considered to show a biological behavior similar to SCLC. The aim of this study was to analyze the efficacy of topotecan in pretreated metastatic NEC patients. We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients treated with topotecan for metastatic NEC who presented at our center between January 2005 and December 2014 (n = 30). All 30 patients had received at least a platinum and etoposide containing regimen as prior chemotherapy. Median proliferation rate (Ki67) was 80%. As best response to topotecan five patients showed a stable disease, two patients a partial remission, resulting in a disease control rate of 23%. Of the remaining 23 patients, 14 (47%) showed a progressive disease, nine (30%) died before radiologic response could be evaluated. Median progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) after start of topotecan was 2.1 and 4.1 months, respectively. In the subgroup analysis, patients with unknown primary (vs. those with a known primary) showed a significantly prolonged PFS of 3.5 months (vs. 1.9, P = 0.0107) and OS of 6.7 months (vs. 2.6 months, P = 0.0168). Grade 3/4 hematotoxicity was observed in 60% of patients. Topotecan shows only moderate antitumor activity in metastatic NEC. Disease control rate is lower than reported for SCLC. However, antitumor activity of topotecan seems higher in patients with unknown primary.