Blood mRNA Measurement (NETest) for Neuroendocrine Tumor Diagnosis of Image-Negative Liver Metastatic Disease

The Quest for Circulating Biomarkers in Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: a Clinical Perspective

OPINION STATEMENT

Given the considerable heterogeneity in neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs), it appears unlikely that a sole biomarker exists capable of fully capturing all useful clinical aspects of these tumors. This is reflected in the abundant number of biomarkers presently available for the diagnosis, prognosis, and monitoring of NEN patients. Although assessment of immunohistochemical and radiological markers remains paramount and often obligatory, there has been a notable surge of interest in circulating biomarkers over the years given the numerous benefits associated with liquid biopsies. Currently, the clinic primarily relies on single-analyte assays such as the chromogranin A assay, but these are far from ideal because of limitations such as compromised sensitivity and specificity as well as a lack of standardization. Consequently, the quest for NEN biomarkers continued with the exploration of multianalyte markers, exemplified by the development of the NETest and ctDNA-based analysis. Here, an extensive panel of markers is simultaneously evaluated to identify distinct signatures that could enhance the accuracy of patient diagnosis, prognosis determination, and response to therapy prediction and monitoring. Given the promising results, the development and implementation of these multianalyte markers are expected to usher in a new era of NEN biomarkers in the clinic. In this review, we will outline both clinically implemented and more experimental circulating markers to provide an update on developments in this rapidly evolving field.

An Overview of Circulating Biomarkers in Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: A Clinical Guide

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are a heterogeneous group of diseases that are characterized by different behavior and clinical manifestations. The diagnosis and management of this group of tumors are challenging due to tumor complexity and lack of precise and widely validated biomarkers. Indeed, the current circulating mono-analyte biomarkers (such as chromogranin A) are ineffective in describing such complex tumors due to their poor sensitivity and specificity. In contrast, multi-analytical circulating biomarkers (including NETest) are emerging as more effective tools to determine the real-time profile of the disease, both in terms of accurate diagnosis and effective treatment. In this review, we will analyze the capabilities and limitations of different circulating biomarkers focusing on three relevant questions: (1) accurate and early diagnosis; (2) monitoring of disease progression and response to therapy; and (3) detection of early relapse.

Circulating hsa-miR-5096 predicts 18F-FDG PET/CT positivity and modulates somatostatin receptor 2 expression: a novel miR-based assay for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

Gastro-entero-pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) are rare diseases encompassing pancreatic (PanNETs) and ileal NETs (SINETs), characterized by heterogeneous somatostatin receptors (SSTRs) expression. Treatments for inoperable GEP-NETs are limited, and SSTR-targeted Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy (PRRT) achieves variable responses. Prognostic biomarkers for the management of GEP-NET patients are required. ¹⁸F-FDG uptake is a prognostic indicator of aggressiveness in GEP-NETs. This study aims to identify circulating and measurable prognostic miRNAs associated with ¹⁸F-FDG-PET/CT status, higher risk and lower response to PRRT.

Methods

Whole miRNOme NGS profiling was conducted on plasma samples obtained from well-differentiated advanced, metastatic, inoperable G1, G2 and G3 GEP-NET patients enrolled in the non-randomized LUX (NCT02736500) and LUNET (NCT02489604) clinical trials prior to PRRT (screening set, n= 24). Differential expression analysis was performed between ¹⁸F-FDG positive (n=12) and negative (n=12) patients. Validation was conducted by Real Time quantitative PCR in two distinct well-differentiated GEP-NET validation cohorts, considering the primary site of origin (PanNETs n=38 and SINETs n=30). The Cox regression was applied to assess independent clinical parameters and imaging for progression-free survival (PFS) in PanNETs. In situ RNA hybridization combined with immunohistochemistry was performed to simultaneously detect miR and protein expression in the same tissue specimens. This novel semi-automated miR-protein protocol was applied in PanNET FFPE specimens (n=9). In vitro functional experiments were performed in PanNET models.

Results

While no miRNAs emerged to be deregulated in SINETs, hsa-miR-5096, hsa-let-7i-3p and hsa-miR-4311 were found to correlate with ¹⁸F-FDG-PET/CT in PanNETs (p-value:<0.005). Statistical analysis has shown that, hsa-miR-5096 can predict 6-month PFS (p-value:<0.001) and 12-month Overall Survival upon PRRT treatment (p-value:<0.05), as well as identify ¹⁸F-FDG-PET/CT positive PanNETs with worse prognosis after PRRT (p-value:<0.005). In addition, hsa-miR-5096 inversely correlated with both SSTR2 expression in PanNET tissue and with the ⁶⁸Gallium-DOTATOC captation values (p-value:<0.05), and accordingly it was able to decrease SSTR2 when ectopically expressed in PanNET cells (p-value:<0.01).

Conclusions

hsa-miR-5096 well performs as a biomarker for ¹⁸F-FDG-PET/CT and as independent predictor of PFS. Moreover, exosome-mediated delivery of hsa-miR-5096 may promote SSTR2 heterogeneity and thus resistance to PRRT.

Liquid Biopsy in Lung Cancer: Biomarkers for the Management of Recurrence and Metastasis

Liquid biopsies have emerged as a promising tool for the detection of metastases as well as local and regional recurrence in lung cancer. Liquid biopsy tests involve analyzing a patient's blood, urine, or other body fluids for the detection of biomarkers, including circulating tumor cells or tumor-derived DNA/RNA that have been shed into the bloodstream. Studies have shown that liquid biopsies can detect lung cancer metastases with high accuracy and sensitivity, even before they are visible on imaging scans. Such tests are valuable for early intervention and personalized treatment, aiming to improve patient outcomes. Liquid biopsies are also minimally invasive compared to traditional tissue biopsies, which require the removal of a sample of the tumor for further analysis. This makes liquid biopsies a more convenient and less risky option for patients, particularly those who are not good candidates for invasive procedures due to other medical conditions. While liquid biopsies for lung cancer metastases and relapse are still being developed and validated, they hold great promise for improving the detection and treatment of this deadly disease. Herein, we summarize available and novel approaches to liquid biopsy tests for lung cancer metastases and recurrence detection and describe their applications in clinical practice.

Neuroendocrine Tumors: Genomics and Molecular Biomarkers with a Focus on Metastatic Disease

Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are considered rare tumors that originate from specialized endocrine cells. Patients often present with metastatic disease at the time of diagnosis, which negatively impacts their quality of life and overall survival. An understanding of the genetic mutations that drive these tumors and the biomarkers used to detect new NET cases is important to identify patients at an earlier disease stage. Elevations in CgA, synaptophysin, and 5-HIAA are most commonly used to identify NETs and assess prognosis; however, new advances in whole genome sequencing and multigenomic blood assays have allowed for a greater understanding of the drivers of NETs and more sensitive and specific tests to diagnose tumors and assess disease response. Treating NET liver metastases is important in managing hormonal or carcinoid symptoms and is imperative to improve patient survival. Treatment for liver-dominant disease is varied; delineating biomarkers that may predict response will allow for better patient stratification.

Blood-Based mRNA Tests as Emerging Diagnostic Tools for Personalised Medicine in Breast Cancer

Molecular diagnostic tests help clinicians understand the underlying biological mechanisms of their patients' breast cancer (BC) and facilitate clinical management. Several tissue-based mRNA tests are used routinely in clinical practice, particularly for assessing the BC recurrence risk, which can guide treatment decisions. However, blood-based mRNA assays have only recently started to emerge. This review explores the commercially available blood mRNA diagnostic assays for BC. These tests enable differentiation of BC from non-BC subjects (Syantra DX, BCtect), detection of small tumours <10 mm (early BC detection) (Syantra DX), detection of different cancers (including BC) from a single blood sample (multi-cancer blood test Aristotle), detection of BC in premenopausal and postmenopausal women and those with high breast density (Syantra DX), and improvement of diagnostic outcomes of DNA testing (variant interpretation) (+RNAinsight). The review also evaluates ongoing transcriptomic research on exciting possibilities for future assays, including blood transcriptome analyses aimed at differentiating lymph node positive and negative BC, distinguishing BC and benign breast disease, detecting ductal carcinoma in situ, and improving early detection further (expression changes can be detected in blood up to eight years before diagnosing BC using conventional approaches, while future metastatic and non-metastatic BC can be distinguished two years before BC diagnosis).

Clinical Features of Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Microadenoma: A Single-Center Experience and Literature Review

OBJECTIVES

Pancreatic neuroendocrine microadenoma (NEMA) is a nonfunctioning neuroendocrine tumor of less than 5 mm. Most studies of NEMA were based on autopsies, and few reports have revealed the clinical frequency of NEMA. We investigated the clinicopathological features of NEMA.

METHODS

The pathological results of the pancreatic resection specimens of patients, older than 18 years, who underwent pancreatic resection at Hokkaido University Hospital between April 2008 and December 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. The NEMAs were re-examined in detail and examined by immunohistochemical staining.

RESULTS

Among 850 patients enrolled in this study, 24 NEMAs were identified in 12 patients (1.4%). Of the 12 patients, 2 patients had multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1, and the others had no hereditary disease, including 2 patients with multiple NEMAs. A difference in the number of NEMA was observed between patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 and sporadic NEMA. Intratumoral Ki-67 heterogeneity was correlated with the Ki-67 index. One grade 2 NEMA (Ki-67 index, 4.6%) was detected, but ATRX and DAXX labeling showed intact nuclear protein expression.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple sporadic NEMAs and grade 2 NEMAs were observed, suggesting that NEMA may have malignant potential. Thus, NEMAs should be carefully monitored for lymph node metastasis and postoperative recurrence.

Predictive Factors for Resistant Disease with Medical/Radiologic/Liver-Directed Anti-Tumor Treatments in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: Recent Advances and Controversies

Simple Summary

Tumor resistance, both primary and acquired, is leading to increased complexity in the nonsurgical treatment of patients with advanced panNENs, which would be greatly helped by reliable prognostic/predictive factors. The importance in identifying resistance is being contributed to by the increased array of possible treatments available for treating resistant advanced disease; the variable clinical course as well as response to any given treatment approach of patients within one staging or grading system, the advances in imaging which are providing increasing promising results/parameters that correlate with grading/outcome/resistance, the increased understanding of the molecular pathogenesis providing promising prognostic markers, all of which can contribute to selecting the best treatment to overcome resistance disease. Several factors have been identified that have prognostic/predictive value for identifying development resistant disease and affecting overall survival (OS)/PFS with various nonsurgical treatments of patients with advanced panNENs. Prognostic factors identified for patients with advanced panNENs for both OS/PFSs include various clinically-related factors (clinical, laboratory/biological markers, imaging, treatment-related factors), pathological factors (histological, classification, grading) and molecular factors. Particularly important prognostic factors for the different treatment modalities studies are the recent grading systems. Most prognostic factors for each treatment modality for OS/PFS are not specific for a given treatment option. These advances have generated several controversies and new unanswered questions, particularly those related to their possible role in predicting the possible sequence of different anti-tumor treatments in patients with different presentations. Each of these areas is reviewed in this paper.

Abstract

Purpose: Recent advances in the diagnosis, management and nonsurgical treatment of patients with advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (panNENs) have led to an emerging need for sensitive and useful prognostic factors for predicting responses/survival. Areas covered: The predictive value of a number of reported prognostic factors including clinically-related factors (clinical/laboratory/imaging/treatment-related factors), pathological factors (histological/classification/grading), and molecular factors, on therapeutic outcomes of anti-tumor medical therapies with molecular targeting agents (everolimus/sunitinib/somatostatin analogues), chemotherapy, radiological therapy with peptide receptor radionuclide therapy, or liver-directed therapies (embolization/chemoembolization/radio-embolization (SIRTs)) are reviewed. Recent findings in each of these areas, as well as remaining controversies and uncertainties, are discussed in detail, particularly from the viewpoint of treatment sequencing. Conclusions: The recent increase in the number of available therapeutic agents for the nonsurgical treatment of patients with advanced panNENs have raised the importance of prognostic factors predictive for therapeutic outcomes of each treatment option. The establishment of sensitive and useful prognostic markers will have a significant impact on optimal treatment selection, as well as in tailoring the therapeutic sequence, and for maximizing the survival benefit of each individual patient. In the paper, the progress in this area, as well as the controversies/uncertainties, are reviewed.

Perspectives on the diagnostic, predictive and prognostic markers of neuroendocrine neoplasms (Review)

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are a heterogeneous group of rare tumors with different types of physiology and prognosis. Therefore, prognostic information, including morphological differentiation, grade, tumor stage and primary location, are invaluable and contribute to the formulation of treatment decisions. Biomarkers that are currently used, including chromogranin A (CgA), serotonin and neuron-specific enolase, are singular parameters that cannot be used to accurately predict variables associated with tumor growth, including proliferation, metabolic rate and metastatic potential. In addition, site-specific biomarkers, such as insulin and gastrin, cannot be applied to all types of NENs. The clinical application of broad-spectrum markers, as it is the case for CgA, remains controversial despite being widely used. Due to limitations of the currently available mono-analyte biomarkers, recent studies were conducted to explore novel parameters for NEN diagnosis, prognosis, therapy stratification and evaluation of treatment response. Identification of prognostic factors for predicting NEN outcome is a critical requirement for the planning of adequate clinical management. Advances in ‘liquid’ biopsies and genomic analysis techniques, including microRNA, circulating tumor DNA or circulating tumor cells and sophisticated biomathematical analysis techniques, such as NETest or molecular image-based biomarkers, are currently under investigation as potentially novel tools for the management of NENs in the future. Despite these recent findings yielding promising observations, further research is necessary. The present review therefore summarizes the existing knowledge and recent advancements in the exploration of biochemical markers for NENs, with focus on gastroenteropancreatic-neuroendocrine tumors.

A multigenomic liquid biopsy biomarker for neuroendocrine tumor disease outperforms CgA and has surgical and clinical utility

BACKGROUND

Biomarkers are key tools in cancer management. In neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), Chromogranin A (CgA) was considered acceptable as a biomarker. We compared the clinical efficacy of a multigenomic blood biomarker (NETest) to CgA over a 5-year period.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

An observational, prospective, cross-sectional, multicenter, multinational, comparative cohort assessment. Cohort 1: NETest evaluation in NETs (n = 1684) and cancers, benign diseases, controls (n = 731). Cohort 2: (n = 1270): matched analysis of NETest/CgA in a sub-cohort of NETs (n = 922) versus other diseases and controls (n = 348). Disease status was assessed by response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST). NETest measurement: qPCR [upper limit of normal (ULN: 20)], CgA (EuroDiagnostica, ULN: 108 ng/ml).

STATISTICS

Mann-Whitney U-test, AUROC, chi-square and McNemar' test.

RESULTS

Cohort 1: NETest diagnostic accuracy was 91% (P < 0.0001) and identified pheochromocytomas (98%), small intestine (94%), pancreas (91%), lung (88%), gastric (80%) and appendix (79%). NETest reflected grading: G1: 40 ± 1, G2 (50 ± 1) and G3 (52 ± 1). Locoregional disease levels were lower (38 ± 1) than metastatic (52 ± 1, P < 0.0001). NETest accurately stratified RECIST-assessed disease extent: no disease (21 ± 1), stable (43 ± 2), progressive (62 ± 2) (P < 0.0001). NETest concordance with imaging (CT/MRI/⁶⁸Ga-SSA-PET) 91%. Presurgery, all NETs (n = 153) were positive (100%). After palliative R1/R2 surgery (n = 51) all (100%) remained elevated. After curative R0-surgery (n = 102), NETest levels were normal in 81 (70%) with no recurrence at 2 years. In the 31 (30%) with elevated levels, 25 (81%) recurred within 2 years. Cohort #2: NETest diagnostic accuracy was 87% and CgA 54% (P < 0.0001). NETest was more accurate than CgA for grading (chi-square = 7.7, OR = 18.5) and metastatic identification (chi-square = 180, OR = 8.4). NETest identified progressive disease (95%) versus CgA (57%, P < 0.0001). Imaging concordance for NETest was 91% versus CgA (46%) (P < 0.0001). Recurrence prediction after surgery was NETest-positive in >94% versus CgA 11%.

CONCLUSION

NETest accurately diagnoses NETs and is an effective surrogate marker for imaging, grade, metastases and disease status compared to CgA. A multigenomic liquid biopsy is an accurate biomarker of NET disease.

Molecular Genomic Assessment Using a Blood-based mRNA Signature (NETest) is Cost-effective and Predicts Neuroendocrine Tumor Recurrence With 94% Accuracy

INTRODUCTION

Identification of residual disease after neuroendocrine tumor (NET) resection is critical for management. Post-surgery imaging is insensitive, expensive, and current biomarkers ineffective. We evaluated whether the NETest, a multigene liquid biopsy blood biomarker, correlated with surgical resection and could predict recurrence.

METHODS

Multicenter evaluation of NET resections over 24 months (n = 103): 47 pancreas, 26 small bowel, 26 lung, 2 appendix, 1 duodenum, 1 stomach. Surgery: R0 (83), R1/R2 (20). One millilitre of blood was collected at D0 and posroperative day (POD) 30. Transcript quantification by polymerase chain reaction (normal: ≤20), CgA by NEOLISA (normal ≤108 ng/mL). Standard-of-care (SoC) follow-up costs were calculated and compared to POD30 NETest-stratification approach. Analyses: Wilcoxon-paired test, Chi-square test.

RESULTS

D BIOMARKERS

NETest: 103 of 103 (100%)-positive, whereas 23 of 103 (22%) were CgA-positive (Chi-square = 78, P < 0.0001).In the R0 group, the NETest decreased 59 ± 28 to 26 ± 23 (P < 0.0001); 36% (30/83) remained elevated. No significant decrease was evident for CgA. In the R1/R2 group the NETest decreased but 100% remained elevated. CgA levels did not decrease.An elevated POD30 NETest was present in R0 and 25 (83%) developed radiological recurrences. Normal score R0 s (n = 53) did not develop recurrence (Chi-square = 56, P < 0.0001). Recurrence prediction was 94% accurate with the NETest.

COST EVALUATION

Using the NETest to stratify postoperative imaging resulted in a cost-savings of 42%.

CONCLUSION

NETest diagnosis is more accurate than CgA (100% vs 22%). Surgery significantly decreased NETest. An elevated POD30 NETest predicted recurrence with 94% accuracy and post-surgical POD30 NETest follow-up stratification decreased costs by 42%. CgA had no surgical utility. Further studies would define the accuracy and cost-effectiveness of the NETest in the detection of postoperative recurrent disease.

A tool to predict survival in stage IV entero-pancreatic NEN

PURPOSE

Well-differentiated stage IV neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN) have an extremely heterogeneous, unpredictable clinical behavior. Survival prognostic markers, such as the recently proposed NEP-Score, would be very useful for better defining therapeutic strategies. We aim to verify NEP-Score applicability in an independent cohort of stage IV well-differentiated (WD) gastroentero-pancreatic (GEP) NEN, and identify a derivate prognostic marker taking into account clinical and pathological characteristics at diagnosis.

METHODS

Age, site of primary tumor, primary tumor surgery, symptoms, Ki67, timing of metastases of 27 patients (10 females; mean age at diagnosis 60.2 ± 2.9 years) with stage IV WD GEP NEN were evaluated to calculate the NEP-Score at the end of follow-up (NEP-T). We calculated the NEP-Score at diagnosis (NEP-D), which does not consider the appearance of new metastases during follow-up. Patients were subdivided according to whether they were alive or not at the end of follow-up (EOF) and an NEP-Score threshold was investigated to predict survival.

RESULTS

Mean NEP-T and mean NEP-D were significantly lower in 15 live patients as compared to 12 deceased patients (p < 0.01) at EOF. We identified an NEP-D = 116 as the cutoff that significantly predicts survival. No gender differences were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

In our series, we confirmed NEP-Score applicability. In addition, we propose NEP-D as a simple, quick and cheap prognostic score that can help clinicians in decision making. NEP-D threshold can predict NEN aggressiveness and may be used to define the best personalized therapeutic strategy.

Early Identification of Residual Disease After Neuroendocrine Tumor Resection Using a Liquid Biopsy Multigenomic mRNA Signature (NETest)

INTRODUCTION

Surgery is the only cure for neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), with R0 resection being critical for successful tumor removal. Early detection of residual disease is key for optimal management, but both imaging and current biomarkers are ineffective post-surgery. NETest, a multigene blood biomarker, identifies NETs with >90% accuracy. We hypothesized that surgery would decrease NETest levels and that elevated scores post-surgery would predict recurrence.

METHODS

This was a multicenter evaluation of surgically treated primary NETs (n = 153). Blood sampling was performed at day 0 and postoperative day (POD) 30. Follow-up included computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (CT/MRI), and messenger RNA (mRNA) quantification was performed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR; NETest score: 0-100; normal ≤20). Statistical analyses were performed using the Mann-Whitney U-test, Chi-square test, Kaplan-Meier survival, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), as appropriate. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation.

RESULTS

The NET cohort (n = 153) included 57 patients with pancreatic cancer, 62 patients with small bowel cancer, 27 patients with lung cancer, 4 patients with duodenal cancer, and 3 patients with gastric cancer, while the surgical cohort comprised patients with R0 (n = 102) and R1 and R2 (n = 51) resection. The mean follow-up time was 14 months (range 3-68). The NETest was positive in 153/153 (100%) samples preoperatively (mean levels of 68 ± 28). In the R0 cohort, POD30 levels decreased from 62 ± 28 to 22 ± 20 (p < 0.0001), but remained elevated in 30% (31/102) of patients: 28% lung, 29% pancreas, 27% small bowel, and 33% gastric. By 18 months, 25/31 (81%) patients with a POD30 NETest >20 had image-identifiable recurrence. An NETest score of >20 predicted recurrence with 100% sensitivity and correlated with residual disease (Chi-square 17.1, p < 0.0001). AUROC analysis identified an AUC of 0.97 (p < 0.0001) for recurrence-prediction. In the R1 (n = 29) and R2 (n = 22) cohorts, the score decreased (R1: 74 ± 28 to 45 ± 24, p = 0.0012; R2: 72 ± 24 to 60 ± 28, p = non-significant). At POD30, 100% of NETest scores were elevated despite surgery (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The preoperative NETest accurately identified all NETs (100%). All resections decreased NETest levels and a POD30 NETest score >20 predicted radiologically recurrent disease with 94% accuracy and 100% sensitivity. R0 resection appears to be ineffective in approximately 30% of patients. NET mRNA blood levels provide early objective genomic identification of residual disease and may facilitate management.

Advanced Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: Which Systemic Treatment Should I Start With?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (panNENs) often present as advanced disease and there is little data to guide treatment sequencing in the advance disease setting. Therefore, we aim to provide a comprehensive summary of the current evidence supporting the use of systemic treatment for patients with diagnosis of advanced and metastatic panNENs, as well as to provide strategies for treatment selection and address challenges for treatment selection and sequencing of therapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Substantial advances have been made and many clinical trials have been performed over the past two decades expanding therapeutic options available for patients with advanced panNETs. Available systemic treatments for patients with well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors include somatostatin receptors ligands (SRLs), traditional cytotoxic chemotherapy regimens, peptide receptor radiotherapy (PRRT), and biologically targeted therapies, whereas patients with poorly differentiated neurodocrine carcinomas have more limited treatment options. Despite these advances, no clear guidelines exist to support the best sequence of treatments, not only the first-line, but also subsequent lines of therapy in patients with panNENs. Advances in molecular research and discovery of biomarkers for response allowing a more personalized approach to the multimodality therapy of panNENs are still limited. Understanding the impact of previous therapies on subsequent treatment efficacy and toxicity is also an ongoing research question. In the absence of definite predictive markers and paucity of comparative randomized trials, along with the heterogeneity of this patient population, systemic therapy selection in advanced non-resectable disease should be patient centered and often require evaluation within a multidisciplinary setting. The specific clinical context of the patient, with assessment of individual patient clinical and pathological features, somatostatin receptors imaging, and goals of treatment must all be considered when deciding on systemic therapy in the patient. Additional research is needed to address the gap in knowledge regarding optimal sequencing and timing of therapies and to provide individual care.

Multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN-1) and neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs)

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are relatively rare neoplasms with 6.4-times increasing age-adjusted annual incidence during the last four decades. NENs arise from neuroendocrine cells, which release hormones in response to neuronal stimuli and they are distributed into organs and tissues. The presentation and biological behaviour of the NENs are highly heterogeneous, depending on the organ. The increased incidence is mainly due to increased awareness and improved detection methods both in the majority of sporadic NENs (non-inherited), but also the inherited groups of neoplasms appearing in at least ten genetic syndromes. The most important one is multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN-1), caused by mutations in the tumour suppressor gene MEN1. MEN-1 has been associated with different tumour manifestations of NENs e.g. pancreas, gastrointestinal tract, lungs, thymus and pituitary. Pancreatic NENs tend to be less aggressive when arising in the setting of MEN-1 compared to sporadic pancreatic NENs. There have been very important improvements over the past years in both genotyping, genetic counselling and family screening, introduction and validation of various relevant biomarkers, as well as newer imaging modalities. Alongside this development, both medical, surgical and radionuclide treatments have also advanced and improved morbidity, quality of life and mortality in many of these patients. Despite this progress, there is still space for improving insight into the genetic and epigenetic factors in relation to the biological mechanisms determining NENs as part of MEN-1. This review gives a comprehensive update of current evidence for co-occurrence, diagnosis and treatment of MEN-1 and neuroendocrine neoplasms and highlight the important progress now finding its way to international guidelines in order to improve the global management of these patients.

NETest is superior to chromogranin A in neuroendocrine neoplasia: a prospective ENETS CoE analysis

INTRODUCTION

The absence of a reliable, universal biomarker is a significant limitation in neuroendocrine neoplasia (NEN) management. We prospectively evaluated two CgA assays, (NEOLISA, EuroDiagnostica) and (CgA ELISA, Demeditec Diagnostics (DD)) and compared the results to the NETest.

METHODS

NEN cohort (n = 258): pancreatic, n = 67; small intestine, n = 40; appendiceal, n = 10; rectal, n = 45; duodenal, n = 9; gastric, n = 44; lung, n = 43. Image-positive disease (IPD) (n = 123), image & histology- negative (IND) (n = 106), and image-negative and histology positive (n = 29). CgA metrics: NEOLISA, ULN: 108 ng/mL, DD: ULN: 99 ng/mL. Data mean ± s.e.m. NETest: qRT-PCR - multianalyte analyses, ULN: 20. All samples de-identified and assessed blinded. Statistics: Mann-Whitney U-test, Pearson correlation and McNemar-test.

RESULTS

CgA positive in 53/258 (NEOLISA), 32 (DD) and NETest-positive in 157/258. In image- positive disease (IPD, n = 123), NEOLISA-positive: 33% and DD: 19%. NETest-positive: 122/123 (99%; McNemar's Chi2= 79-97, P < 0.0001). NEOLISA was more accurate than DD (P = 0.0003). In image- negative disease (IND), CgA was NEOLISA-positive (11%), DD (8%), P = NS, and NETest (33%). CgA assays could not distinguish progressive (PD) from stable disease (SD) or localized from metastatic disease (MD). NETest was significantly higher in PD (47 ± 5) than SD (29 ± 1, P = 0.0009). NETest levels in MD (35 ± 2) were elevated vs localized disease (24 ± 1.3, P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

NETest, a multigenomic mRNA biomarker, was ~99% accurate in the identification of NEN disease. The CgA assays detected NEN disease in 19-33%. Multigenomic blood analysis using NETest is more accurate than CgA and should be considered the biomarker standard of care.

Prospective Evaluation of the NETest as a Liquid Biopsy for Gastroenteropancreatic and Bronchopulmonary Neuroendocrine Tumors: An ENETS Center of Excellence Experience

BACKGROUND

There is a substantial unmet clinical need for an accurate and effective blood biomarker for neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN). We therefore evaluated, under real-world conditions in an ENETS Center of Excellence (CoE), the clinical utility of the NETest as a liquid biopsy and compared its utility with chromogranin A (CgA) measurement.

METHODS

The cohorts were: gastroenteropancreatic NEN (GEP-NEN; n = 253), bronchopulmonary NEN (BPNEN; n = 64), thymic NEN (n = 1), colon cancer (n = 37), non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC; n = 63), benign lung disease (n = 59), and controls (n = 86). In the GEPNEN group, 164 (65%) had image-positive disease (IPD, n = 135) or were image-negative but resection-margin/biopsy-positive (n = 29), and were graded as G1 (n = 106), G2 (n = 49), G3 (n = 7), or no data (n = 2). The remainder (n = 71) had no evidence of disease (NED). In the BPNEN group, 43/64 (67%) had IPD. Histology revealed typical carcinoids (TC, n = 14), atypical carcinoids (AC, n = 14), small-cell lung cancer (SCLC, n = 11), and large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC, n = 4). Disease status (stable or progressive) was evaluated according to RECIST v1.1. Blood sampling involved NETest (n = 563) and NETest/CgA analysis matched samples (n = 178). NETest was performed by PCR (on a scale of 0-100), with a score ≥20 reflecting a disease-positive status and >40 reflecting progressive disease. CgA positivity was determined by ELISA. Samples were deidentified and measurements blinded. The Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney U, and McNemar tests, and the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) were used in the statistical analysis.

RESULTS

In the GEPNEN group, NETest was significantly higher (34.4 ± 1.8, p < 0.0001) in disease-positive patients than in patients with NED (10.5 ± 1, p < 0.0001), colon cancer patients (18 ± 4, p < 0.0004), and controls (7 ± 0.5, p < 0.0001). Sensitivity for detecting disease compared to controls was 89% and specificity was 94%. NETest levels were increased in G2 vs. G1 (39 ± 3 vs. 32 ± 2, p = 0.02) and correlated with stage (localized: 26 ± 2 vs. regional/distant: 40 ± 3, p = 0.0002) and progression (55 ± 5 vs. 34 ± 2 in stable disease, p = 0.0005). In the BPNEN group, diagnostic sensitivity was 100% and levels were significantly higher in patients with bronchopulmonary carcinoids (BPC; 30 ± 1.3) who had IPD than in controls (7 ± 0.5, p < 0.0001), patients with NED (24.1 ± 1.3, p < 0.005), and NSCLC patients (17 ± 3, p = 0.0001). NETest levels were higher in patients with poorly differentiated BPNEN (LCNEC + SCLC; 59 ± 7) than in those with BPC (30 ± 1.3, p = 0.0005) or progressive disease (57.8 ± 7), compared to those with stable disease (29.4 ± 1, p < 0.0001). The AUC for differentiating disease from controls was 0.87 in the GEPNEN group and 0.99 in BPC patients (p < 0.0001). Matched CgA analysis was performed in 178 patients. In the GEPNEN group (n = 135), NETest was significantly more accurate for detecting disease (99%) than CgA positivity (53%; McNemar test χ2 = 87, p < 0.0001). In the BPNEN group (n = 43), NETest was significantly more accurate for disease detection (100%) than CgA positivity (26%; McNemar's test χ2 = 30, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The NETest is an accurate diagnostic for GEPNEN and BPNEN. It exhibits tumor biology correlation with grading, staging, and progression. CgA as a biomarker is significantly less accurate than NETest. The NETest has substantial clinical utility that can facilitate patient management.

Evaluation of circulating transcript analysis (NETest) in small intestinal neuroendocrine neoplasms after surgical resection

PURPOSE

Surgical resection is the only effective curative strategy for small intestinal neuroendocrine neoplasms (SINENs). Nevertheless, the evaluation of residual disease and prediction of disease recurrence/progression remains a problematic issue.

METHODS

We evaluated 13 SINENs that underwent surgical resection of the primary tumour and/or mesenteric mass. Patients were divided in three groups: (a) Group 1: SINENs that underwent resection with curative intent, (b) Group 2: SINENs treated with resection in the setting of metastatic disease, which remained stable and (c) Group 3: SINENs treated with resection in the setting of metastatic disease, with evidence of any progression at follow-up. NETest and chromogranin A were measured pre-operatively and post-operatively during a 22-month median follow-up period and compared with imaging studies. NETest score <20% was determined as normal, 20-40% low, 41-79% intermediate and ≥80% high score.

RESULTS

NETest score was raised in all (100%) SINENs pre-operatively. Surgery with curative intent resulted in NETest score reduction from 78.25 ± 15.32 to 25.25 ± 1.75 (p < 0.05). Low NETest scores post-operatively were evident in all cases without clinical evidence of residual disease (Group 1). However, the low disease activity score suggested the presence of microscopic residual disease. In three cases (75%) with stable disease (Group 2) the NETest score was low consistent with indolent disease. In the progressive disease group (Group 3), a high NETest score was present in three cases (60%) and an intermediate NETest score in the remainder (40%).

CONCLUSIONS

Blood NETest scores accurately identified SINENs and were significantly decreased by curative surgery. Monitoring NETest post-operatively may facilitate management by identifying the presence of residual/progressive disease.

The NETest liquid biopsy is diagnostic for gastric neuroendocrine tumors: observations on the blood-based identification of microscopic and macroscopic residual diseaseOK

Background

NETest, a novel multi-gene liquid biopsy has utility in neuroendocrine tumor (NET) diagnosis and identification of residual disease. We independently assessed utility of the NETest to diagnose gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms (GNENs) and identify micro- and macroscopic residual disease.

Methods

Cohorts comprised histologically confirmed GNENs at biopsy, n = 46; GNETs Type 1: 42 (32 NET G1, 10 NET G2), a GNET Type 3: 1 well-differentiated NET G3, neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs) (n = 3), and controls (n = 63). Disease status at sampling was assessed by gastroscopy, histology (resection margin [R] positivity of polypectomy or biopsy), EUS, CT or MRI, and/or ⁶⁸Ga-DOTA-TATE PET/CT. Groups included image- (gastroscopy, EUS, and anatomical and/or functional imaging) positive or image negative disease. NETest assay by PCR (spotted plates, normal cut-off: 20). Data: mean ± SD.

Results

Disease extent: Image-negative (n = 30) (21 R0, 9 R1); Image-positive, n = 16.

Diagnosis: NETest was increased in GNETs (23 ± 11) vs. controls (7 ± 4, p < 0.0001). In histology-positive, the NETest accuracy was 100% (25/25).

Microscopic disease: In image-negative but R1, NETest was elevated in 100% (9/9; 28 ± 9). Levels were elevated vs. controls (7 ± 4, p < 0.0001), or R0 (16 ± 11, p = 0.02). Eight of 21 R0, exhibited positive NETest.

Macroscopic disease: Gastric lesions were multiple: 38%, single: 62%, submucosal: 13%, or ulcerated: 13%. Lesions size was ≤5 mm (50%), > 5–9.9 mm (17%), 10–19.9 mm (17%), ≥20 mm (17%) [≥10 mm: 34%). The NETest accuracy was 100% (16/16). Levels (28 ± 7) were higher than controls (7 ± 4, p < 0.0001) or R0 (16 ± 11, p = 0.002) but not to R1 (28 ± 9, p = 0.5).

Conclusions

NETest is diagnostic for gastric NETs. Elevated levels identify both microscopic and macroscopic residual disease. In histology/image-negative disease, elevated NETest may reflect early evidence of increased neuroendocrine gene expression of hypergastrinemia-induced neoplastic transformation of enterochromaffin-like (ECL) cells to tumor status. A sensitive liquid biopsy has utility in the management and surveillance of gastric NET disease.

Circulating Neuroendocrine Gene Transcripts (NETest): A Postoperative Strategy for Early Identification of the Efficacy of Radical Surgery for Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors

BACKGROUND

Surgery remains the only treatment for the cure of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNETs). Biomarkers to identify the completeness of resection and predict recurrence are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this study were to evaluate if the blood measurement of neuroendocrine gene transcripts (NETest) was diagnostic of PanNETs, and whether NETest blood levels could identify complete resection. We compared transcript analysis with the biomarker chromogranin A (CgA).

METHODS

This was a prospective, longitudinal, single-center study including 30 patients with a postoperative histological confirmation of PanNET. Blood for NETest and CgA was collected preoperatively and on postoperative day (POD) 1, POD5, and POD30. Transcripts were measured by real-time quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and multianalyte algorithmic analysis (NETest; normal < 20), and CgA was measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA; normal < 109 ng/mL). Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD).

RESULTS

Pancreatic surgical resections (n = 30) were R0, 26; R1, 2; and R2, 2. Preoperatively, NETest score was elevated in all 30 patients (44.7 ± 27), but postoperatively, NETest scores significantly decreased (p = 0.006) to POD30 (24.7 ± 24). The proportion of patients (15/30) with an elevated score significantly decreased by POD30 (p < 0.0001). CgA levels were elevated preoperatively (184 ± 360 ng/mL) in only 9/30 patients, but did not decrease significantly postoperatively at POD30 (260 ± 589 ng/mL, p = 0.398). The number of patients with elevated CgA levels remained unchanged (9/30).

CONCLUSIONS

The NETest is an accurate diagnostic biomarker for PanNETs (100%). A decrease in NETest levels after radical resection suggests this blood test provides early assessment of surgical efficacy. CgA had no clinical utility.

Clinicopathological correlations of mesenteric fibrosis and evaluation of a novel biomarker for fibrosis detection in small bowel neuroendocrine neoplasms

PURPOSE

Mesenteric fibrosis (MF) in small intestinal neuroendocrine neoplasms (SINENs) is often associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The detection of MF is usually based on radiological criteria, but no previous studies have attempted a prospective, multidimensional assessment of mesenteric desmoplasia to determine the accuracy of radiological measurements. There is also a lack of non-invasive biomarkers for the detection of image-negative MF.

METHODS

A multidimensional assessment of MF incorporating radiological, surgical and histological parameters was performed in a prospective cohort of 34 patients with SINENs who underwent primary resection. Pre-operative blood samples were collected in 20 cases to evaluate a set of five profibrotic circulating transcripts-the "fibrosome"-that is included as an "omic" component of the NETest.

RESULTS

There was a significant correlation between radiological and surgical assessments of MF (p < 0.05). However, there were several cases of image-negative MF. The NETest-fibrosome demonstrated an accuracy of 100% for the detection of microscopic MF.

CONCLUSIONS

The detection of MF by radiological criteria has limitations. The NETest-fibrosome is a promising biomarker for fibrosis detection and further validation of these results would be needed in larger, multicentre studies.

The clinical applications of a multigene liquid biopsy (NETest) in neuroendocrine tumors

PURPOSE

There are few effective biomarkers for neuroendocrine tumors. Precision oncology strategies have provided liquid biopsies for real-time and tailored decision-making. This has led to the development of the first neuroendocrine tumor liquid biopsy (the NETest). The NETest represents a transcriptomic signature of neuroendocrine tumor (NETs) that captures tumor biology and disease activity. The data have direct clinical application in terms of identifying residual disease, disease progress and the efficacy of treatment. In this overview we assess the available published information on the metrics and clinical efficacy of the NETest.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Published data on the NETest have been collated and analyzed to understand the clinical application of this multianalyte biomarker in NETs.

RESULTS

NETest assay has been validated as a standardized and reproducible clinical laboratory measurement. It is not affected by demographic characteristics, or acid suppressive medication. Clinical utility of the NETest has been documented in gastroenteropancreatic, bronchopulmonary NETs, in paragangliomas and pheochromocytomas. The test facilitates accurate diagnosis of a NET disease, and real-time monitoring of the disease status (stable/progressive disease). It predicts aggressive tumor behavior, identifies operative tumor resection, and efficacy of the medical treatment (e.g. somatostatin analogues), or peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT). NETest metrics and clinical applications out-perform standard biomarkers like chromogranin A.

CONCLUSIONS

The NETest exhibits clinically competent metrics as an effective biomarker for neuroendocrine tumors. Measurement of NET transcripts in blood is a significant advance in neuroendocrine tumor management and demonstrates that blood provides a viable source to identify and monitor tumor status.

PRRT neuroendocrine tumor response monitored using circulating transcript analysis: the NETest

PURPOSE

Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) is effective for metastatic/inoperable neuroendocrine tumors (NETs). Imaging response assessment is usually efficient subsequent to treatment completion. Blood biomarkers such as PRRT Predictive Quotient (PPQ) and NETest are effective in real-time. PPQ predicts PRRT efficacy; NETest monitors disease. We prospectively evaluated: (1) NETest as a surrogate biomarker for RECIST; (2) the correlation of NETest levels with PPQ prediction.

METHODS

Three independent ¹⁷⁷Lu-PRRT-treated GEP-NET and lung cohorts (Meldola, Italy: n = 72; Bad-Berka, Germany: n = 44; Rotterdam, Netherlands: n = 41). Treatment response: RECIST1.1 (responder (stable, partial, and complete response) vs non-responder). Blood sampling: pre-PRRT, before each cycle and follow-up (2-12 months). PPQ (positive/negative) and NETest (0-100 score) by PCR. Stable < 40; progressive > 40). CgA (ELISA) as comparator. Samples de-identified, measurement and analyses blinded. Kaplan-Meier survival and standard statistics.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-two of the 157 were evaluable. RECIST stabilization or response in 67%; 33% progressed. NETest significantly (p < 0.0001) decreased in RECIST "responders" (- 47 ± 3%); in "non-responders," it remained increased (+ 79 ± 19%) (p < 0.0005). NETest monitoring accuracy was 98% (119/122). Follow-up levels > 40 (progressive) vs stable (< 40) significantly correlated with mPFS (not reached vs. 10 months; HR 0.04 (95%CI, 0.02-0.07). PPQ response prediction was accurate in 118 (97%) with a 99% accurate positive and 93% accurate negative prediction. NETest significantly (p < 0.0001) decreased in PPQ-predicted responders (- 46 ± 3%) and remained elevated or increased in PPQ-predicted non-responders (+ 75 ± 19%). Follow-up NETest categories stable vs progressive significantly correlated with PPQ prediction and mPFS (not reached vs. 10 months; HR 0.06 (95%CI, 0.03-0.12). CgA did not reflect PRRT treatment: in RECIST responders decrease in 38% and in non-responders 56% (p = NS).

CONCLUSIONS

PPQ predicts PRRT response in 97%. NETest accurately monitors PRRT response and is an effective surrogate marker of PRRT radiological response. NETest decrease identified responders and correlated (> 97%) with the pretreatment PPQ response predictor. CgA was non-informative.

Prognostic and predictive factors on overall survival and surgical outcomes in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: recent advances and controversies

Introduction: Recent advances in diagnostic modalities and therapeutic agents have raised the importance of prognostic factors in predicting overall survival, as well as predictive factors for surgical outcomes, in tailoring therapeutic strategies of patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (panNENs).Areas covered: Numerous recent studies of panNEN patients report the prognostic values of a number of clinically related factors (clinical, laboratory, imaging, treatment-related factors), pathological factors (histological, classification, grading) and molecular factors on long-term survival. In addition, an increasing number of studies showed the usefulness of various factors, specifically biomarkers and molecular makers, in predicting recurrence and mortality related to surgical treatment. Recent findings (from the last 3 years) in each of these areas, as well as recent controversies, are reviewed.Expert commentary: The clinical importance of prognostic and predictive factors for panNENs is markedly increased for both overall outcome and post resection, as a result of recent advances in all aspects of the diagnosis, management and treatment of panNENs. Despite the proven prognostic utility of routinely used tumor grading/classification and staging systems, further studies are required to establish these novel prognostic factors to support their routine clinical use.

NETest liquid biopsy is diagnostic of small intestine and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors and correlates with imaging

INTRODUCTION

Current monoanalyte biomarkers are ineffective in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs). NETest, a novel multianalyte signature, provides molecular information relevant to disease biology.

AIM(S)

Independently validate NETest to diagnose GEP-NETs and identify progression in a tertiary referral center.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Cohorts: 67 pancreatic NET (PNETs), 44 small intestine NETs (SINETs), 63 controls. Well-differentiated (WD): PNETs, n=62, SINETs, all (n=44). Disease extent assessment at blood draw: anatomical (n=110)- CT(n=106), MRI(n=7) and/or functional- 68Ga-SSA-PET/CT(n=69) or 18F-FDG-PET/CT (n=8). Image positive disease (IPD) was defined as either CT/MRI or 68Ga-SSA-PET/CT/18F-FDG-PET/CT-positive. Both CT/MRI and 68Ga-SSA-PET/CT-negative in WD-NETs was considered image negative disease (IND). NETest (normal: 20): PCR (spotted plates).

DATA

mean±SD.

RESULTS

Diagnosis: NETest was significantly increased in NETs (n=111; 26±21) vs. controls (8±4, p<0.0001). 75 (42 PNET, 33 SINET) were image-positive. Eleven (8 PNET, 3 SINET; all WD) were IND. In IPD, NETest was significantly higher (36±22) vs. IND (8±7, p<0.0001). NETest accuracy, sensitivity, specificity: 97%, 99%, 95%. Concordance with imaging: NETest was 92% (101/110) concordant with anatomical imaging, 94% (65/69) with 68Ga-SSA-PET/CT, 96% (65/68) dual modality (CT/MRI and 68Ga-SSA-PET/CT). In 70 CT/MRI-positive, NETest was elevated in all (37±22). In 40 CT/MRI-negative, NETest was normal (11±10) in 31. In 56 68Ga-SSA-PET/CT-positive, NETest was elevated (36±22) in 55. In 13 68Ga-SSA-PET/CT-negative, NETest was normal (9±8) in 10. Disease status: NETest was significantly higher in progressive (61±26; n=11) vs. stable disease (29±14; n=64; p<0.0001) (RECIST 1.1).

CONCLUSION

NETest is an effective diagnostic for PNETs and SINETs. Elevated NETest is as effective as imaging in diagnosis and accurately identifies progression.