Challenges in High-grade Neuroendocrine Neoplasms and Mixed Neuroendocrine/Non-neuroendocrine Neoplasms

Venous Thromboembolism in Patients with Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: A Systematic Review of Incidence, Types, and Clinical Outcomes

Background: Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are a heterogeneous group of tumors with unique biological characteristics and complications, including thromboembolism. This systematic review evaluates the incidence, types, and clinical outcomes of venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) in NEN patients. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, and Embase was conducted to identify studies on TEs in NENs. Eligible studies included case reports, case series, and retrospective cohort studies reporting VTEs, including deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), and visceral vein thrombosis (VVT). Data were extracted on tumor site, functionality, differentiation grade, and VTE type. Results: In total, 33 studies were included, comprising 26 case reports, 2 case series, and 5 retrospective cohort studies. VTE prevalence ranged from 7.5% to 33% across studies. The most common VTEs were DVT, PE, and portal vein thrombosis (PVT). A meta-analysis revealed a pooled VTE prevalence of 11.1% (95% CI: 9.07-13.53%). Pancreatic NENs exhibited the highest thrombotic burden, particularly in poorly differentiated and advanced-stage tumors. Functioning tumors, including glucagonomas and ACTH-secreting NENs, were strongly associated with VTEs, potentially related to their systemic effects on coagulation and inflammation. Conclusions: Venous thromboembolism is a significant complication in NEN patients, especially in advanced or poorly differentiated tumors. Early detection and targeted management are critical for improving outcomes. Further investigations are required to clarify the mechanisms underlying thromboembolism in NENs and to develop optimized prophylactic and therapeutic strategies tailored to this patient population.

Mixed neuroendocrine non-neuroendocrine tumors: The quest for evidence

Mixed neuroendocrine non-neuroendocrine neoplasms (MiNENs) are rare mixed tumors containing both neuroendocrine and non-neuroendocrine components that occupy at least 30% of the whole tumor. Biologically, both components appear to derive from an identical cellular precursor undergoing early dual differentiation or late transdifferentiation. While our understanding of MiNENs has improved in recent years, many areas of uncertainty remain. In this context, setting diagnostic criteria capable of capturing the continuum of disease biology while providing clinically meaningful information in terms of prognosis and response to treatments appears vital to advance the field and improve patients' outcomes. Evidence is needed to generate robust classification schemes, and multi-institutional cooperation will likely play a crucial role in building adequately powered cohorts to address some of the most pressing questions discussed in this Editorial. What is the minimum representation for each component needed to define MiNENs? How can the epidemiology of MiNENs change according to different diagnostic definitions? How can we generate the clinical evidence needed to optimize the management of MiNENs?

[Neuroendocrine carcinomas of the gastrointestinal tract : Morphology, molecular pathology, cellular origin]

Neuroendocrine carcinomas (NEC) are poorly differentiated neuroendocrine neoplasms that can occur ubiquitously in the mucosa-bearing organs of the gastrointestinal tract. Based on their morphology, they are classified into large cell (LCNEC) and small cell NEC (SCNEC). The most common form of mixed differentiation is the combination with an adenocarcinoma, referred to as mixed adenoneuroendocrine carcinoma (MANEC). NEC/MANEC exhibit a significantly poorer prognosis than the adenocarcinomas of their respective primary sites, which is inextricably linked to their typical histomorphology. Adenocarcinomas with aberrant expression of neuroendocrine markers do not show a worse clinical course. Molecularly, NEC/MANEC have a profile comparable to the adenocarcinomas of their site of origin and a profile divergent from neuroendocrine tumors. Analyses of gastric NEC/MANEC have shown frequent MYC amplifications, which are reflected in MYC signatures in various transcriptome analyses.The cellular origin of NEC remains a subject of controversial discussion. New insights are provided by a MYC-driven, genetically modified mouse model that led to the development of large gastric tumors. These tumors were histologically identified as LCNEC and were accompanied by both neuroendocrine and non-neuroendocrine precursor lesions. Using immunofluorescence, a derivation from resident neuroendocrine cells in the gastric corpus was demonstrated, suggesting that at least a portion of LCNEC may originate directly from neuroendocrine cells.

Diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers for pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms

This review examines the diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers for pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (PanNENs), a heterogeneous group of tumors with expression of neuroendocrine markers. PanNENs include both well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNETs) and poorly differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinomas (PanNECs). The diagnosis is confirmed through markers such as chromogranin A, synaptophysin, and INSM1, which establish neuroendocrine differentiation. The World Health Organization classification categorizes PanNENs based on tumor differentiation and proliferative activity (Ki-67 and/or mitotic index) into well-differentiated PanNETs (grade 1 to grade 3) and poorly differentiated PanNECs. In most cases, the morphology and proliferation index are sufficient to distinguish PanNETs from PanNECs. However, distinguishing grade 3 PanNETs from PanNECs can be challenging on the basis of morphology and proliferative activity alone. Additional key diagnostic markers for distinguishing grade 3 PanNET from PanNEC include SSTR2A expression and molecular immunohistochemical markers such as p53, Rb1, menin, ATRX, and DAXX. PanNECs are by definition high-grade tumors with highly aggressive clinical behavior, while PanNETs have a variable prognosis that is difficult to predict using current biomarkers such as tumor grade and size. Several studies have shown that ATRX or DAXX loss is strongly associated with a higher risk of PanNET metastasis and recurrence. They are therefore key prognostic markers in PanNETs. In addition, chromosomal copy number variations can further help assess PanNET aggressiveness and prognosis. Molecular profiling is increasingly important for improving the diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of PanNENs.

Subgrading of G2 Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors as 2A (Ki67 3% to < 10%) Versus 2B (10% to ≤ 20%) Identifies Behaviorally Distinct Subsets in Keeping with the Evolving Management Protocols

BACKGROUND

Grade 1/2 PanNETs are mostly managed similarly, typically without any adjunct treatment with the belief that their overall metastasis rate is low. In oncology literature, Ki67-index of 10% is increasingly being used as the cutoff in stratifying patients to different protocols, although there are no systematic pathology-based studies supporting this approach.

METHODS

Ki67-index was correlated with clinicopathologic parameters in 190 resected PanNETs. A validation cohort (n = 145) was separately analyzed.

RESULTS

In initial cohort, maximally selected rank statistics method revealed 12% to be the discriminatory cutoff (close to 10% rule of thumb). G2b cases had liver/distant metastasis rate of almost threefold higher than that of G2a and showed significantly higher frequency of all histopathologic signs of aggressiveness (tumor size, perineural/vascular invasion, infiltrative growth pattern, lymph node metastasis). In validation cohort, these figures were as striking. When all cases were analyzed together, compared with G1, the G2b category had nine times higher liver/distant metastasis rate (6.1 vs. 58.5%; p < 0.001) and three times higher lymph node metastasis rate (20.5 vs. 65.1%; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

G2b PanNETs act very similar to G3, supporting management protocols that regard them as potential therapy candidates. Concerning local management, metastatic behavior in G2b cases indicate they may not be as amenable for conservative approaches, such as watchful waiting or enucleation. This substaging should be considered into diagnostic guidelines, and clinical trials need to be devised to determine the more appropriate management protocols for G2b (10% to ≤ 20%) group, which shows liver/distant metastasis in more than half of the cases, which at minimum warrants closer follow-up.

The Driver Role of Pathologists in Endocrine Oncology: What Clinicians Seek in Pathology Reports

Endocrine neoplasia represents an increasingly broad spectrum of disorders. Endocrine neoplasms range from incidental findings to potentially lethal malignancies. In this paper, we cover the impact of pathology in the interpretation of the clinic-pathological, genetic, and radiographic features underpinning these neoplasms. We highlight the critical role of multidisciplinary interactions in structuring a rational diagnostic and efficient therapeutic plan and emphasize the role of histopathological input in decision-making. In this context, standardized pathology reporting and second opinion endocrine pathology review represent relevant tools to improve the overall diagnostic workup of patients affected by endocrine tumors in every specific scenario. In fact, although a relevant proportion of cases may be correctly identified based on clinical presentation and biochemical/imaging investigations, a subset of cases presents with atypical findings that may lead to an inappropriate diagnosis and treatment plan based on a wrong pathological diagnosis if all pieces of the puzzle are not correctly considered. Pathologists have a responsibility to actively guide clinicians before and during surgical procedures to prevent unnecessary interventions. In all areas of endocrine pathology, pathologists must understand the complexity of tissue preservation and assay sensitivities and specificities to ensure the optimal quality and interpretation of diagnostic material. Finally, pathologists are central actors in tumor tissue biobanking, which is an expanding field in oncology that should be promoted while adhering to strict ethical and methodological standards.

Updates in histopathological classification and tissue biomarkers of digestive neuroendocrine neoplasms: What the clinician should know

Histopathological classifications of neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN) change regularly and the latest WHO classification published in 2022, which concerns all NEN in the body, attempts to standardize classifications in the different locations. Differentiation and proliferation mainly assessed by Ki-67 index are still the cornerstone of those classifications. However, many markers are now used for diagnostic (to check neuroendocrine differentiation, to identify the site of origin of a metastasis, to help separating high-grade neuroendocrine tumors/NET and neuroendocrine carcinoma/NEC), prognostic or theranostic purposes. NENs are often heterogeneous and this can lead to difficulties in classifications, biomarker and prognostic assessment. These different points are discussed successively in this review, insisting especially on the frequent digestive, gastro-entero-pancreatic (GEP) localizations.

Digestive MiNENs: Could histological classification and molecular characterization drive clinical outcome and therapeutic approach?

Mixed neuroendocrine-non-neuroendocrine neoplasms (MiNENs) are epithelial neoplasms in which neuroendocrine and non-neuroendocrine discrete components are combined, each of which constitutes ≥ 30% of the neoplasm. The finding of an additional neuroendocrine component seems to characterize the tumor's biological behavior. Few studies have proved MiNENs histogenetic and molecular characterization, and the development of molecular markers for more accurate classification of MiNENs represents a clinical need. However, a common origin of the neuroendocrine and non-neuroendocrine components from a pluripotent cancer stem cell could be suggested. The optimal clinical management of MiNENS is largely unknown. Whenever feasible, curative-intent resection should be performed for localized disease; in advanced disease, the treatment should be targeted to the component responsible for the metastatic spreading. This paper provides a revision of the current knowledge on MiNENs, focusing on available evidence about their molecular characterization to suggest a prognostic stratification of these rare forms.

A rare clinical case of a patient with mixed neuroendocrine-non-neuroendocrine neoplasms of the ampulla of vater

Background. Neuroendocrine tumors are rare neoplasias accounting for 1 % of all digestive malignancies. In 2010, mixed neuroendocrine-non-neuroendocrine neoplasms (MiNENs) were classified by the World Health Organization This type of tumor is extremely rare and most commonly occurs in the appendix, colon, and rectum. To date, only 30 clinical cases of MINEN of the major duodenal papilla (MDP) have been described in the available world literature, while we have not found a description of this pathology in the domestic literature.

Description of the clinical case. We present a case of a 64-year-old male patient with MiNEN MDP. The first clinical manifestation of the disease was obstructive jaundice. To eliminate the jaundice, papillosphincterotomy, transpapillary stenting of the choledochus with a plastic stent was performed. MDP tumor was verifed as adenocarcinoma by histological examination. The patient underwent gastropancreatoduodenal resection. Postoperative immunohistochemical examination showed the expression of antibodies in tumor cells: Synaptophysin (clone 27G12) +++, Chromogranin A (5H7) +, CD 57 (NK-1) ++, Ki 67 (Mib 1) 80 %.

Conclusion: mixed neuroendocrine (G3) non-neuroendocrine carcinoma (G2) of the major duodenal papilla with growth within the wall of the duodenum; metastases of the neuroendocrine component in three lymph nodes, adenocarcinoma metastasis in 1 out of 15 lymph nodes examined; pT2N2M0, MiNEN high grade (classified by S. La Rosa). Conclusion. Mixed neuroendocrine-non-neuroendocrine tumors of MDP are an extremely rare pathology. The accuracy of preoperative morphological diagnostics is not high, therefore, this diagnosis can be easily missed at the preoperative stage. In the morphological study of malignant tumors of MDP, a pathologist should take into account the feasibility of a combination of a neuroendocrine tumor with adenocarcinoma. 

Evolving landscape of clinical trials in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms in the past two decades

BACKGROUND

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs) are heterogenous malignancies that require well-designed trials to develop effective management strategies. This cross-sectional study aimed to illustrate the current landscape of clinical trials in GEP-NENs to provide insights for future research.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We reviewed all clinical trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2021 with GEP-NEN in the 'condition or disease' field.

RESULTS

We included 206 eligible trials. Most trials enrolled less than 50 patients (59.8%) and were sponsored by institutions other than government or industry (67.0%). Most trials were conducted in high-income countries (86.6%) and countries located in Europe (30.1%) or Northern America (29.6%). The overall result reporting rates of GEP-NEN trials was 41.4%, and the median time from primary completion to result reporting was 101 months. Characteristics that improved the reporting of results included larger sample size, tumor differentiation specification for inclusion, progression-free survival as primary endpoint, industry sponsorship, and multicenter or multinational participation (all P < 0.05). Compared with trials registered between 2000 and 2011 (n = 28), trials registered between 2012 and 2021 (n = 178) were more likely to specify the Ki-67 index for inclusion (68.0% vs 35.7%, P = 0.002) and to be conducted outside Europe or Northern America (16.4% vs 3.7%, P = 0.02), while the sample size and the sponsorship did not change significantly.

CONCLUSIONS

Novel management options have been explored for GEP-NENs with more specific inclusion criteria during the past two decades. More efforts are needed to promote international collaborations in clinical trials and enhance timely result dissemination.

Liver transplantation in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

Neuroendocrine tumors are part of a heterogeneous group of tumors located in organs such as the gastrointestinal tract (GIT), lungs, thymus, thyroid, and adrenal glands. The most prevalent sites are the small intestine, cecal appendix, and pancreas. More than 50% of these tumors are associated with metastases at the time of diagnosis. Neuroendocrine tumors are classified according to the degree of cell differentiation and the histopathological proliferation index of the lesion. Neuroendocrine tumors can be well differentiated or poorly differentiated. G3 tumors are characterized by Ki-67 expression greater than 20% and can be either well differentiated (G3 NET) or poorly differentiated (G3 NEC). Neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC G3) is subdivided into small-cell and large-cell types. When neuroendocrine tumors present clinical and compressive symptoms, carcinoid syndrome is evident. Carcinoid syndrome occurs when the tumor produces neuroendocrine mediators that cannot be metabolized by the liver due to either the size of the tumor or their secretion by the liver itself. Several therapeutic strategies have been described for the treatment of metastatic neuroendocrine tumors, including curative or palliative surgical approaches, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy, percutaneous therapy, systemic chemotherapy, and radiotherapy. Liver surgery is the only approach that can offer a cure for metastatic patients. Liver metastases must be completely resected, and in this context, orthotopic liver transplantation has gained prominence for yielding very promising outcomes in selected cases. The aim of this study is to review the literature on OLT as a form of treatment with curative intent for patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors with liver metastasis.

The Complex Histopathological and Immunohistochemical Spectrum of Neuroendocrine Tumors-An Overview of the Latest Classifications

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) originate from the neuroendocrine cell system, which may either take the shape of organoid cell aggregations or be composed of dispersed cells across various organs. Therefore, these tumors are heterogenous regarding the site of origin, functional status, degree of aggressiveness, and prognosis. When treating patients with neuroendocrine tumors, one of the most significant challenges for physicians is determining the correct tumor grade and thus classifying patients into risk categories. Over the years, the classification of these tumors has changed significantly, often causing confusion due to clinical, molecular, and immunohistochemical variability. This review aims to outline the latest NENs classifications regardless of their site of origin. Thus, an overview of the key histopathological and immunohistochemical characteristics of NENs could pave the way to validate possible predictive and prognostic markers and also guide the therapeutic conduct.

Olfactory Neuroblastoma: Morphological Reappraisal and Molecular Insights with Quantum Leap in Clinical Perspectives

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of review is to provide a comprehensive review of the literature focusing on the recent advances in the diagnosis, molecular underpinning, and targeted therapy of olfactory neuroblastoma (ONB).

RECENT FINDINGS

Studies focused on the molecular fingerprinting of ONB are critical to engage new promising treatment strategies. Molecular-based subtype classifications have been proposed (basal-like ONB and neural-like ONB) but are not widely used. The rationale for implementation of DNA methylation analysis and IDH2 sequencing in routine work-up for ONB is gaining recognition. Expression of somatostatin receptors (SSTR) in ONB open new avenues for both, diagnostic (especially metastatic disease) and new treatment protocols with somatostatin analogs. Olfactory carcinoma is proposed as a unifying diagnostic terminology pertinent to epithelial divergent differentiation in olfactory neuroblastoma. Molecular (genetic and epigenetic) efforts on olfactory neuroblastoma are promising; however further refinement is needed for employment of these biomarkers as clinical standard of care. Ongoing and future multi-institutional collaborative studies will contribute to further understanding of ONB biology and aid the development of targeted treatments for this disease.

Long-term survival of gastric mixed neuroendocrine-non-neuroendocrine neoplasm: Two case reports

BACKGROUND

Gastric mixed neuroendocrine-non-neuroendocrine neoplasm (MiNEN), which consists of neuroendocrine and non-neuroendocrine components, is quite rare. Until now, most data on gastric MiNEN come from clinical cases, without large-scale retrospective studies or controlled clinical trials. Consequently, no consensus regarding the origin, molecular characteristics, or appropriate treatment of MiNEN has been reached so far. We conducted chemotherapy of irinotecan plus cisplatin (IP regimen) and surgery in two patients with gastric MiNEN, which had never been used in treating this kind of tumor, leading to their long-term survival for more than 3 and 7 years, respectively.

CASE SUMMARY

We present two patients (one male and one female) with gastric MiNEN, with the primary manifestation of recurrent upper abdominal pain. After they were referred to our hospital, a diagnosis of gastric MiNEN was defined with the help of CT scan, and histopathological and immunohistochemical examinations on the samples of gastrointestinal endoscopy or radical surgery. The male patient (case 1) were found to have metastases in the reginal lymph nodes and the left liver. He received four cycles of IP regimens first, then the gastrectomy and partial left liver resection, followed by additional two cycles of IP chemotherapy. The female patient (case 2) underwent a laparoscopic gastrectomy, and received six cycles of IP regimen. She was found to have metastatic lesions in the right lung 2 years after that, and underwent video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) of the lower lobe of the right lung. The two patients have now survived for more than 3 years and 7 years, respectively, without any evidence of recurrence or metastases.

CONCLUSION

IP regimen, combined with curative-intent surgery if feasible, could be considered as the priority in the choice of front-line chemotherapy for gastric MiNEN.

The classification of neuroendocrine neoplasms of the lung and digestive system according to WHO, 5th edition: similarities, differences, challenges, and unmet needs

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are a group of disease entities sharing common morphological, ultrastructural and immunophenotypical features, yet with distinct biological behavior and clinical outcome, ranging from benign to frankly malignant. Accordingly, a spectrum of therapeutic options for each single entity is available, including somatostatin analogues (SSA), mTOR-inhibitors, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT), non-platinum and platinum chemotherapy. In the last few decades, several attempts have been made to better stratify these lesions refining the pathological classifications, so as to obtain an optimal correspondence between the scientific terminology and, the predictive and prognostic features of each disease subtype, and achieve a global Classification encompassing NENs arising at different anatomical sites. The aim of this review was to analyze, compare and discuss the main features and issues of the latest WHO Classifications of NENs of the lung and the digestive system, in order to point out the strengths and limitations of our current understanding of these complex diseases.

Mixed neuroendocrine-non-neuroendocrine neoplasms of the digestive system: A mini-review

Mixed neuroendocrine-non-neuroendocrine neoplasms (MiNENs) are rare mixed tumors containing both neuroendocrine (NE) and non-NE components. Each component must occupy at least 30% of the tumor volume by definition. Recent molecular evidence suggests MiNENs are clonal neoplasms and potentially harbor targetable mutations similar to conventional carcinomas. There have been multiple changes in the nomenclature and classification of MiNENs which has created some confusion among pathologists on how to integrate the contributions of each component in a MiNEN, an issue which in turn has resulted in confusion in communication with front-line treating oncologists. This mini review summarizes our current understanding of MiNENs and outline diagnosis, prognosis, and management of these neoplasms. The authors emphasize the importance of treating the most aggressive component of the tumor regardless of its percentage volume.

An update on the development of concepts, diagnostic criteria, and challenging issues for neuroendocrine neoplasms across different digestive organs

Digestive neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are a group of heterogeneous neoplasms found throughout the digestive tract, with different behaviour and genetic background. In the last few years, nomenclature and WHO/UICC classifications of digestive NENs have changed, and molecular classifications have emerged, especially in pancreatic locations. Increasing patho-molecular details are needed to diagnose the different categories of NEN, including the use of helpful immunohistochemical markers. In this review, we address these topics in three successive chapters. We first briefly review recent updates in classifications, discuss important grading and proliferating issues and advances in the molecular understanding of NEN. Then, we provide an update on diagnosis, including the most important differential diagnoses of NEN, with a focus on high-grade neoplasms and mixed tumours. Finally, we highlight a variety of currently used and next-generation predictive and prognostic biomarkers as well as biomarkers of tumour origin and describe some site specificities of gastrointestinal NEN. We specifically focus on biomarkers available to pathologists with the potential to change the way patients with NEN are diagnosed and treated.

Update from the 5th Edition of the World Health Organization Classification of Head and Neck Tumors: Overview of the 2022 WHO Classification of Head and Neck Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

This review article provides a brief overview of the new WHO classification by adopting a question-answer model to highlight the spectrum of head and neck neuroendocrine neoplasms which includes epithelial neuroendocrine neoplasms (neuroendocrine tumors and neuroendocrine carcinomas) arising from upper aerodigestive tract and salivary glands, and special neuroendocrine neoplasms including middle ear neuroendocrine tumors (MeNET), ectopic or invasive pituitary neuroendocrine tumors (PitNET; formerly known as pituitary adenoma) and Merkel cell carcinoma as well as non-epithelial neuroendocrine neoplasms (paragangliomas). The new WHO classification follows the IARC/WHO nomenclature framework and restricts the diagnostic term of neuroendocrine carcinoma to poorly differentiated epithelial neuroendocrine neoplasms. In this classification, well-differentiated epithelial neuroendocrine neoplasms are termed as neuroendocrine tumors (NET), and are graded as G1 NET (no necrosis and < 2 mitoses per 2 mm²; Ki67 < 20%), G2 NET (necrosis or 2-10 mitoses per 2 mm², and Ki67 < 20%) and G3 NET (> 10 mitoses per 2 mm² or Ki67 > 20%, and absence of poorly differentiated cytomorphology). Neuroendocrine carcinomas (> 10 mitoses per 2 mm², Ki67 > 20%, and often associated with a Ki67 > 55%) are further subtyped based on cytomorphological characteristics as small cell and large cell neuroendocrine carcinomas. Unlike neuroendocrine carcinomas, head and neck NETs typically show no aberrant p53 expression or loss of RB reactivity. Ectopic or invasive PitNETs are subtyped using pituitary transcription factors (PIT1, TPIT, SF1, GATA3, ER-alpha), hormones and keratins (e.g., CAM5.2). The new classification emphasizes a strict correlation of morphology and immunohistochemical findings in the accurate diagnosis of neuroendocrine neoplasms. A particular emphasis on the role of biomarkers in the confirmation of the neuroendocrine nature of a neoplasm and in the distinction of various neuroendocrine neoplasms is provided by reviewing ancillary tools that are available to pathologists in the diagnostic workup of head and neck neuroendocrine neoplasms. Furthermore, the role of molecular immunohistochemistry in the diagnostic workup of head and neck paragangliomas is discussed. The unmet needs in the field of head and neck neuroendocrine neoplasms are also discussed in this article. The new WHO classification is an important step forward to ensure accurate diagnosis that will also form the basis of ongoing research in this field.

Overview of the 2022 WHO Classification of Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

In this review, we detail the changes and the relevant features that are applied to neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) in the 2022 WHO Classification of Endocrine and Neuroendocrine Tumors. Using a question-and-answer approach, we discuss the consolidation of the nomenclature that distinguishes neuronal paragangliomas from epithelial neoplasms, which are divided into well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) and poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs). The criteria for these distinctions based on differentiation are outlined. NETs are generally (but not always) graded as G1, G2, and G3 based on proliferation, whereas NECs are by definition high grade; the importance of Ki67 as a tool for classification and grading is emphasized. The clinical relevance of proper classification is explained, and the importance of hormonal function is examined, including eutopic and ectopic hormone production. The tools available to pathologists for accurate classification include the conventional biomarkers of neuroendocrine lineage and differentiation, INSM1, synaptophysin, chromogranins, and somatostatin receptors (SSTRs), but also include transcription factors that can identify the site of origin of a metastatic lesion of unknown primary site, as well as hormones, enzymes, and keratins that play a role in functional and structural correlation. The recognition of highly proliferative, well-differentiated NETs has resulted in the need for biomarkers that can distinguish these G3 NETs from NECs, including stains to determine expression of SSTRs and those that can indicate the unique molecular pathogenetic alterations that underlie the distinction, for example, global loss of RB and aberrant p53 in pancreatic NECs compared with loss of ATRX, DAXX, and menin in pancreatic NETs. Other differential diagnoses are discussed with recommendations for biomarkers that can assist in correct classification, including the distinctions between epithelial and non-epithelial NENs that have allowed reclassification of epithelial NETs in the spine, in the duodenum, and in the middle ear; the first two may be composite tumors with neuronal and glial elements, and as this feature is integral to the duodenal lesion, it is now classified as composite gangliocytoma/neuroma and neuroendocrine tumor (CoGNET). The many other aspects of differential diagnosis are detailed with recommendations for biomarkers that can distinguish NENs from non-neuroendocrine lesions that can mimic their morphology. The concepts of mixed neuroendocrine and non-neuroendocrine (MiNEN) and amphicrine tumors are clarified with information about how to approach such lesions in routine practice. Theranostic biomarkers that assist patient management are reviewed. Given the significant proportion of NENs that are associated with germline mutations that predispose to this disease, we explain the role of the pathologist in identifying precursor lesions and applying molecular immunohistochemistry to guide genetic testing.

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms G3: Novel insights and unmet needs

According to the 2019 WHO pathology grading system, high-grade gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs) can be divided into well differentiated neuroendocrine tumors G3 (NETs G3) and poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs). GEP-NETs G3 and GEP-NECs present significant differences in driver genes and disease origin. NETs G3 and NECs have been confirmed to be two distinct diseases with different genetic backgrounds, however, this issue remains controversial. The prognosis of NETs G3 is significantly better than that of NECs. The differential diagnosis of GEP-NETs G3 and GEP-NECs should be combined with the patient's medical history, tumor histopathology, Ki-67 index, DAXX/ATRX, TP53 and Rb expression as well as other immunohistochemical indicators. In addition, the treatment strategies of these two subgroups are very different. Here, we summarize recent findings focused on the genomics, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, treatment and other aspects of high-grade GEP-NENs (G3). This review may help further our understanding of the carcinogenesis, diagnosis and treatment of GEP-NENs G3.

An analysis of 130 neuroendocrine tumors G3 regarding prevalence, origin, metastasis, and diagnostic features

Limited data exist on high-grade neuroendocrine tumors (NETs G3) which represent a new category among neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN). We analyzed NETs G3 in a consultation series regarding prevalence, origin, metastasis, and diagnostic problems. Based on the WHO classification of digestive system tumors, 130 NETs G3 (9%) were identified in 1513 NENs. NET G3 samples were more often obtained from metastatic sites (69%) than NET G1/G2 samples (24%). NET G3 metastases presented most frequently in the liver (74%) and originated from the pancreas (38/90, 42%), followed by the lung (9%), ileum (7%), stomach (3%), rectum (1%), and rare sites (2%) such as the prostate and breast. The primaries remained unknown in 15%. NETs G3 had a median Ki67 of 30% that distinguished them from NECs (60%), though with great overlap. The expression of site-specific markers, p53, Rb1, and SST2 was similar in NETs G3 and NETs G1/G2, except for p53 and Rb1 which were abnormally expressed in 8% and 7% of liver metastases from NET G3 but not from NET G1/G2. NETs G3 were frequently referred as NECs (39%) but could be well distinguished from NECs by normal p53 (92% versus 21%) and Rb1 expression (93% versus 41%) expression. In conclusion, NETs G3 are frequently discovered as liver metastases from pancreatic or pulmonary primaries and are often misinterpreted as NEC. p53 and Rb1 are powerful markers in the distinction of NET G3 from NEC. Rarely, carcinomas from non-digestive, non-pulmonary organs with neuroendocrine features may present as NET G3.