Treatment for gastrointestinal and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several available therapies for neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) have demonstrated efficacy in randomised controlled trials. However, translation of these results into improved care faces several challenges, as a direct comparison of the most pertinent therapies is incomplete.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of therapies for NETs, to guide clinical decision-making, and to provide estimates of relative efficiency of the different treatment options (including placebo) and rank the treatments according to their efficiency based on a network meta-analysis.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified studies through systematic searches of the following bibliographic databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE (Ovid); and Embase from January 1947 to December 2020. In addition, we checked trial registries for ongoing or unpublished eligible trials and manually searched for abstracts from scientific and clinical meetings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We evaluated randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing two or more therapies in people with NETs (primarily gastrointestinal and pancreatic).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies and extracted data to a pre-designed data extraction form. Multi-arm studies were included in the network meta-analysis using the R-package netmeta. We separately analysed two different outcomes (disease control and progression-free survival) and two types of NET (gastrointestinal and pancreatic NET) in four network meta-analyses. A frequentist approach was used to compare the efficacy of therapies.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 55 studies in 90 records in the qualitative analysis, reporting 39 primary RCTs and 16 subgroup analyses. We included 22 RCTs, with 4299 participants, that reported disease control and/or progression-free survival in the network meta-analysis. Precision-of-treatment estimates and estimated heterogeneity were limited, although the risk of bias was predominantly low. The network meta-analysis of progression-free survival found nine therapies for pancreatic NETs: everolimus (hazard ratio [HR], 0.36 [95% CI, 0.28 to 0.46]), interferon plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.34 [95% CI, 0.14 to 0.80]), everolimus plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.26 to 0.57]), bevacizumab plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.15 to 0.89]), interferon (HR, 0.41 [95% CI, 0.18 to 0.94]), sunitinib (HR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.26 to 0.67]), everolimus plus bevacizumab plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.28 to 0.83]), surufatinib (HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.32 to 0.76]), and somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.34 to 0.77]); and six therapies for gastrointestinal NETs: 177-Lu-DOTATATE plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.07 [95% CI, 0.02 to 0.26]), everolimus plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.12 [95%CI, 0.03 to 0.54]), bevacizumab plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.18 [95% CI, 0.04 to 0.94]), interferon plus somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.23 [95% CI, 0.06 to 0.93]), surufatinib (HR, 0.33 [95%CI, 0.12 to 0.88]), and somatostatin analogue (HR, 0.34 [95% CI, 0.16 to 0.76]), with higher efficacy than placebo. Besides everolimus for pancreatic NETs, the results suggested an overall superiority of combination therapies, including somatostatin analogues. The results indicate that NET therapies have a broad range of risk for adverse events and effects on quality of life, but these were reported inconsistently. Evidence from this network meta-analysis (and underlying RCTs) does not support any particular therapy (or combinations of therapies) with respect to patient-centred outcomes (e.g. overall survival and quality of life).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The findings from this study suggest that a range of efficient therapies with different safety profiles is available for people with NETs.

Molecular Signatures and Their Clinical Utility in Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) are classified based on their histologic differentiation and proliferative indices, which have been used extensively to determine prognosis. Advances in next-generation sequencing and other high-throughput techniques have allowed researchers to objectively explore tumor specimens and learn about the genetic alterations associated with malignant transformation in PNETs. As a result, targeted, pathway-specific therapies have been emerging for the treatment of unresectable and metastatic disease. As we continue to trial various pharmaceutical products, evidence from studies using multi-omics approaches indicates that clinical aggressiveness stratifies along other genotypic and phenotypic demarcations, as well. In this review, we explore the clinically relevant and potentially targetable molecular signatures of PNETs, their associated trials, and the overall differences in reported prognoses and responses to existing therapies.

Everolimus, lutetium-177 DOTATATE and sunitinib for advanced, unresectable or metastatic neuroendocrine tumours with disease progression: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) are a group of heterogeneous cancers that develop in cells in the diffuse neuroendocrine system.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the clinical effectiveness of three interventions [everolimus (Afinitor^®; Novartis International AG, Basel, Switzerland), lutetium-177 DOTATATE (177Lu-DOTATATE) (Lutathera^®; Imaging Equipment Ltd, Radstock, UK) and sunitinib (Sutent^®; Pfizer Inc., New York, NY, USA)] for treating unresectable or metastatic NETs with disease progression and establish the cost-effectiveness of these interventions.

DATA SOURCES

The following databases were searched from inception to May 2016: MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, MEDLINE Daily, Epub Ahead of Print, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science.

REVIEW METHODS

We systematically reviewed the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness literature on everolimus, 177Lu-DOTATATE and sunitinib for treating advanced, unresectable or metastatic progressive NETs. The following NET locations were considered separately: pancreas, gastrointestinal (GI) tract and lung, and GI tract (midgut only). We wrote a survival partition cohort-based economic evaluation in Microsoft Excel^® 2013 (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, USA) from the UK NHS and Personal Social Services perspective. This comprised three health states: (1) progression-free survival (PFS), (2) progressed disease and (3) death.

RESULTS

Three randomised controlled trials (RCTs), RADIANT-3 [RAD001 in Advanced Neuroendocrine Tumors, Third Trial; pancreatic NETs (pNETs): everolimus vs. best supportive care (BSC)], A6181111 (pNETs: sunitinib vs. BSC) and RADIANT-4 (RAD001 in Advanced Neuroendocrine Tumors, Fourth Trial; GI and lung NETs: everolimus vs. BSC), met the inclusion criteria for the clinical effectiveness systematic review. The risk of bias was low. Although the NETTER-1 (Neuroendocrine Tumors Therapy) RCT, of 177Lu-DOTATATE plus 30 mg of octreotide (Sandostatin^®, Novartis) compared with 60 mg of octreotide, was excluded from the review, we nonetheless present the results of this trial, as it informs our estimate of the cost-effectiveness of 177Lu-DOTATATE. The pNETs trials consistently found that the interventions improved PFS and overall survival (OS) compared with BSC. Our indirect comparison found no significant difference in PFS between everolimus and sunitinib. Estimates of OS gain were confounded because of high rates of treatment switching. After adjustment, our indirect comparison suggested a lower, but non-significant, hazard of death for sunitinib compared with everolimus. In GI and lung NETs, everolimus significantly improved PFS compared with BSC and showed a non-significant trend towards improved OS compared with BSC. Adverse events were more commonly reported following treatment with targeted interventions than after treatment with BSC. In the base case for pNETs, assuming list prices, we estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for everolimus compared with BSC of £45,493 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and for sunitinib compared with BSC of £20,717 per QALY. These ICERs increased substantially without the adjustment for treatment switching. For GI and lung NETs, we estimated an ICER for everolimus compared with BSC of £44,557 per QALY. For GI (midgut) NETs, the ICERs were £199,233 per QALY for everolimus compared with BSC and £62,158 per QALY for a scenario analysis comparing 177Lu-DOTATATE with BSC. We judge that no treatment meets the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence's (NICE) end-of-life criteria, although we cannot rule out that sunitinib in the A6181111 trial does.

LIMITATIONS

A RCT with included comparators was not identified for 177Lu-DOTATATE. The indirect treatment comparison that our economic analysis was based on was of a simple Bucher type, unadjusted for any differences in the baseline characteristics across the two trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Given NICE's current stated range of £20,000-30,000 per QALY for the cost-effectiveness threshold, based on list prices, only sunitinib might be considered good value for money in England and Wales.

FUTURE WORK

Further analysis of individual patient data from RADIANT-3 would allow assessment of the robustness of our findings. The data were not made available to us by the company sponsoring the trial.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016041303.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Emerging therapies and latest development in the treatment of unresectable pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: an update for clinicians

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) differ in their clinical behavior, presentation and prognosis based on their initial histological features and disease stage. While small resectable tumors can be treated surgically, metastatic and locally advanced disease carries a significant mortality and treatment options have been limited in terms of their efficacy. Streptozocin-based regimens were the only agents available before but recent advances have improved the armamentarium to treat pNETs. Newer chemotherapeutic agents such as temozolomide, somatostatin analogs and targeted therapies including everolimus and sunitinib are now available to treat these tumors. Several combination regimens with targeted therapies and newer agents such as pazopanib are being developed and tested in ongoing trials.

Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy for neuroendocrine tumors in Germany: first results of a multi-institutional cancer registry

Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy is an effective treatment option for patients with well-differentiated somatostatin receptor-expressing neuroendocrine tumors. However, published data result mainly from retrospective monocentric studies. We initiated a multi-institutional, prospective, board-reviewed registry for patients treated with peptide receptor radionuclide therapy in Germany in 2009. In five centers, 297 patients were registered. Primary tumors were mainly derived from pancreas (117/297) and small intestine (80/297), whereas 56 were of unknown primary. Most tumors were well differentiated with median Ki67 proliferation rate of 5% (range 0.9-70%). Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy was performed using mainly yttrium-90 and/or lutetium-177 as radionuclides in 1-8 cycles. Mean overall survival was estimated at 213 months with follow-up between 1 and 230 months after initial diagnosis, and 87 months with follow-up between 1 and 92 months after start of peptide receptor radionuclide therapy. Median overall survival was not yet reached. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that best results were obtained in neuroendocrine tumors with proliferation rate below 20%. Our results indicate that peptide receptor radionuclide therapy is an effective treatment for well- and moderately differentiated neuroendocrine tumors irrespective of previous therapies and should be regarded as one of the primary treatment options for patients with somatostatin receptor-expressing neuroendocrine tumors.

Sunitinib malate for the treatment of pancreas malignancies--where does it fit?

INTRODUCTION

Sunitinib , a broad-spectrum multikinase inhibitor, was recently approved for use in progressive, well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs). Its mechanism of action affects various signaling cascades involving antiangiogenesis and tumor proliferation, including vascular endothelial growth factors and platelet-derived growth factors.

AREAS COVERED

In this article, we review sunitinib's mechanism of action at a molecular level and review key preclinical and clinical studies for pNETs and more limited data regarding sunitinib's evaluation in pancreas adenocarcinoma. The data for sunitinib in pNETs are placed in the context of the changing landscape of therapeutic options for this cancer, and relevant ongoing clinical trials and future directions are highlighted.

EXPERT OPINION

Sunitinib malate has become integrated into routine clinical management for pNETs; however, its role in pancreas adenocarcinoma is not established.

Translation of molecular pathways into clinical trials of neuroendocrine tumors

Current treatment options for neuroendocrine tumors (NET) include somatostatin analogs, interferon-α, peptide receptor-targeted therapy and cytotoxic chemotherapy. Most patients undergo sequential therapies since these drugs are active only in subpopulations of patients and for a limited period of time. There is a need for novel drugs that are capable of amelioration of symptomatology (syndromic control) and/or tumor growth control. A number of diverse signaling pathways are involved in the pathogenesis of NET and tumor growth, thus many potential targets are available for drug targeting. Targeted therapies therefore represent an appropriate developmental therapeutic strategy given the multiplicity of potential targets in NET. These include but are not limited to: inhibitory or activating G protein-coupled receptors, receptor tyrosine kinases, ligands, and intracellular targets such as the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR). Numerous drugs that utilize single or multiple targets are currently in clinical development. Recently, two target-directed agents, the multiple tyrosine kinase inhibitor sunitinib and the mTOR inhibitor everolimus, have been approved for the treatment of progressive pancreatic NET. This review provides a broad overview of established and potential molecular targets in NET, summarizes data from phase II and III clinical trials with targeted drugs and outlines future therapeutic directions.

Well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: from genetics to therapy

Well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNETs) comprise ∼1-3% of pancreatic neoplasms. Although long considered as reasonably benign lesions, PanNETs have considerable malignant potential, with a 5-year survival of ∼65% and a 10-year survival of 45% for resected lesions. As PanNETs have a low incidence, they have been understudied, with few advances made until the completion of their exomic sequencing in the past year. In this Review, we summarize some of the latest insights into the genetics of PanNETs, and their probable implications in the context of prognosis and therapy. In particular, we discuss two genes (DAXX and ATRX) that have collectively been identified as mutated in >40% of PanNETs, and the biological and prognostic implications of these novel mutations. The identification of recurrent somatic mutations within the mTOR signaling pathway and the therapeutic implications for personalized therapy in patients with PanNETs are also discussed. Finally, this Review outlines state-of-the-art advances in the biology of PanNETs that are of emerging translational importance.