Metastatic VIPoma presenting as an ovarian mass

Diagnostic and Management Challenges in Vasoactive Intestinal Peptide Secreting Tumors: A Series of 15 Patients

OBJECTIVES

Vasoactive intestinal peptide-secreting tumors (VIPomas) are rare functioning neuroendocrine tumors often characterized by a difficult-to-control secretory syndrome and high potential to develop metastases. We hereby present the characteristics of 15 cases of VIPomas and provide a recent literature review.

METHODS

This was a retrospective data analysis of 15 patients with VIPoma from 3 different centers and literature research through PubMed database during the last 10 years.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients with VIPomas (9 with hepatic metastases at diagnosis) with watery diarrhea and raised VIP levels were studied. Ten patients (67%) had grade 2 tumors, 6 of 15 had localized disease and underwent potentially curative surgery, whereas the remaining 9 received multiple systemic therapies; 3 patients died during follow-up. The median overall survival was 71 months (range, 41-154 months). Patients who were treated with curative surgery (n = 7) had longer median overall survival compared with patients who were treated with other therapeutic modalities (44 vs 33 months).

CONCLUSIONS

The management of VIPomas is challenging requiring the application of multiple treatment modalities. Patients who underwent surgical treatment with curative intent appear to have higher survival rate. Central registration and larger prospective studies are required to evaluate the effect of currently employed therapies in these patients.

Prevalence of Diagnostic Methods and Treatment Modalities in Vipoma Patients: A Rare Cause of Hormone-Mediated Diarrhea

INTRODUCTION

VIPoma is a neuroendocrine tumor that secrets vasoactive intestinal peptide and produces a well-defined clinical syndrome characterized by watery diarrhea, hypokalemia, hypochlorhydria and metabolic acidosis. The aim of this study to investigate clinical studies about diagnostic and therapeutic modalities of vipoma patients. In this retrospective study, all patients of vipoma were investigated. Clinical features, laboratory data at initial presentation, management and outcomes were collected.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

The paper has written based on searching PubMed and Google Scholar to identify potentially relevant articles or abstracts. Categorical variables as percentage and continuous variables were reported as mean ± standard deviation (SD).

RESULTS

All the patients presented with watery diarrhea (30/30, 100%) and dehydration was reported in 33.3% of them. Prevalence of laboratory findings in these patients were assessed for hypokalaemia (25/30, 83.3%), metabolic acidosis (9/30, 33.6%), hypochloremia and achlorhydria (2/30, 6.6%). Elevated VIP levels have been seen in 73.3% patients with mean values of 882.85 ± 1134.87 pg/ml. Prevalence of diagnostic methods included CT scan in 19 patients (19/30, 63.3%), ultrasonography (15/50, 50%), and somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (8/30, 26.6%). Medical treatments included somatostatin and analogues in 18 patients (18/30, 60%). Surgery included less percentage of treatment in these patients.

CONCLUSION

CT scan can be used as a reliable modality for diagnosis of vipoma and somatostatin analogues can be used as the most effective treatment in vipoma patients. Surveillance of these patients needs to close monitoring of patients via history, physical examination, laboratory and imaging.