Expression of Somatostatin Receptor Type 2A and PTEN in Neuroendocrine Neoplasms Is Associated with Tumor Grade but Not with Site of Origin

Net theranostics

Theranostics is a term coined by combining the words “therapeutics” and “diagnostics,” referring to single chemical entities developed to deliver therapy and diagnosis simultaneously. Neuroendocrine tumors are rare cancers that occur in various organs of the body, and they express neuroendocrine factors such as chromogranin A and somatostatin receptor. Somatostatin analogs bind to somatostatin receptor, and when combined with diagnostic radionuclides, such as gamma‐emitters, are utilized for diagnosis of neuroendocrine tumor. Somatostatin receptor scintigraphy when combined with therapeutic radionuclides, such as beta‐emitters, are effective in treating neuroendocrine tumor as peptide receptor radionuclide therapy. Somatostatin receptor scintigraphy and peptide receptor radionuclide therapy are some of the most frequently used and successful theranostics for neuroendocrine tumor. In Japan, radiopharmaceuticals are regulated under a complex law system, creating a significant drug lag, which is a major public concern. It took nearly 10 years to obtain the approval for somatostatin receptor scintigraphy and peptide receptor radionuclide therapy use by the Japanese government. In 2021, ¹¹¹Lu‐DOTATATE (Lutathera), a drug for peptide receptor radionuclide therapy, was covered by insurance in Japan. In this review, we summarize the history of the development of neuroendocrine tumor theranostics and theranostics in general, as therapeutic treatment for cancer in the future. Furthermore, we briefly address the Japanese point of view regarding the development of new radiopharmaceuticals.

Antagonizing somatostatin receptor subtype 2 and 5 reduces blood glucose in a gut- and GLP-1R-dependent manner

Somatostatin (SS) inhibits glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) secretion in a paracrine manner. We hypothesized that blocking somatostatin subtype receptor 2 (SSTR2) and 5 (SSTR5) would improve glycemia by enhancing GLP-1 secretion. In the perfused mouse small intestine, the selective SSTR5 antagonist (SSTR5a) stimulated glucose-induced GLP-1 secretion to a larger degree than the SSTR2 antagonist (SSTR2a). In parallel, mice lacking the SSTR5R showed increased glucose-induced GLP-1 secretion. Both antagonists improved glycemia in vivo in a GLP-1 receptor-dependent (GLP-1R-dependent) manner, as the glycemic improvements were absent in mice with impaired GLP-1R signaling and in mice treated with a GLP-1R-specific antagonist. SSTR5a had no direct effect on insulin secretion in the perfused pancreas, whereas SSTR2a increased insulin secretion in a GLP-1R-independent manner. Adding a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor (DPP-4i) in vivo resulted in additive effects on glycemia. However, when glucose was administered intraperitoneally, the antagonist was incapable of lowering blood glucose. Oral administration of SSTR5a, but not SSTR2a, lowered blood glucose in diet-induced obese mice. In summary, we demonstrate that selective SSTR antagonists can improve glucose control primarily through the intestinal GLP-1 system in mice.

Pathology Reporting in Neuroendocrine Neoplasms of the Digestive System: Everything You Always Wanted to Know but Were Too Afraid to Ask

During the 5th NIKE (Neuroendocrine tumors Innovation in Knowledge and Education) meeting, held in Naples, Italy, in May 2019, discussions centered on the understanding of pathology reports of gastroenetropancreactic neuroendocrine neoplasms. In particular, the main problem concerned the difficulty that clinicians experience in extrapolating relevant information from neuroendocrine tumor pathology reports. During the meeting, participants were asked to identify and rate issues which they have encountered, for which the input of an expert pathologist would have been appreciated. This article is a collection of the most rated questions and relative answers, focusing on three main topics: 1) morphology and classification; 2) Ki67 and grading; 3) immunohistochemistry. Patient management should be based on multidisciplinary decisions, taking into account clinical and pathology-related features with clear comprehension between all health care professionals. Indeed, pathologists require clinical details and laboratory findings when relevant, while clinicians require concise and standardized reports. In keeping with this last statement, the minimum requirements in pathology datasets are provided in this paper and should be a baseline for all neuroendocrine tumor professionals.

Different somatostatin and CXCR4 chemokine receptor expression in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms depending on their origin

Somatostatin receptors (SST), especially SST2A, are known for their overexpression in well-differentiated gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NEN). The chemokine receptor CXCR4, in contrast, is considered to be present mainly in highly proliferative and advanced tumors. However, comprehensive data are still lacking on potential differences in SST or CXCR4 expression pattern in GEP-NEN in dependence on the place of origin. Overall, 412 samples from 165 GEP-NEN patients, comprising both primary tumors (PT) and metastases (MTS), originating from different parts of the gastrointestinal tract or the pancreas were evaluated for SST and CXCR4 expression by means of immunohistochemistry using monoclonal antibodies. SST2A was present in 85% of PT with a high intensity of expression, followed by SST5 (23%), CXCR4 (21%), SST3 (10%), SST1 (9%), and SST4 (4%). PT displayed higher SST2A and chromogranin A (CgA) expression levels than MTS. In both PT and MTS lower SST2A and CgA expression levels were found in tumors originating from the appendix or colon, compared to tumors from other origins. Tumors derived from appendix or colon were associated with significantly worse patient outcomes. Positive correlations were noted between SST2A and CgA as well as between CXCR4 and Ki-67 expression levels. SST2A and CgA negativity of the tumors was significantly associated with poor patient outcomes. All in all, SST2A was the most prominent receptor expressed in the GEP-NEN samples investigated. However, expression levels varied considerably depending on the location of the primary tumor.

Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma Shares Similarity with Small Cell Carcinoma on the Basis of Clinical and Pathological Features

BACKGROUND: Large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) was categorized into pulmonary neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) according to the World Health Organization classification guideline. However, LCNEC patients often received the chemotherapy regimens similar to non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) in advanced stage and the therapeutic effect was unsatisfactory. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the hidden clinical features, prognosis and immunoprofile of the LCNEC, compared with carcinoid and SCLC, to explore whether LCNEC shares similarity with SCLC and potential treatment approaches could be revealed. METHODS: One hundred seventeen pulmonary NETs cases were retrospectively retrieved in this study. The Kaplan–Meier estimator was employed to draw survival curves. Immunohistochemistry was applied to detect NET-related markers expression. RESULTS: In clinical features, compared with carcinoid, LCNEC patients were older, more commonly in male and advanced stage. The parallel phenomena were also found in the high-grade subgroup when compared with the low- to intermediate-grade one. In survival analysis, the 5-year overall survival of LCNECs was 59.1%, which was poorer than that of carcinoids, but better than that of SCLCs. Immunohistochemistry showed that p53 and PTEN functional inactivation, up-regulation of CD117 expression, down-regulation of SSR2A and SSR5 expression were commonly involved in LCNECs when compared with carcinoids, or in the high-grade subgroup when compared with the low- to intermediate-grade one. However, no significant difference was found in the comparison between LCNECs and SCLCs, or NSCLCs and SCLCs. CONCLUSION: In clinical features, survival and immunoprofile, LCNEC showed more similarity with SCLC rather than carcinoid, which might guide novel therapy for pulmonary NETs.

Neuroendrocrine tumors of the uterine cervix: A therapeutic challenge for gynecologic oncologists

Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are aggressive diseases developing from neuroendocrine cells that most frequently involve the gastro-entero-pancreatic tract and the lung, but more rarely are found in almost all body tissues. Limited biological and clinical data are currently available for NETs in uncommon sites, such as female genital tract. NETs represent 0.9% to 1.5% of the tumors of the uterine cervix. They are more likely to have lymph-vascular space invasion and lymph node involvement, and to develop local and distant relapses when compared with the mostly common cervical squamous cell carcinomas or adenocarcinomas. Positive immunostaining for synaptophysin, chromogranin, CD56, and neuron-specific enolase is often detected in cervical NETs . The most recent editions of the World Health Organization Classification of Gynecologic Tract tumors grouped cervical carcinoid tumor and atypical carcinoid tumor into low-grade NETs and cervical small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma and large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma into high-grade NETs. High-risk HPV DNA is detected in almost all cervical high-grade NETs. No treatment guidelines, based on prospective, well-designed clinical trials, are currently available due to the rarity of these tumors. Many authors have reported different multimodality approaches, mainly derived from NETs of the lung. These usually consist in radical hysterectomy followed by adjuvant chemotherapy or concurrent chemoradiation for early stage disease, definitive concurrent chemoradiation sometimes preceded by neoadjuvant chemotherapy and followed by adjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced disease, and palliative chemotherapy for metastatic disease. In this systematic review, we address the histologic classification of cervical NETs, analyze their pathogenesis and overall prognosis, and evaluate the different treatment modalities described in the literature, in order to offer a possible algorithm that may help the clinicians in diagnosing and treating patients with these uncommon and aggressive malignancies.