Endoscopic, transanal, laparoscopic, and transabdominal management of rectal neuroendocrine tumors

Assessing risk stratification in long-term outcomes of rectal neuroendocrine tumors following endoscopic resection: a multicenter retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

While endoscopic resection of rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) has significantly increased, long-term data on risk factors for recurrence are still lacking. Our aim is to analyze the long-term outcomes of patients with rectal NETs after endoscopic resection through risk stratification.

METHODS

In this multicenter retrospective study, we included patients who underwent endoscopic resection of rectal NETs from 2009 to 2018 and were followed for ≥12 months at five university hospitals. We classified the patients into three risk groups according to the clinicopathological status of the rectal neuroendocrine tumors: low, indeterminate, and high. The high-risk group was defined if the tumors have any of the followings: size ≥ 10 mm, lymphovascular invasion, muscularis propria or deeper invasion, positive resection margins, or mitotic count ≥2/10.

RESULTS

A total of 346 patients were included, with 144 (41.6%), 121 (35.0%), and 81 (23.4%) classified into the low-, indeterminate-, and high-risk groups, respectively. Among the high-risk group, seven patients (8.6%) received salvage treatment 28 (27-67) days after the initial endoscopic resection, with no reported extracolonic recurrence. Throughout the follow-up period, 1.1% (4/346) of patients experienced extracolonic recurrences at 56.5 (54-73) months after the initial endoscopic resection. Three of these patients (75%) were in the high-risk group and did not undergo salvage treatment. The risk of extracolonic recurrence was significantly higher in the high-risk group compared to the other groups (p = 0.039).

CONCLUSION

Physicians should be concerned about the possibility of metastasis during long-term follow-up of high-risk patients and consider salvage treatment.

Clinical Value of Clip-and-Snare Assisted Endoscopic Submucosal Resection in Treatment of Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors

Introduction

The aim of the study was to introduce a new endoscopic technology, clip-and-snare assisted endoscopic submucosal resection (CS-ESMR), for treatment of rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) and then to investigate the therapeutic value of CS-ESMR.

Methods

In this retrospective study, 67 patients who underwent endoscopic treatment of rectal NETs from March 2017 to December 2021 were analyzed. According to the endoscopic resection methods (endoscopic mucosal resection [EMR], CS-ESMR, and endoscopic submucosal dissection [ESD]), the cases were divided into CS-ESMR group (27 cases), ESD group (31 cases), and EMR group (9 cases). The pathological R0 resection rate and the incidence of adverse events (bleeding and perforation) were compared among the three groups.

Results

There was a significant difference about the pathological R0 resection between the CS-ESMR group and the EMR group and between the CS-ESMR group and the ESD group (both p < 0.05). Compared with ESD group, the procedure time, intraoperative bleeding, and the cost of CS-ESMR group are significantly decreased (p < 0.001, p < 0.05, p < 0.001, respectively).

Conclusion

CS-ESMR may be a safe and effective treatment for rectal NETs with a diameter of less than 10 mm, without muscularis propria invasion and metastasis.

Role of Advanced Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in the Comprehensive Management of Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs), also called neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), are relatively uncommon, heterogenous tumors primarily originating in the gastrointestinal tract. With the improvement in technology and increasing use of cross-sectional imaging and endoscopy, they are being discovered with increasing frequency. Although traditionally considered indolent tumors with good prognoses, some NENs exhibit aggressive behavior. Timely diagnosis, risk stratification, and management can often be a challenge. In general, small NENs without local invasion or lymphovascular involvement can often be managed using minimally invasive advanced endoscopic techniques, while larger lesions and those with evidence of lymphovascular invasion require surgery, systemic therapy, or a combination thereof. Ideal management requires a comprehensive and accurate understanding of the stage and grade of the tumor. With the recent advancements, a therapeutic advanced endoscopist can play a pivotal role in diagnosing, staging, and managing this rare condition. High-definition white light imaging and digital image enhancing technologies like narrow band imaging (NBI) in the newer endoscopes have improved the diagnostic accuracy of traditional endoscopy. The refinement of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) over the past decade has revolutionized the role of endoscopy in diagnosing and managing various pathologies, including NENs. In addition to EUS-directed diagnostic biopsies, it also offers the ability to precisely assess the depth of invasion and lymphovascular involvement and thus stage NENs accurately. EUS-directed locoregional ablative therapies are increasingly recognized as highly effective, minimally invasive treatment modalities for NENs, particularly pancreatic NENs. Advanced endoscopic resection techniques like endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), endoscopic submucosal resection (EMR), and endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) have been increasingly used over the past decade with excellent results in achieving curative resection of various early-stage gastrointestinal luminal lesions including NENs. In this article, we aim to delineate NENs of the different segments of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract (esophagus, gastric, pancreatic, and small and large intestine) and their management with emphasis on the endoscopic management of these tumors.

European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) 2023 guidance paper for colorectal neuroendocrine tumours

This ENETS guidance paper, developed by a multidisciplinary working group, provides an update on the previous colorectal guidance paper in a different format. Guided by key clinical questions practical advice on the diagnosis and management of neuroendocrine tumours (NET) of the caecum, colon, and rectum is provided. Although covered in one guidance paper colorectal NET comprises a heterogeneous group of neoplasms. The most common rectal NET are often small G1 tumours that can be treated by adequate endoscopic resection techniques. Evidence from prospective clinical trials on the treatment of metastatic colorectal NET is limited and discussion of patients in experienced multidisciplinary tumour boards strongly recommended. Neuroendocrine carcinomas (NEC) and mixed neuroendocrine non-neuroendocrine neoplasms (MiNEN) are discussed in a separate guidance paper.

Endoscopic techniques for gastric neuroendocrine tumors: An update

Gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms (gNENs) are a rare type of gastric neoplasm, even if their frequency is increasing according to the latest epidemiologic revisions of the main registries worldwide. They are divided into three main subtypes, with different pathogeneses, biological behaviors, and clinical characteristics. GNEN heterogeneity poses challenges, therefore these neoplasms require different management strategies. Update the knowledge on the endoscopic treatment options to manage g-NENs. This manuscript is a narrative review of the literature. In recent years, many advances have been made not only in the knowledge of both the pathogenesis and the molecular profiling of gNENs but also in the endoscopic expertise towards innovative treatment options, which proved to be less aggressive without losing the capability of being radical. The endoscopic approach is increasingly applied in the field of gastrointestinal (GI) luminal neoplasms, and this is true not only for adenocarcinomas but also for gNENs. In particular, different techniques have been described for the endoscopic removal of suspected lesions, ranging from classical polypectomy (cold or hot snare) to endoscopic mucosal resection (both with “en bloc” or piecemeal technique), endoscopic submucosal dissection, and endoscopic full-thickness resection. GNENs comprise different subtypes of neoplasms with distinct management and prognosis. New endoscopic techniques offer a wide variety of approaches for GI localized neoplasms, which demonstrated to be appropriate and effective also in the case of gNENs. Correct evaluation of size, site, morphology, and clinical context allows the choice of tailored therapy in order to guarantee a definitive treatment.

Survival in patients with neuroendocrine tumors of the colon, rectum and small intestine

BACKGROUND

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) of the colon, rectum and small intestine (SI) are increasing in incidence and prevalence. We evaluated the 5-year overall survival (OS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS).

METHODS

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) 18 registry from 2000 to 2017 was accessed to identify patients with colonic, rectal, and SI NENs.

RESULTS

46,665 patients were diagnosed with NENs of the colon (n = 10,518, 22.5%), rectum (18,063, 38.7%), and SI (18,084, 38.8%). By tumor site alone, patients with well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) of the rectum had improved 5-year OS (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.68-0.77, p < 0.001). However, patients with rectal poorly-differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs) who underwent oncologic resection had lower 5-year OS (35.1%) compared to colon (41.9%), and SI (72.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical resection may improve 5-year OS for NECs of the SI and colon, except in the rectum where survival was reduced. More frequent surveillance and timely initiation of systemic therapy should be considered for rectal NECs.

Rectal neuroendocrine neoplasms: what the radiologists should know

Neuroendocrine neoplasms of the rectum (R-NENs) are rare; however, their incidence has increased almost threefold in the last few decades. Imaging of R-NENs includes two primary categories: anatomic/morphologic imaging comprised of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and functional/molecular imaging comprising of planar scintigraphy, single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), and positron emission tomography (PET). The management depends on stage, dimension, atypical features, histological grade, and lymphovascular invasion (LVI). Low-risk local R-NENs can be resected endoscopically, and high-risk or locally advanced neoplasms can be treated with radical surgery and lymphadenectomy and/or chemoradiation. The review article focuses on imaging illustrations and discusses applications of different imaging modalities in diagnosing and managing R-NENs.

Long-term clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection in rectal neuroendocrine tumors based on resection margin status: a real-world study

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been widely adopted in treating rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs). However, clinical outcomes in rectal NETs after ESD with different resection margin status remain scanty, particularly in patients with positive resection margins. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term clinical outcomes of ESD in rectal NET based on the resection margin status.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 436 patients diagnosed with rectal NET who had undergone ESD. Clinical data, including age, sex, tumor size, stage, invasion, and the resection margin status, were collected. Further, the patients were assessed for complications, recurrence, distant metastasis, and long-term outcomes.

RESULTS

Among all 436 patients, 395 patients had their primary ESD in our hospital. Complete resection was achieved in 319 patients. Patients who did not achieve complete resection opted for follow-up (n = 73), salvage surgery (n = 1) and salvage ESD (n = 2). Another 41 had their primary ESD in other hospital with incomplete resection and had salvage ESD in our hospital. All 436 patients had a median follow-up period of 61.4 months (range 33.4-125.3 months). During the follow-up period, two patients developed recurrences, while three patients developed metastasis. There were no significant differences in the 5-year progression-free survival and overall survival between patients with incomplete resection opting for follow-up compared to the other two groups (P = 0.5/0.8). However, the complication rates were significantly higher in patients who received salvage ESD.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that positive resection margins have no influence on survival in patients with rectal NET treated using ESD.

Ampullary Large-Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma, a Diagnostic Challenge of a Rare Aggressive Neoplasm: A Case Report and Literature Review

Ampullary large-cell neuroendocrine carcinomas (LCNECs) are extremely rare, and available data are limited on case reports. They present with jaundice, non-specific abdominal pain, or weight loss, imitating adenocarcinoma. Their incidence increases due to the improved diagnostic techniques. However, preoperative diagnosis remains challenging. We report the case of a 70-year-old man with a history of metabolic syndrome, cholecystectomy, and right hemicolectomy, presenting with jaundice. Laboratory results showed increased liver biochemistry indicators and elevated CA 19-9. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy revealed an ulcerative tumor on the ampulla of Vater, and the biopsy revealed neuroendocrine carcinoma. Although computed tomography (CT) detected enlarged regional lymph nodes, the positron emission tomography (PET) showed a hyperactive lesion only in this area. Pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy with R0 resection was performed. Pathologic evaluation of the 3.1 × 1.9 cm tumor revealed an LCNEC with immunohistochemical positivity at Synaptophysin, EMA, CD56, and cytokeratin CK8/18. The Ki-67 index was 45%. Two out of the nine dissected lymph nodes were occupied by the neoplasm. The patient was discharged home free of symptoms, and adjuvant chemotherapy with carboplatin + etoposide was initiated. A comprehensive review of the reported cases showed that the preoperative biopsy result was different from the final diagnosis in few cases, regarding the subtypes. Conventional radiology cannot identify small masses, and other methods, such as endoscopy, magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), and FDG-PET scan, might aid the diagnosis. Diagnosis is based on histology and immunohistochemical markers of the surgical specimens. The treatment of choice is pancreatoduodenectomy, followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. However, recurrence is frequent, and the prognosis remains poor.

Advances in the Diagnosis and Therapeutic Management of Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms (GEP-NENs)

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are an increasingly common cause of neoplastic diseases. One of the largest groups of NENs are neoplasms localized to the gastroenteropancreatic system, which are known as gastroenteropancreatic NENs (GEP-NENs). Because of nonspecific clinical symptoms, GEP-NEN patient diagnosis and, consequently, their treatment, might be difficult and delayed. This situation has forced researchers all over the world to continue progress in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with GEP-NENs. Our review is designed to present the latest reports on the laboratory diagnostic techniques, imaging tests and surgical and nonsurgical treatment strategies used for patients with these rare neoplasms. We paid particular attention to the nuclear approach, the use of which has been applied to GEP-NEN patient diagnosis, and to nonsurgical and radionuclide treatment strategies. Recent publications were reviewed in search of reports on new strategies for effective disease management. Attention was also paid to those studies still in progress, but with successful results. A total of 248 papers were analyzed, from which 141 papers most relevant to the aim of the study were selected. Using these papers, we highlight the progress in the development of diagnostic and treatment strategies for patients with GEP-NENs.

Endoscopic management of subepithelial lesions including neuroendocrine neoplasms: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

1: ESGE recommends endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) as the best tool to characterize subepithelial lesion (SEL) features (size, location, originating layer, echogenicity, shape), but EUS alone is not able to distinguish among all types of SEL.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2: ESGE suggests providing tissue diagnosis for all SELs with features suggestive of gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) if they are of size > 20 mm, or have high risk stigmata, or require surgical resection or oncological treatment.Weak recommendation, very low quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) or mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB) equally for tissue diagnosis of SELs ≥ 20 mm in size.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4: ESGE recommends against surveillance of asymptomatic gastrointestinal (GI) tract leiomyomas, lipomas, heterotopic pancreas, granular cell tumors, schwannomas, and glomus tumors, if the diagnosis is clear.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 5: ESGE suggests surveillance of asymptomatic esophageal and gastric SELs without definite diagnosis, with esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) at 3-6 months, and then at 2-3-year intervals for lesions < 10 mm in size, and at 1-2-year intervals for lesions 10-20 mm in size. For asymptomatic SELs > 20 mm in size that are not resected, ESGE suggests surveillance with EGD plus EUS at 6 months and then at 6-12-month intervals.Weak recommendation, very low quality evidence. 6: ESGE recommends endoscopic resection for type 1 gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms (g-NENs) if they grow larger than 10 mm. The choice of resection technique should depend on size, depth of invasion, and location in the stomach.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7: ESGE suggests considering removal of histologically proven gastric GISTs smaller than 20 mm as an alternative to surveillance. The decision to resect should be discussed in a multidisciplinary meeting. The choice of technique should depend on size, location, and local expertise.Weak recommendation, very low quality evidence. 8: ESGE suggests that, to avoid unnecessary follow-up, endoscopic resection is an option for gastric SELs smaller than 20 mm and of unknown histology after failure of attempts to obtain diagnosis.Weak recommendation, very low quality evidence. 9: ESGE recommends basing the surveillance strategy on the type and completeness of resection. After curative resection of benign SELs no follow-up is advised, except for type 1 gastric NEN for which surveillance at 1-2 years is advised.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 10: For lower or upper GI NEN with a positive or indeterminate margin at resection, ESGE recommends repeating endoscopy at 3-6 months and another attempt at endoscopic resection in the case of residual disease.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

Rectal neuroendocrine tumors: Current advances in management, treatment, and surveillance

Rectal neuroendocrine neoplasms (r-NENs) are considered among the most frequent digestive NENs, together with small bowel NENs. Their incidence has increased over the past few years, and this is probably due to the widespread use of endoscopic screening for colorectal cancer and the advanced endoscopic procedures available nowadays. According to the current European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) guidelines, well-differentiated r-NENs smaller than 10 mm should be endoscopically removed in view of their low risk of local and distant invasion. R-NENs larger than 20 mm are candidates for surgical resection because of their high risk of distant spreading and the involvement of the muscularis propria. There is an area of uncertainty regarding tumors between 10 and 20 mm, in which the metastatic risk is intermediate and the endoscopic treatment can be challenging. Once removed, the indications for surveillance are scarce and poorly codified by international guidelines, therefore in this paper, a possible algorithm is proposed.

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.

Efficacy and safety of ligation-assisted endoscopic submucosal resection combined with endoscopic ultrasonography for treatment of rectal neuroendocrine tumors

OBJECTIVE

Rectal neuroendocrine tumors (R-NETs) usually invade the submucosa, and so complete resection is difficult. The treatment of choice for R-NETs ≤10 mm in size is endoscopic resection, but there is still controversy concerning the best endoscopic method. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of ligation-assisted endoscopic submucosal resection combined with endoscopic ultrasonography (ESMR-LUS) for treatment of R-NETs.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the data of 101 patients with R-NETs ≤10 mm in size who underwent ESMR-LUS (n = 48) or conventional ligation-assisted endoscopic submucosal resection (ESMR-L; n = 53) between May 2019 and September 2021 at the 900th Hospital of Joint Logistics Support Force. Complete resection rate, pathological complete resection rate, procedure time, and adverse events were compared between the two groups of patients.

RESULTS

The endoscopic complete resection rate was slightly higher in the ESMR-LUS group than in the ESMR-L group (100 vs. 96.2%, p = .496). The pathological complete resection rate was also slightly higher in the ESMR-LUS group (97.9 vs. 88.7%, p = .152), these findings, though statistically non-significant, have practical clinical significance. Margin involvement was less common in ESMR-LUS patients than in ESMR-L patients (1 vs. 6). Involvement of the lateral resection margin was found one patient in the ESMR-LUS group versus two patients in the ESMR-L group, and deep resection margin involvement in no patient in the ESMR-LUS group versus four patients in the ESMR-L group. Mean procedure time was longer in the ESMR-LUS group than in the ESMR-L group (11.08 ± 1.89 min vs. 9.38 ± 2.09 min, p = .061). Immediate bleeding occurred in two patients in the ESMR-LUS group vs. seven patients in the ESMR-L group. Two patients in the ESMR-L group also suffered perforation; both patients were successfully treated by endoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

ESMR-LUS appears to be a safe and effective technique for removal of small rectal NETs confined to the submucosal layer without metastasis. Further studies are warranted to compare the efficacy and safety of different methods.

Implementation of robot-assisted curative resection for rare anorectal tumours on the basis of individualised treatment

PURPOSE

To evaluate the validity of robot-assisted curative operation for rare anorectal tumours, characterised by biological heterogeneity and anatomical complexity.

METHODS

The present study evaluated 16 consecutive patients including three with anorectal squamous cell carcinoma (ARSCC), four with anorectal mucosal melanoma (ARMM), seven with anorectal neuroendocrine tumour (ARNET), and two with other types of anorectal tumours.

RESULTS

Of the three patients with ARSCC after chemoradiotherapy, two underwent abdominoperineal resection (APR), and one underwent ultralow anterior resection (uLAR)/total intersphincteric resection (ISR), surviving 56-76 months without recurrence. Of the four ARMM patients, APR and uLAR/total ISR were conducted in two patients, respectively, with variable survival outcomes. All seven patients with ARNET were treated with uLAR/ISR and LAR, surviving for 5-106 months to date.

CONCLUSIONS

Because most anorectal tumours are confined to the dermal and submucosal layers, robotic anorectal function preserving ISR is expected to achieve R0 resection.

Comparable survival benefit of local excision versus radical resection for 10- to 20-mm rectal neuroendocrine tumors

OBJECTIVE

The optimal surgical management for 10- to 20-mm rectal neuroendocrine tumors (RNET) is still a matter of debate. This study aimed to explore the optimal surgical approach for 10- to 20-mm RNET by comparing the outcomes between local excision and radical resection.

METHOD

We extracted clinicopathological information of 10- to 20-mm RNET from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. The 1:2 propensity score matching (PSM) method was used to balance the imbalanced baseline covariates (P < 0.05) between the local excision group and radical resection group. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify the risk factors associated with cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULT

A total of 531 RNET patients 10-20 mm in size were included. Patients receiving radical resection had larger tumor sizes (P < 0.001), higher T stages (P < 0.001), higher N stages (P < 0.001), higher M stages (P = 0.002) and higher grades (P = 0.041). For 10-20 mm RNET patients, radical resection had no survival benefit compared with local excision (CSS: HR = 2.048, 95% CI 0.553-7.576, P = 0.283; OS: HR = 1.090, 95% CI 0.535-2.219, P = 0.813). After 1:2 PSM, there was no significant difference between local excision and radical resection. Radical resection still had no survival benefit over local excision (CSS: HR = 0.449, 95% CI 0.050-4.022, P = 0.474; OS: HR = 1.408, 95% CI 0.488-4.061, P = 0.527). In a multivariate analysis of CSS, age >60 years old (P = 0.005), tumour size 14-20 mm (P = 0.011) and M1 stage (P < 0.001) were identified as independent prognostic factors for worse CSS. In multivariate analysis of OS, age>60 years (P＜0.001), male sex (P = 0.007), black race (P = 0.016), and T2/T3/T4 stage (P = 0.007) were significantly associated with worse OS. N stage was not an independent predictive factor for CSS and OS.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed that for 10- to 20-mm RNET patients, there was no survival benefit for radical resection compared with local excision, which suggested that local excision may be an adequate treatment for these patients.

Risk factors for lymph node metastasis in rectal neuroendocrine tumors: A recursive partitioning analysis based on multicenter data

BACKGROUND

The well-differentiated rectal neuroendocrine tumors (RNETs) can also have lymph node metastasis (LNM). Large multicenter data were reviewed to explore the risk factors for LNM in RNETs. Further, we developed a model to predict the risk of LNM in RNETs.

METHODS

In total, 223 patients with RNETs from the Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, the First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, and the First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University were retrospectively enrolled. Logistic regression analysis was performed to study the factors affecting LNM, and recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) was performed to stratify the risk of LNM.

RESULTS

Among the 223 patients diagnosed with RNETs, the incidence of LNM was 10.8%. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses revealed that tumor size, World Health Organization (WHO) grade, and depth of tumor invasion were independent risk factors for LNM (p < 0.05). The area under the curve was 0.948 (95% confidence interval: 0.890-1.000). Furthermore, the incidence of LNM in patients divided into low- and high-risk groups according to RPA was 1.1% and 56.4%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Compared with tumor size, the depth of tumor invasion and WHO grade are more important factors in predicting LNM. Then, we developed a model based on RPA to predict the risk of LNM in RNETs and identify patients who are suitable for local resection.

Endoscopic and surgical treatment of T1N0M0 colorectal neuroendocrine tumors: a population-based comparative study

BACKGROUND

With the rapid advances in endoscopic technology, endoscopic therapy (ET) is increasingly applied to the treatment of small (≤ 20 mm) colorectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs). However, long-term data comparing ET and surgery for management of T1N0M0 colorectal NETs are lacking. The purpose of this work was to compare overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) of such patients with ET or surgery.

METHODS

Patients with T1N0M0 colorectal NETs were identified within the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database (2004-2016). Demographics, tumor characteristics, therapeutic methods, and survival were compared. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used 1:3 and among this cohort, Cox proportional hazards regression models were performed to evaluate correlation between treatment and outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 4487 patients with T1N0M0 colorectal NETs, 1125 were identified in the matched cohort, among whom 819 (72.8%) underwent ET and 306 (27.2%) underwent surgery. There was no difference in the 5-year and 10-year OS and CSS rates between the 2 treatment modalities. Likewise, analyses stratified by tumor size and site showed that patients did not benefit more from surgery compared with ET. Moreover, multivariate analyses found no significant differences in OS [Hazard Ratio (HR) = 0.857, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.513-1.431, P = 0.555] and CSS (HR = 0.925, 95% CI: 0.282-3.040, P = 0.898) between the 2 groups. Similar results were observed when comparisons were limited to patients with different tumor size and site.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population-based study, patients with lesions < 10 mm treated endoscopically had comparable long-term survival compared with those treated surgically, which demonstrates ET as an alternative to surgery in T1N0M0 colorectal NETs of < 10 mm. Further high-quality prospective studies are warranted to comprehensively evaluate the role of ET in patients with tumors 10 to 20 mm.

Diagnosis and Management of Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors (NETs)

Rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are rare, with an incidence of 0.17%, but they represent 12% to 27% of all NETs and 20% of gastrointestinal NETs. Although rectal NETs are uncommon tumors, their incidence has increased over the past few years, and this is probably due to the improvement in detection rates made by advanced endoscopic procedures. The biological behavior of rectal NETs may be different: factors predicting the risk of metastases have been identified, such as size and grade of differentiation. The tendency for metastatic diffusion generally depends on the tumor size, muscular and lymphovascular infiltration, and histopathological differentiation. According to the current European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) guidelines, tumors that are smaller than 10 mm and well differentiated are thought to have a low risk of lymphovascular invasion, and they should be completely removed endoscopically. Rectal NETs larger than 20 mm have a higher risk of involvement of muscularis propria and high metastatic risk and are candidates for surgical resection. There is controversy over rectal NETs of intermediate size, 10–19 mm, where the metastatic risk is considered to be 10–15%: assessment of tumors endoscopically and by endoanal ultrasound should guide treatment in these cases towards endoscopic, transanal, or surgical resection.

Update on gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

The incidence gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs) has dramatically risen over the last three decades, probably due to the increased detection of asymptomatic lesions. The diagnostic work-up for patients with suspected GEP-NENs is based on conventional imaging, endoscopy, pathology, and functional imaging, including ⁶⁸Gallium-DOTATATE PET and ¹⁸F-FDG PET. The choice of the best treatment strategy should be based on the evaluation of tumor-related features and patient's characteristics. A conservative management, consisting of active surveillance or endoscopic resection, has been advocated for patients with small, incidentally discovered, nonfunctioning tumors without features of aggressiveness. On the other hand, surgery with lymphadenectomy, also with a minimally invasive approach, represents the gold standard for the curative treatment of localized disease. Moreover, surgical resection plays an important role also in the context of a multimodal treatment strategy for patients with advanced GEP-NENs. Finally, a wide range of medical therapies, comprising somatostatin analogues, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy, target therapies and several chemotherapy regimens, can be offered to patients with advanced GEP-NENs not amenable of surgical resection, according to the biological and molecular features of their disease.

Comparison of 68Ga-DOTANOC and 18F-FDG PET-CT Scans in the Evaluation of Primary Tumors and Lymph Node Metastasis in Patients With Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors

BACKGROUND

Lymph node metastasis of rectal neuroendocrine tumors (RNETs) predicts poor prognosis. However, the assessment of lymph node metastasis remains a challenge. It has been reported that 68Ga-DOTANOC and 18F-FDG PET-CT scans could be employed in the work-up of rectal neuroendocrine tumors (RNETs). This study aimed to assess both tracers' ability to identify primary tumors and lymph node (LN) metastasis in RNETs.

METHODS

A total of 537 patients with RNETs were enrolled from January 2014 to January 2021. Both 68Ga-DOTANOC and 18F-FDG PET-CT scans were used to evaluate primary tumors and LN group metastasis. PET images were evaluated through visual and semiquantitative assessment. Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curve analysis was used to investigate the performance of SUVmax of 68Ga-DOTANOC and 18F-FDG PET in predicting LN group metastasis.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients with preoperative 68Ga-DOTANOC with 18F-FDG PET-CT scans underwent endoscopic biopsy or dissection of the primary tumor, while 11 patients underwent rectal surgery together with regional LN dissection. For primary tumors, 68Ga-DOTANOC had a sensitivity of 89.58% and a positive predictive value (PPV) of 95.56% through visual assessment, while 18F-FDG PET-CT showed 77.08% sensitivity and 97.37% PPV. For the prediction of LN group metastasis, 68Ga-DOTANOC PET-CT had 77.78% sensitivity and 91.67% specificity, while 18F-FDG PET-CT had 38.89% sensitivity and 100% specificity according to visual assessment. The area under the ROC curves (AUC) for 68Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT was 0.852 (95%CI:0.723-0.981) with an optimal SUVmax cut-off value of 2.25, while the AUC for 18F-FDG PET were 0.664 (95%CI:0.415-0.799) with an optimal SUVmax cut-off value of 1.05.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that 68Ga-DOTANOC PET-CT was a promising tool for detecting LN metastasis in RNETs with high sensitivity and specificity in visual assessment and semiquantitative assessment, which was better than 18F-FDG PET-CT.

Endoscopic full thickness resection vs. transanal endoscopic microsurgery for local treatment of rectal neuroendocrine tumors - a retrospective analysis

PURPOSE

Local treatment of small well-differentiated rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) is recommended by current guidelines. However, although several endoscopic methods have been established, the highest R0 rate is achieved by transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM). Since a recently published study about endoscopic full thickness resection (eFTR) showed a R0 resection rate of 100%, the aim of this study was to evaluate both methods (eFTR vs. TEM).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all patients with rectal NET treated either by TEM (1999-2018) or eFTR (2016-2019) in two tertiary centers (University Hospital Wuerzburg and Ulm). We analyzed clinical, procedural, and histopathological outcomes in both groups.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients with rectal NET received local treatment (TEM: 13; eFTR: 15). Most tumors were at stage T1a and grade G1 or G2 (in the TEM group two G3 NETs were staged T2 after neoadjuvant chemotherapy). In both groups, similar outcomes for en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, tumor size, or specimen size were found. No procedural adverse events were noted. Mean procedure time in the TEM group was 48.9 min and 19.2 min in the eFTR group.

CONCLUSION

eFTR is a convincing method for local treatment of small rectal NETs combining high safety and efficacy with short interventional time.

Chromogranin A Expression in Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors Is Associated With More Aggressive Clinical Behavior and a Poorer Prognosis

Although rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) with an L-cell phenotype and small size are generally less clinically serious, the new 2019 World Health Organization (WHO) classification system has categorized all of these lesions as malignant. Identifying biomarkers of rectal NETs is thus important for stratifying their clinical behavior. Chromogranin A protein expression was assessed in 538 endoscopically or surgically resected rectal NETs and compared with clinicopathologic factors to identify its clinical and prognostic significance. All of the rectal NETs analyzed (100%) were synaptophysin positive, but chromogranin A labeling was only detected in 111 cases (20.6%). Chromogranin A expression in the rectal NETs was more commonly associated with older age (50 y and older; P=0.013), male sex (P=0.002), radical resection (P=0.003), large tumor size (≥1 cm; P=0.038), muscularis propria invasion (P=0.002), lymphovascular (P=0.014) and perineural (P<0.001) invasion, an involved resection margin (P=0.028), and lymph node metastasis (P=0.003). Patients with chromogranin A expression had higher plasma chromogranin A levels (P=0.023) than those without chromogranin A expression during follow-up. The 10-year disease-free survival rate in rectal NET patients with chromogranin A expression (91.5%) was significantly shorter than the negative cases (99.7%) by both univariate (hazard ratio=14.438; 95% confidence interval: 2.911-71.598; P<0.001) and multivariate (hazard ratio=12.099; 95% confidence interval, 2.044-71.608; P=0.006) analyses. In summary, rectal NETs that are positive for chromogranin A are less common than those with synaptophysin expression and show more aggressive clinical behavior. Chromogranin A is therefore a prognostic indicator of higher recurrence risk in patients with endoscopically or surgically resected rectal NETs.

Prediction of the World Health Organization Grade of rectal neuroendocrine tumors based on CT histogram analysis

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) histogram analysis in predicting the World Health Organization (WHO) grade of rectal neuroendocrine tumors (R-NETs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 61 (35 G1, 12 G2, 10 G3, and 4 NECs) patients who underwent preoperative CECT and treated with surgery to be confirmed as R-NETs were included in this study from January 2014 to May 2019. We depicted ROIs and measured the CECT texture parameters (mean, median, 10th, 25th, 75th, 90th percentiles, skewness, kurtosis, and entropy) from arterial phase (AP) and venous phase (VP) images by two radiologists. We calculated intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and compared the histogram parameters between low-grade (G1) and higher grade (HG) (G2/G3/NECs) by applying appropriate statistical method. We obtained the optimal parameters to identify G1 from HG using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

RESULTS

The capability of AP and VP histogram parameters for differentiating G1 from HG was similar in several histogram parameters (mean, median, 10th, 25th, 75th, and 90th percentiles) (all p < 0.001). Skewness, kurtosis, and entropy on AP images showed no significant differences between G1 and HG (p = 0.853, 0.512, 0.557, respectively). Entropy on VP images was significantly different (p = 0.017) between G1 and HG, however, skewness and kurtosis showed no significant differences (p = 0.654, 0.172, respectively). ROC analysis showed a good predictive performance between G1 and HG, and the 75th (AP) generated the highest area under the curve (AUC = 0.871), followed by the 25th (AP), mean (VP), and median (VP) (AUC = 0.864). Combined the size of tumor and the 75th (AP) generated the highest AUC.

CONCLUSIONS

CECT histogram parameters, including arterial and venous phases, can be used as excellent indicators for predicting G1 and HG of rectal neuroendocrine tumors, and the size of the tumor is also an important independent predictor.

Risk Factors for Lymph Node Metastasis and Survival Outcomes in Colorectal Neuroendocrine Tumors

Objective

The aim of our study was to analyze the factors affecting lymph node metastasis (LNM) and the prognosis of colorectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs).

Patients and Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted to collect the clinical data of 135 patients with colorectal NETs from January 2000 to December 2018, including clinical manifestations, pathological results, treatment methods, etc. Follow-up was regularly performed to observe the recurrence and metastasis of tumors and to identify the clinical and pathological features of colorectal NETs, risk factors for LNM and survival outcomes.

Results

Among 135 patients, there were 57 (42.2) patients with LNM, and the independent risk factors for LNM in the multivariable analyses were tumor diameter ≥2 cm (P= 0.040) and tumor grade G3 (P=0.001). Patients were followed up for 1 to 190 months, and of the 133 patients who were successfully followed up, the 5-year OS was 71.7%, and the 5-year PFS was 69.0%. The multivariate analysis for survival outcomes showed that age ≥65 years (P=0.002/<0.001) and lymph node metastasis (P=0.018/0.025) were independent risk factors affecting 5-year PFS and OS in colorectal neuroendocrine tumors. Tumors in the colon (P=0.022), moderately positive (++) CgA (P=0.010) and strongly positive (+++) CgA (P=0.007) were independent risk factors for poor 5-year PFS in patients with colorectal NETs.

Conclusion

Rectal NETs have a better prognosis than colonic neuroendocrine tumors. Tumor diameter and tumor grade are independent risk factors for LNM in colorectal neuroendocrine tumors. Age, tumor location, lymph node status and a positive level of the neuroendocrine marker CgA are independent risk factors that affect the prognosis of colorectal NETs.

Digestive Neuroendocrine Neoplasms (NEN): French Intergroup clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up (SNFGE, GTE, RENATEN, TENPATH, FFCD, GERCOR, UNICANCER, SFCD, SFED, SFRO, SFR)

INTRODUCTION

This document is a summary of the French Intergroup guidelines regarding the management of digestive neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN) published in February 2020 (www.tncd.org).

METHODS

All French medical societies involved in the management of NEN took part in this work. Recommendations were graded into four categories (A, B, C or D), according to the level of evidence found in the literature until May 2019.

RESULTS

The management of NEN is challenging because of their heterogeneity and the increasing complexity of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. Pathological analysis is required for their diagnostic and prognostic characterization, which mainly relies on differentiation, grade and stage. The two main emergency situations are functioning syndromes and poorly-differentiated carcinoma. Chromogranin A is the main biochemical marker of NET, although of limited clinical interest. Initial characterization relies on morphological and isotopic imaging. The treatment of localized NET relies on watchful follow-up and local or surgical resection depending on its supposed aggressiveness. Treatment options for metastatic disease include surgery, somatostatin analogues, chemotherapy, targeted therapies, organ-driven locoregional therapies and peptide-receptor radionuclide therapy. As specific predictive factors of treatment efficacy are yet to be identified and head-to-head comparisons have not or only rarely been performed, the therapeutic strategy currently depends on prognostic factors. Cumulative toxicity and the impact of treatment on quality of life must be considered since survival is relatively long in most patients with NET.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines are proposed to achieve the most beneficial therapeutic strategy in clinical practice as the therapeutic landscape of NEN is becoming ever more complex. These recommendations are permanently being reviewed.

Rectal neuroendocrine tumor developing lateral lymph node metastasis after curative resection: a case report

Background

Among gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), rectal NETs account for about one-third of all tumors. Despite the occasional observation of lateral lymph node metastasis in patients with rectal NETs, lateral lymph node recurrence is rare. We present a rare case of lateral lymph node recurrence after curative resection of a rectal NET.

Case presentation

A 55-year-old man presented with fecal occult blood and colonoscopy revealed a mass in the distal rectum. Systematic computed tomography scan showed no evidence of regional lymph node or distant metastasis. The patient underwent laparoscopic intersphincteric resection and D2 lymph node dissection with diverting stoma. Diverting stoma closure was performed 6 months after the initial operation. Pathological diagnosis was NET of the rectum, grade 2, T1b, N0, Stage I without lymphovascular invasion. At 54 months after the surgery, recurrence in a left lateral lymph node was suspected and lymph node dissection was performed. The pathological diagnosis of the specimen was consistent with lateral lymph node metastasis of a recurrent rectal NET. To our best knowledge, there are no case reports in English of lateral lymph node recurrence after curative resection of a rectal NET, grade 2, T1b, N0, Stage I without lymphovascular invasion.

Conclusion

Considering that patients with lateral lymph node metastasis have worse survival than those without metastasis in rectal cancer, if complete resection of the tumor can be achieved for lateral lymph node recurrence, surgery may be an important option in the strategy to treat this condition.

Rectal NETs and rectosigmoid junction NETs may need to be treated differently

Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are heterogeneous, and the incidence of NETs is rapidly increasing. We observed different survival in patients with rectal NETs and rectosigmoid junction NETs, which are treated similarly. We included patients with rectal and rectosigmoid junction NETs from the SEER database. The 5‐year survival was set as the end‐point. 6675 patients with rectal NETs and 329 patients with rectosigmoid junction NETs, were eligible for the analysis. Initially, the survival analyses suggested that the 5‐year survival significantly differed between the patients with rectal and rectosigmoid junction NETs (HR = 0.82, 95% CI 0.70‐0.95; P = .01). Tumor differentiation, an invasion deeper than T2, and lymph node and distant metastases were still important risk factors affecting survival for both location. While, the males showed better survival (HR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.55‐0.88; P < .01) and primary tumor surgery had no benefits (P = .56) for patients with rectosigmoid junction NETs. The factors that predict regional lymph node metastases varied by location. In rectal NETs, invasion deeper than T1 and a tumor larger than 1 cm could significantly increase the risk of regional lymph node metastases (all OR > 5, P < .01). In rectosigmoid junction NETs, the risk of regional lymph node metastases was considered significantly higher with invasion deeper than T1 (all OR > 5, P < .01) and a tumor larger than 2 cm (OR = 31.32, 95% CI 2.53‐387.57; P < .01). We advocate a clear and consistent definition of the rectosigmoid junction for future studies, and more studies are needed to determine the reason underlying differences between rectum and rectosigmoid junction.