Outcomes of Cytoreductive Surgery for Metastatic Low-Grade Neuroendocrine Tumors in the Setting of Extrahepatic Metastases

Exploring Carcinoid Syndrome in Neuroendocrine Tumors: Insights from a Multidisciplinary Narrative Review

Carcinoid syndrome (CS) is a rare condition associated with neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), particularly those originating in the gastrointestinal tract, which secrete bioactive substances like serotonin. The management of CS requires a multidisciplinary approach due to its complex clinical manifestations, including flushing, diarrhea, bronchospasm, and carcinoid heart disease. Optimal care involves collaboration between several professional figures like oncologists, endocrinologists, gastroenterologists, surgeons, and dietitians. Currently, a wide range of treatments are available, focused on both symptom control and tumor burden reduction. Somatostatin analogs (SSAs) are the first-line therapy for symptom relief. Still, in patients with progressive disease or refractory CS, other options include targeted therapies, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT), liver-directed therapies, and surgical resection, when feasible. Furthermore, management of complications related to prolonged serotonin release and malnutrition as a result of exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, post-surgical conditions, vitamin deficit, and chronic diarrhea often requires early detection to mitigate symptoms and improve the quality of life in these patients. The complexity of CS necessitates individualized care and continuous coordination among specialists to optimize outcomes and enhance patient well-being.

Liver Resection for Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors with Extrahepatic Disease

Background: Although survival outcomes for neuroendocrine liver metastases (NETLM) are improved with liver-direct therapies (LDT), including hepatic debulking and nonsurgical trans-arterial embolization, the benefit is less established in the setting of concurrent extrahepatic disease (EHD). We performed a population-based study to characterize the rates of LDT being performed for NETLM with EHD patients and whether LDT is associated with survival outcomes. Methods: Patients with NETLM and EHD were identified using the California Cancer Registry database merged with data from the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development between 2000 and 2012. Demographics, clinical characteristics, and survival outcomes were analyzed for these patients with and without LDT. Results: 327 NETLM patients with EHD were identified. EHD sites included lung, peritoneum, bone, and brain. A total of 71 (22%) of these patients underwent LDT. Compared to NETLM with EHD patients who did not undergo LDT, patients who received LDT had longer median overall survival (27 vs. 16 months, p = 0.006). Within the LDT group, 23 patients underwent liver resection. Liver resection was associated with longer median overall survival compared to nonsurgical LDT (138 vs. 13 months, p < 0.001). Conclusions: LDT candidacy should be determined for patients on a case-by-case basis, but the presence of EHD should not preclude LDT with appropriate patient selection.

Value of Surgical Cytoreduction in Patients with Small Intestinal Neuroendocrine Tumors Metastatic to the Liver and Peritoneum

BACKGROUND

Cytoreductive hepatectomy can improve survival and symptoms of hormonal excess in patients with small intestinal neuroendocrine tumor (siNET) liver metastases, but whether to proceed when peritoneal metastases are encountered at the time of planned cytoreductive hepatectomy is controversial.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of patients who underwent surgical management of metastatic siNETs at Mayo Clinic between 2000 and 2020. Patients who underwent cytoreductive operation for isolated liver metastases or both liver and peritoneal metastases were compared.

RESULTS

Of 261 patients who underwent cytoreductive operation for siNETs, 211 had isolated liver metastases and 50 had liver and peritoneal metastases. Complete cytoreduction was achieved in 78% of patients with isolated liver metastases and 56% of those with liver and peritoneal metastases (p = 0.002). After complete cytoreduction, median overall survival (OS) was 11.5 years for isolated liver metastases and 11.2 years for liver and peritoneal metastases (p = 0.10), and relief of carcinoid syndrome was ≥ 97% in both groups. After incomplete cytoreduction with debulking of > 90% of hepatic disease and/or closing Lyon score of 1-2, median OS was 6.4 years for isolated liver metastases and 7.1 years for liver and peritoneal metastases (p = 0.12).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with siNETs metastatic to both the liver and peritoneum have favorable outcomes after aggressive surgical cytoreduction, with the best outcomes observed after complete cytoreduction. Therefore, the presence of peritoneal metastases should not by itself preclude surgical cytoreduction in this population.

Surgery for advanced neuroendocrine tumours of the small bowel: recommendations based on a consensus meeting of the European Society of Endocrine Surgeons (ESES)

BACKGROUND

Small bowel neuroendocrine tumours often present with locally advanced or metastatic disease. The aim of this paper is to provide evidence-based recommendations regarding (controversial) topics in the surgical management of advanced small bowel neuroendocrine tumours.

METHODS

A working group of experts was formed by the European Society of Endocrine Surgeons. The group addressed 11 clinically relevant questions regarding surgery for advanced disease, including the benefit of primary tumour resection, the role of cytoreduction, the extent of lymph node clearance, and the management of an unknown primary tumour. A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE to identify papers addressing the research questions. Final recommendations were presented and voted upon by European Society of Endocrine Surgeons members at the European Society of Endocrine Surgeons Conference in Mainz in 2023.

RESULTS

The literature review yielded 1223 papers, of which 84 were included. There were no randomized controlled trials to address any of the research questions and therefore conclusions were based on the available case series, cohort studies, and systematic reviews/meta-analyses of the available non-randomized studies. The proposed recommendations were scored by 38-51 members and rated 'strongly agree' or 'agree' by 64-96% of participants.

CONCLUSION

This paper provides recommendations based on the best available evidence and expert opinion on the surgical management of locally advanced and metastatic small bowel neuroendocrine tumours.

Surgery as a Principle and Technical Consideration for Primary Tumor Resection of Small Bowel Neuroendocrine Tumors

Small bowel neuroendocrine tumors (SB-NETs) are increasingly identified and have become the most frequent entity among small bowel tumors. An increasing incidence, a high prevalence, and a prolonged survival with optimal modern multidisciplinary management makes SB-NETs a unique set of tumors to consider for surgical oncologists. The major goals of surgical treatment in the setting of SB-NET include control of tumor volume, control of endocrine secretion, and prevention of locoregional complications. Key considerations include assessment of multifocality and resection of mesenteric nodal masses with the use of mesenteric-sparing approaches and acceptance of R1 margins if necessary to clear disease while avoiding short bowel syndrome. A description through eight steps for consideration is presented to allow for systematic surgical planning and execution of resection. Moreover, some controversies and evolving considerations to the surgical principles and technical procedures remain. The role of primary tumor resection in the presence of (unresectable) liver metastasis is still unclear. Reports of feasibility of minimally invasive surgery are emerging, with undetermined selection criteria for appropriateness or long-term outcomes. Resection of SB-NETs should be considered in all patients fit for surgery and should follow principles to achieve surgical oncological control that is appropriate for the stage and tumor burden, considering the age and comorbidity of the individual patient.

Optimal surgical approach for digestive neuroendocrine neoplasia primaries: Oncological benefits versus short and long-term complications

The rising incidence and the accumulating prevalence of neuroendocrine neoplasia (NEN) in the population makes this a common, prevalent and a clinically relevant disease group. Surgical resection represents the only potentially curative treatment for digestive NENs. Thus, resection should in principle be considered for all patients with NEN, although taking the patients age, relevant comorbidity, and performance status into account for operability. Patients with insulinomas, NEN of the appendix and rectal NENs are usually cured by surgery alone. However, less than a third of patients are amendable to curative surgery alone at time of diagnosis. Furthermore, recurrence is common and may occur years after primary surgery, hence the long follow-up time recommended in most NENs (>10 years). As many patients with NENs present with locoregional or metastatic disease, there is considerable debate regarding the role of debulking surgery in these settings. However, good long-term survival can be achieved in a considerable proportion of patients, with 50-70% alive up to 10 years after surgery. Location and grade are the main determinants of long-term survival. Here we present considerations to surgery for primary neuroendocrine tumors in the digestive tract.

Grade Progression and Intrapatient Tumor Heterogeneity as Potential Contributors to Resistance in Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are a heterogenous group of tumors that are incurable when metastatic, regardless of grade. The aim of this article is to understand tumor heterogeneity and grade progression as possible contributors to drug resistance in gastroentropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs). Heterogeneity has been observed in the genetic, pathological, and imaging features of these tumors at baseline. Diagnostic challenges related to tumor sampling and the potential for changes in grade over time further confound our ability to optimize therapy for patients. A better understanding of NEN biology and tumor heterogeneity at baseline and over time could lead to the development of new therapeutic avenues.

A Systematic Review of Surgical Management Strategies in the Treatment of Peritoneal Carcinomatosis of Neuroendocrine Origin

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) represents the cornerstone of surgical management for peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) and involves peritonectomy procedures aimed at complete peritoneal tumour resection. Frequently, CRS is combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). The combination of CRS + HIPEC is now considered the standard of care in patients with colorectal and ovarian PC. However, the role of this multi-modality treatment approach in patients with PC of neuroendocrine tumour origin (NET-PC) is less well understood. This systematic review provides a summary of available evidence on management strategies for patients with NET-PC. A systematic literature search was performed using Ovid Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases to identify studies reporting outcomes for patients with NET-PC undergoing surgical treatment. Eligible studies were assessed for methodological quality and design and evaluated for a method of surgical treatment, method of HIPEC delivery, oncological outcomes, and treatment-related morbidity. Eight studies, including a total of 1240 patients with NET-PC, met predefined inclusion criteria and have been included in this review. In three of the included studies, CRS alone was performed for patients with NET-PC, while five studies reported outcomes with combined treatment using CRS plus HIPEC. All studies were performed at tertiary peritoneal malignancy centres. Only one study directly compared outcomes in patients with NET-PC undergoing CRS plus HIPEC compared with CRS in isolation, with no significant difference in overall survival reported. Carefully selected patients with NET-PC may benefit from aggressive surgical treatment in the form of CRS +/- HIPEC. These procedures are best undertaken at centres with expertise in the management of both neuroendocrine tumours and peritoneal malignancy, as both are conditions that require tertiary-level care. The additional benefit of the HIPEC component in this group of patients remains unclear and warrants further investigation in clinical trials. Overall, the quality of data on this subject is restricted by the low number of studies and the variability in treatment methods employed. A multi-national data registry for patients with NET-PC may offer the opportunity to better define treatment algorithms. Translational research efforts in parallel should focus on developing a better biological understanding of NET-PC, with a view to identifying more effective intraperitoneal cytocidal agents.

Radiofrequency and microwave ablation controls hepatic oligoprogression of advanced gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

In progression of multifocal liver metastases of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NET) escalation of systemic therapy is indicated. The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the potential of local thermal ablation in hepatic oligoprogression and otherwise stable disease in GEP-NET. Patients with hepatic oligoprogression and otherwise stable disease, who underwent radiofrequency ablation (RFA) or microwave ablation (MWA) for local control, were included in the study. Thermal ablation was performed while maintaining the ongoing systemic therapy or without addition of a systemic therapy. The effectiveness of this therapeutic approach was evaluated by determination of local treatment success, improvement of progression-free survival (PFS) and the safety. Seventeen thermal ablation procedures were performed in 13 patients with well differentiated NET including seven ileum NET, four pancreatic NET, one appendix NET and one rectum NET. RFA and MWA of liver metastases were well tolerated without major complications. Thermal ablation resulted in an estimated median PFS of 62.6 weeks (mean 50.5 weeks; range 10.1-78.9 weeks) per procedure. In four patients, two ablation procedures were performed throughout the course of their disease resulting in an estimated median PFS of 69.1 weeks (mean 71.6 weeks; range 10.1-123.1 weeks) per patient. Start or change of systemic therapy could be delayed up to 123.1 weeks by using thermal ablations for isolated progression of single liver metastases. 88% of thermal ablations prolonged PFS. Thermal ablation of liver metastases in a non-curative intent has the potential to provide focal growth control and to prolong PFS in GEP-NET patients with hepatic oligoprogression.

Surgical Options for Peritoneal Surface Metastases from Digestive Malignancies-A Comprehensive Review

The peritoneum is a common site for the dissemination of digestive malignancies, particularly gastric, colorectal, appendix, or pancreatic cancer. Other tumors such as cholangiocarcinomas, digestive neuroendocrine tumors, or gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) may also associate with peritoneal surface metastases (PSM). Peritoneal dissemination is proven to worsen the prognosis of these patients. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS), along with systemic chemotherapy, have been shown to constitute a survival benefit in selected patients with PSM. Furthermore, the association of CRS with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) seems to significantly improve the prognosis of patients with certain types of digestive malignancies associated with PSM. However, the benefit of CRS with HIPEC is still controversial, especially due to the significant morbidity associated with this procedure. According to the results of the PRODIGE 7 trial, CRS for PSM from colorectal cancer (CRC) achieved overall survival (OS) rates higher than 40 months, but the addition of oxaliplatin-based HIPEC failed to improve the long-term outcomes. Furthermore, the PROPHYLOCHIP and COLOPEC trials failed to demonstrate the effectiveness of oxaliplatin-based HIPEC for preventing peritoneal metastases development in high-risk patients operated for CRC. In this review, we discuss the limitations of these studies and the reasons why these results are not sufficient to refute this technique, until future well-designed trials evaluate the impact of different HIPEC regimens. In contrast, in pseudomyxoma peritonei, CRS plus HIPEC represents the gold standard therapy, which is able to achieve 10-year OS rates ranging between 70 and 80%. For patients with PSM from gastric carcinoma, CRS plus HIPEC achieved median OS rates higher than 40 months after complete cytoreduction in patients with a peritoneal cancer index (PCI) ≤6. However, the data have not yet been validated in randomized clinical trials. In this review, we discuss the controversies regarding the most efficient drugs that should be used for HIPEC and the duration of the procedure. We also discuss the current evidence and controversies related to the benefit of CRS (and HIPEC) in patients with PSM from other digestive malignancies. Although it is a palliative treatment, pressurized intraperitoneal aerosolized chemotherapy (PIPAC) significantly increases OS in patients with unresectable PSM from gastric cancer and represents a promising approach for patients with PSM from other digestive cancers.

Differenzierte Therapiestrategie bei Lebermetastasen gastro-entero-pankreatischer Neuroendokriner Neoplasien

Neuroendokrine Neoplasien (NEN) bilden eine heterogene Gruppe maligner Tumoren, die überwiegend dem gastro-entero-pankreatischen System (GEP) zuzuordnen sind. Hierbei sind Dünndarm und Pankreas die häufigsten Organe für Primärtumoren, die Leber stellt den dominanten Metastasierungsort dar. Da viele Patient*innen lange asymptomatisch bleiben, führen oftmals zufällig diagnostizierte Lebermetastasen oder ein Ileus zur Diagnose. Die einzige kurative Therapieoption stellt die komplette Entfernung von Primarius und Metastasen dar. Besonders im Falle der metastasierten Erkrankung sollten die vorhandenen Therapieoptionen immer im interdisziplinären Tumorboard mit Spezialisten*innen aus Gastroenterologie, (Leber-)Chirurgie, Radiologie, Nuklearmedizin, Radiotherapie, Pathologie und Endokrinologie evaluiert werden. Durch die Kombination der verschiedenen Therapieverfahren kann auch für Patient*innen mit fortgeschrittener Erkrankung eine jahrelange Prognose bei guter Lebensqualität erreicht werden. Wichtig für die Therapieentscheidung sind neben patientenindividuellen Faktoren der Differenzierungsgrad des Tumors, dessen hormonelle Sekretion, das Metastasierungsmuster und der Erkrankungsverlauf. Die Behandlung von Lebermetastasen umfasst neben den unterschiedlichen chirurgischen Strategien die lokal-ablativen radiologischen und nuklearmedizinischen Verfahren, die als Ergänzung zu den systemischen Therapien zur Verfügung stehen.

[Importance of surgery in distant metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms]

The majority of patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (pNEN) already present with distant metastases at diagnosis. The heterogeneity of pNEN and the broad spectrum of treatment options make adequate patient selection and an evidence-based strategy essential. In metastatic pNEN both primary resection and resection of liver metastases have been shown to improve overall survival. Surgical treatment of liver metastases can also be carried out with palliative intent, especially for symptomatic pNEN and can have a positive effect on disease-free survival and overall survival. Classical hepatectomy techniques and innovative techniques (two-stage resections, liver transplantation) are available to the surgeon. In complex growth types of liver metastases, there is increasing evidence for a combination of surgery and ablative methods. Due to a relevant risk of recurrence following liver resection, pNEN patients need to be included in multimodal treatment concepts. Current areas of interest in the treatment of metastatic pNEN are the use of adjuvant/neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery in G3-NEN and G3-NEC patients. The aim of this review is to give an overview on the impact of surgery in the situation of distant metastatic NEN of the pancreas.

Orchestrating Treatment Modalities in Metastatic Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors-Need for a Conductor

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) are a vast growing disease. Over 50% of these tumors are recognized at advanced stages with lymph node, liver, or distant metastasis. An ongoing controversy is the role of surgery in the metastatic setting as dedicated systemic treatments have emerged recently and shown benefits in randomized trials. Today, liver surgery is an option for advanced pNETs if the tumor has a favorable prognosis, reflected by a low to moderate proliferation index (G1 and G2). Surgery in this well-selected population may prolong progression-free and overall survival. Optimal selection of a treatment plan for an individual patient should be considered in a multidisciplinary tumor board. However, while current guidelines offer a variety of modalities, there is so far only a limited focus on the right timing. Available data is based on small case series or retrospective analyses. The focus of this review is to highlight the right time-point for surgery in the setting of the multimodal treatment of an advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor.

Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy for the Management of Liver Metastases from Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: A Preliminary Study

INTRODUCTION

Liver metastases are common in patients with neuroendocrine neoplasms. The role of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is not well understood in this population.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of SABR in treating well-differentiated neuroendocrine liver metastases (WD-NELM).

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients with WD-NELM treated with SABR was conducted between January 2015 and July 2019. Demographic, treatment, and clinical/radiographic follow-up data were abstracted. RECIST 1.1 criteria were applied to each individual target to evaluate the response to treatment. Local control (LC) and progression-free survival (PFS) were determined using the Kaplan-Meier methodology. Toxicity was reported according to the CTCAE v5.0.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients with a total of 53 liver metastases treated with SABR were identified. Most patients (68%) had midgut tumors, were grade 2 (80%), and had high-volume intrahepatic and/or extrahepatic disease (76%). The median number of liver metastases treated was 2, with a median size of 2.5 cm. The median radiation dose delivered was 50 Gy/5 fractions. The median follow-up was 14 months; 24 of the 25 patients were alive at the time of analysis. The objective response rate was 32%, with improvement or stability in 96% of lesions treated. The median time to best response was 9 months. The 1-year LC and PFS were 92 and 44%, respectively. No grade 3/4 acute or late toxicity was identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Liver SABR is a safe and promising means of providing LC for WD-NELM. This treatment modality should be evaluated in selected patients in concert with strategies to manage systemic disease.

Long-Term Results after Surgical Resection of Peritoneal Metastasis from Neuroendocrine Tumors

INTRODUCTION

Peritoneal metastases from neuroendocrine tumors are associated with a bad prognosis. The objective of our study was to evaluate whether surgical resection could lead to prolonged survival in selected patients. This survival was compared to that of patients operated for liver metastasis.

METHODS

From our prospectively maintained database we included 88 patients who underwent the complete resection of peritoneal and/or liver metastasis between January 1995 and December 2016 in Gustave-Roussy. Three resection groups were compared: peritoneal metastasis alone, liver metastasis alone, and the combined resection of liver and peritoneal metastases.

RESULTS

The median peritoneal cancer index was 10 in the peritoneal group and 11 in the peritoneal + liver group. The 5-year overall survival was 81% (60-100) in the peritoneal group compared to 78% (65.2-92.8) in the liver group, and 72% (58.7-89.7) in the peritoneal + liver group (p = 0.71). The 3-year disease-free survival reached 26.9% (16.1-45.1) in the liver group, 12.5% (2.3-68.2) in the peritoneal group, and 32.4% (19.9-52.6) in the combined liver + peritoneal group (p = 0.45). In the univariate analysis, the prognosis factors for a longer survival were: small bowel primary tumor origin, low preoperative chromogranin A level, and tumor grade ≤1.

CONCLUSION

Despite a high recurrence rate, long-term overall survival can be achieved after the resection of peritoneal metastasis in selected patients. This survival is comparable to that of patients operated for liver metastasis only. Surgery should stand as a standard treatment for peritoneal metastases in patients with resectable disease.

Management of Locally Advanced and Unresectable Small Bowel Neuroendocrine Tumours

Three subtypes of small bowel neuroendocrine tumours (SBNETs) have been described: Type A: SBNET with resectable mesenteric disease that does not involve the mesenteric root; Type B: "Borderline resectable" SBNET presenting with mesenteric nodal metastases and fibrosis adjacent but not encasing the main trunk of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) and superior mesenteric vein (SMV); and Type C: "Locally advanced or irresectable" SBNET where tumour deposits and fibrosis encase the SMA and SMV. Type C SBNETs are rare and constitute around 5% of patients in reported series, although this may underestimate the prevalence. In these patients, almost all will present with symptoms of intestinal ischemia or obstruction and symptom management should be a primary main focus of treatment. All patients should be carefully staged with cross-sectional imaging and 68 Ga-dotate positron emission tomography, and discussed at a dedicated neuroendocrine tumour multidisciplinary meeting. Expert surgical review should always be sought as experienced centers have a high rate of successful resection of primary tumours and mesenteric disease. If resection is not feasible, surgical bypass should be considered in patients with a discrete and symptomatic point of obstruction. Non-operative management should emphasize symptomatic treatment with somatostatin analogs, nutritional advice and support and palliative care. Successful neoadjuvant approaches utilizing peptide radionucleide receptor therapy and systemic chemotherapy with everolimus or temazolamide/capecitabine have not been reported.

Role of Primary Tumor Resection for Metastatic Small Bowel Neuroendocrine Tumors

While small bowel resection is well established as standard of care for curative-intent management of localized and loco-regional small bowel neuroendocrine tumors (SB-NETs), resection of the primary tumor in the setting of metastatic disease is debated. This review addresses the role of primary tumor resection for stage IV well-differentiated grade 1 and 2 SB-NETs. While survival benefits have been reported for primary tumor resection in the setting of metastatic disease, these studies are limited by selection bias and thus controversial. The main clinical benefits of primary tumor resection for stage IV disease involve the prevention of potentially debilitating complications associated with mesenteric fibrosis, including intestinal obstruction, mesenteric ischemia and angina, venous congestion, malabsorption, and malnutrition. Patients with metastases undergoing initial resection of the primary SB-NETs appear to have fewer episodes of care and re-intervention for loco-regional complications than those who do not undergo resection. As recommended by the NANETS and ENETS guidelines, resection of the primary tumor for stage IV SB-NETs should be strongly considered to avoid future loco-regional complications and potentially to improve survival. All patients with stage IV SB-NETs should be assessed by a surgeon experienced in the management of NETs to consider surgical therapies, including resection of the primary tumor despite metastatic disease.

Palliative resection of primary site in advanced gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors improves survivals

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors are rarely seen and have heterogeneous clinical outcomes. Mostly half of the patients had metastatic disease at presentation. Palliative resection of primary site in metastatic disease is still controversial. The aim of this study was to find out the influence of resection of primary tumor site on progression-free survival and overall survival in metastatic non-functioning gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. The secondary end point is to determine the prognostic factors influencing the survivals.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was conducted at a single medical oncology center, Antalya Education and Research Hospital. Patients who had non-functioning metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors with primary site resected or unresected were compared retrospectively. Resection of metastases was excluded.

RESULTS

Fifty-three patients were included in the study and 29 patients had primary tumor resection. The primary site resected group had favorable outcomes with the overall survival (median unreached) compared to the median overall survival of 30 months in the unresected group (p=0.001). Median progression-free survival was also better in the primary site resected group than the unresected group (60 months vs. 14 months, respectively) (p=0.013). In multivariate analysis, unresected primary site and high-grade tumors were found to be independent prognostic factors on low survivals (Hazard ratio (HR): 4.6; 95% CI: 1.21-17.47 and HR: 10.1; 95% CI: 1.15-88.84, respectively). Age (p=0.131), gender (p=0.051), chromogranin A level (p=0.104), Ki-67 index (p=0.550), tumor size (p=0.623), and primary tumor area (p=0.154) did not influence the overall survival.

CONCLUSION

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors with primary site resected had improved survivals when compared to the unresected group.