Factors associated with worse outcomes for colorectal neuroendocrine tumors in radical versus local resections

Treatment indicators and prognostic factors in colorectal neuroendocrine neoplasms and adenocarcinoma with neuroendocrine differentiation: a single center retrospective study

PURPOSE

This study compared survival and metastasis occurrence between colorectal neuroendocrine neoplasms (cNEN) and colorectal adenocarcinoma with neuroendocrine differentiation (cNED) and further explored their prognostic factors and treatment indicators.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed as cNEN and cNED in West China Hospital from January 2009 to December 2020 were enrolled. The diagnosis and metastasis rates were calculated. Univariate and multivariate Cox analyses were conducted for progression-free survival (PFS) in cNEN surgical patients, and generalized linear regression was used for metastatic disease.

RESULT

The study enrolled 435 patients, including 257 neuroendocrine tumors (NET), 52 neuroendocrine carcinomas (NEC), 29 mixed neuroendocrine-non-neuroendocrine neoplasms (MiNEN), and 97 NED patients, of whom 202 received local resection, and 233 received radical resection. Metastasis rates were higher in MiNEN and NEC groups compared to other groups (NED: 28.9%, MiNEN: 58.6%, NEC: 65.4%, NET: 8.6%, p < 0.001). The liver is the main metastatic site in cNEN, whereas cNED metastasized to various sites. For NEC and MiNEN patients, colon location (p = 0.002) and T stage > 2 (p = 0.040) were associated with disease progression separately. Independent risk factors for metastatic NET included tumor grade G2/G3 (p < 0.001), colon location (p = 0.001), size ≥ 1 cm (p = 0.005), and CK20 partial positive (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

cNEN show high metastatic capacity and are challenging to diagnose. More aggressive treatment and follow-up strategies are necessary for those patients. NET tumor grade higher than G2, size larger than 1 cm, or located in the colon should be managed with radical surgery.

Clinicopathological and molecular differences between stage IV screen-detected and interval colorectal cancers in the Flemish screening program

Introduction

Interval cancer (IC) is an important quality indicator in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Previously, we found that fecal immunochemical test (FIT) ICs are more common in women, older age, right-sided tumors, and advanced stage. Here, we extended our existing stage IV patient cohort with clinicopathological and molecular characteristics, to identify factors associated with FIT-IC.

Methods

Logistic regression models were fit to identify variables associated with the odds of having a stage IV FIT-IC. Multivariate models were corrected for gender, age, and location.

Results

A total of 292 screen-detected (SD) CRCs and 215 FIT-IC CRCs were included. FIT-IC CRC had 5 fold higher odds to be a neuroendocrine (NET) tumor and 2.5 fold higher odds to have lymphovascular invasion. Interestingly, some variables lost significance upon accounting for location. Thus, tumor location is a critical covariate that should always be included when evaluating factors related to FIT-IC.

Conclusions

We identified NETs and lymphovascular invasion as factors associated with increased odds of having a stage IV FIT-IC. Moreover, we highlight the importance of tumor location as a covariate in evaluating FIT-IC related factors. More research across all stages is needed to clarify how these insights might help to optimize the Flemish CRC screening program.

Predictors of lymph node metastasis and survival in radically resected rectal neuroendocrine tumors: A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database analysis

BACKGROUND

Rectal neuroendocrine tumors are uncommon tumor types. Lymph node metastases may occur in up to 40%, potentially impacting decision-making. We aimed to assess risk factors for lymph node metastases of rectal neuroendocrine tumors and their association with overall and cancer-specific survival.

METHODS

This retrospective case-control study involved patients with stage I to III rectal neuroendocrine tumors who underwent radical resection. Data were derived from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2000-2020). Patients with pathologic evidence of lymph node metastases were compared to those without lymph node metastases for baseline patient and tumor characteristics. The main outcomes were lymph node metastases, overall survival, and cancer-specific survival.

RESULTS

In total, 580 patients (50.9% male; mean age: 58.9 years) were included. The lymph node metastases rate was 37.1%. Independent predictors of lymph node metastases were Grade 2 neuroendocrine tumors (odds ratio: 8.06; P = .001), neuroendocrine carcinoma (odds ratio: 2.59, P = .006), large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (odds ratio: 4.89; P = .017), T2 tumors (odds ratio: 6.44; P < .001), T3 tumors (odds ratio: 27.5; P < .001), and T4 tumors (odds ratio: 17.3; P < .001). Lymph node metastases were associated with shorter restricted mean overall survival (40.8 vs 52.7 months; P < .001) and cancer-specific survival (41.3 vs 54.8 months; P < .001). When adjusted for other confounders, the nodal status of rectal neuroendocrine tumors was not independently associated with overall (hazard ratio = 1.56; P = .165) or cancer-specific survival (hazard ratio = 1.69; P = .158). Significant factors associated with worse overall survival and cancer-specific survival were age, tumor size, neuroendocrine carcinomas, large-cell neuroendocrine carcinomas, and the number of positive lymph nodes.

CONCLUSIONS

Lymph node metastases of rectal neuroendocrine tumors were more likely associated with high-grade, large-sized, and T2 to T4 tumors. The number of involved lymph nodes was an independent predictor of overall and cancer-specific survival. Other independent survival predictors were tumor grade, size, and T stage.

Outcome of Endoscopic Resection of Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors ≤ 10 mm

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Guidelines suggest endoscopic resection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors (rNETs) < 10 mm, but the most appropriate resection technique is unclear. In real-life clinical practice, the endoscopic removal of unrecognized rNETs can take place with "simple" techniques and without preliminary staging. The aim of the current study is to report our own experience at a referral center for both neuroendocrine neoplasms and endoscopy.

METHODS

Retrospective analyses of polypectomies were performed at the Humanitas Research Hospital for rNETs (already diagnosed or previously unrecognized).

RESULTS

A total of 19 patients were included, with a median lesion size of 5 mm (range 3-10 mm). Only five lesions were suspected as NETs before removal and underwent endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) before resection, being removed with advanced endoscopic techniques. Unsuspected rNETs were removed by cold polypectomy in eleven cases, EMR in two, and biopsy forceps in one. When described, the margins were negative in four cases, positive in four (R1), and indeterminate in one. The median follow-up was 40 months. A 10 mm polypoid lesion removed with cold snare polypectomy (G2 R1) needed subsequent surgery. Eighteen patients underwent EUS after a median time of 6.5 months from resection. The EUS identified local recurrence after 14 months in a 7 mm polypoid lesion removed with cold snare polypectomy (G1 R1); the lesion was treated with cap-assisted EMR. For all the other lesions, the follow-up was negative.

CONCLUSIONS

When rNETs are improperly removed without prior staging, caution must be exercised. The data from our cohort suggest that even if inappropriate resection had happened, patients may be safely managed with early EUS evaluation.

Comparative Efficacy and Acceptability of Endoscopic Methods for Rectal Neuroendocrine Neoplasms with Low Malignant Potential: A Network Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/AIMS

 Although endoscopic resection is an effective treatment of rectal neuroendocrine neoplasms (R-NENs) with low malignant potential, there is no consensus on the most recommended endoscopic method. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and acceptability of different endoscopic treatments for R-NENs with low malignant potential.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 We searched databases for studies on treatments of R-NENs using endoscopic resection. These studies comprised techniques such as endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), modified endoscopic mucosal resection (EMRM), modified endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESDM), and transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM). The primary outcomes assessed were histological complete resection (HCR).

RESULTS

 Overall, 38 retrospective studies (3040 R-NENs) were identified. Endoscopic mucosal resection with a cap (EMRC), endoscopic mucosal resection with ligation (EMRL), ESD, ESDM, and TEM demonstrated higher resectability than did EMR in achieving HCR. Endoscopic mucosal resection, EMRC, EMRL, EMRP, EMRD, and EMRU required shorter operation times than did ESD. Endoscopic mucosal resection, EMRC, ESDM, and TEM incurred lower risks than did ESD.

CONCLUSION

 Regarding R-NENs <20 mm with low malignant potential, ESD could be used as the primary treatment. However, TEM may be more effective if supported by economic conditions and hospital facility. With respect to R-NENs <16 mm with low malignant potential, EMRL could be used as the primary treatment. In regard to R-NENs <10 mm with low malignant potential, EMRL, EMRC, and ESD could be used as the primary treatment. However, EMRL and EMRC might be better when operational difficulties and economic conditions were considered.

Optimization of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection and Endoscopic Mucosal Resection Strategies for Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors Within 20 mm

AIMS

No consensus regarding the optimal endoscopic resection approach for rectal neuroendocrine tumors (R-NETs) measuring 10-20 mm, this study aims to investigate this issue.

METHODS

Patients with R-NETs underwent either endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). The primary endpoint was the complete resection rate, and the secondary endpoints were surgery-related complications and long-term outcomes.

RESULTS

96 patients met the inclusion criteria, 84 patients completed endoscopic resection, and 5 patients were excluded. 79 patients were enrolled and divided into EMR (n = 21) and ESD groups (n = 58). 100% of ESD excisions reached the primary endpoint, while 90.5% of EMR. Endoscopic submucosal dissection can achieve higher R0 rate and lower positive margin rate than EMR. The mean operative time of ESD and EMR was 35.22 ± 8.96 min and 13.14 ± 3.26 min, respectively. The complication rates of ESD and EMR were 3.4% and 4.8%, respectively. For R-NETs between 10 mm and 20 mm, the R0 rate of ESD was significantly higher than that of EMR (100% vs 71.4%, P = .01) and the margin positive rate of ESD was significant lower than that of EMR (4.8% vs 42.9%, P < .05). Both ESD and EMR obtained 100% R0 resection of less than 10 mm R-NET. The median follow-up was 13 months (3-84 months); 1 patient relapsed 25 months after EMR and was re-treated with ESD.

CONCLUSION

For R-NETs with a diameter less than 10 mm, both EMR and ESD were safe and effective and EMR is convenient and fast, with advantages. ESD offers superiority for R-NETs between 10 and 20 mm and can be considered as the preferred method.

Risk of metastasis and survival in patients undergoing different treatment strategies with T1 colonic neuroendocrine tumors

PURPOSE

The efficacy and safety of local excision (LE) for small (< 1‒2 cm) colonic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) is controversial due to the higher metastasis risk when compared with rectal NETs. The study aimed to evaluate the metastasis risk of T1 colonic NETs and compare patients' long-term prognosis after LE or radical surgery (RS).

METHODS

The Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database was used to identify patients with T1 colonic NETs (2004‒2015). Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess factors associated with metastasis risk. Propensity score matching was used to balance the variables. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated to estimate the prognosis of patients with T1N0M0 colonic NETs who underwent LE or RS.

RESULTS

Of the 610 patients with colonic NETs, 46 (7.54%) had metastasis at diagnosis. Tumor size (11-20 mm) (OR = 9.51; 95% confidence interval (CI): 4.32‒21.45; P < 0.001), right colon (OR = 15.79; 95% CI 7.20‒38.56; P < 0.001), submucosal infiltration (OR = 2.08; 95% CI 0.84‒5.57; P = 0.125) were independent risk factors associated with metastasis. Of the 515 patients with T1N0M0 colonic NETs, the overall long-term prognosis of LE was as good as that of RS groups (after matching, 5-year CSS: 97.9% vs. 94.6%, P = 0.450; 5-year OS: 92.7% vs. 85.6%, P = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

Tumor size (11‒20 mm) and site (right colon) are associated with metastasis in T1 colonic NETs. In the absence of metastasis, LE could be a viable option for 0‒10 mm T1 colonic NETs with well/moderate differentiation in the left colon in terms of long-term survival.

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

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

Efficacy of Endoscopic Resection for Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors Smaller than 15 mm

BACKGROUND

Local resection, including endoscopic resection, is recommended for rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) < 15 mm in patients without risk factors for metastasis, though the short- and long-term outcomes are unclear.

AIMS

This study investigates the efficacy of endoscopic resection for rectal NETs < 15 mm.

METHODS

The short- and long-term outcomes of patients with rectal NETs < 15 mm who underwent endoscopic resection and the outcomes of each endoscopic technique were analyzed. The tumors were stratified as < 10 mm (small-size group, SSG) and 10-14 mm (intermediate-size group, IMG).

RESULTS

Overall, 139 lesions (SSG, n = 118; IMG, n = 21) were analyzed. All tumors were classified as G1 (n = 135) or G2 (n = 4) according to the 2019 World Health Organization grading criteria. The complete resection rate was not different between the groups (P = 0.151). Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic submucosal resection with a ligation device (ESMR-L) achieved complete resection rates > 90% in the SSG. The ESMR-L procedure time (P < 0.001) and hospitalized period (P < 0.001) were significantly shorter than those of ESD. ESD achieved a complete resection rate of 80.0% in the IMG. The tumor size did not affect the overall survival or rate of lymph node/distant metastases.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic resection is a feasible and effective treatment for patients with rectal NETs < 15 mm without the risk factors of metastasis. ESMR-L and ESD are optimal techniques for resecting tumors smaller than 10 mm and 10-14 mm, respectively.

Multiple ligation-assisted endoscopic submucosal resection combined with endoscopic ultrasonography: a novel method to treat rectal neuroendocrine tumors

OBJECTIVE

The first choice of treatment for rectal neuroendocrine tumors (R-NETs) 10 mm in size is endoscopic resection, there is still controversy concerning the optimal endoscopic treatment for resecting R-NETs. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of multiple ligation-assisted endoscopic submucosal resection combined with endoscopic ultrasonography (EMR-MLUS) for R-NETs.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the data of 62 patients with R-NETs ≤10 mm in size who underwent EMR-MLUS or ligation-assisted endoscopic submucosal resection combined with endoscopic ultrasonography (EMR-LUS) between May 2019 and April 2022, including tumor characteristics, endoscopic complete resection, pathological complete resection, the procedure time, adverse events, and follow-up were compared between the two groups of patients.

RESULTS

Of the 62 patients, 19 underwent EMR-MLUS and 43 underwent EMR-LUS. The endoscopic morphology of lesions was statistically different between group EMR-MLUS and group EMR-LUS ( P = 0.015), and most of them were flat and slightly raised lesions in group EMR-MLUS. Although the pathological complete resection rate was slightly higher in the EMR-MLUS group than in the EMR-LUS group (94.74% vs. 90.70%; P = 0.290), the endoscopic complete resection rate was high in both groups. Involvement of the lateral resection margin was found four cases in the ESMR-LUS group; one case of deep resection margin involvement in the EMR-MLUS group. The mean procedure time was longer in the EMR-MLUS group than in the EMR-LUS group (12.79 ± 1.01 min vs. 11.08 ± 1.89 min; P = 0.041). In group EMR-LUS, there were two cases of immediate bleeding; in group EMR-MLUS, one case of perforation, all of them were successfully treated by endoscopy. No recurrence, progression, or metastasis was found in all patients.

CONCLUSION

EMR-MLUS is a safe and effective technique that could be considered when removing small rectal NETs, especially flat and slightly raised lesions.

Rectal neuroendocrine neoplasms: what the radiologists should know

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

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

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

ENETS standardized (synoptic) reporting for endoscopy in neuroendocrine tumors

Despite efforts from various endoscopy societies, reporting in the field of endoscopy remains extremely heterogeneous. Harmonisation of clinical practice in endoscopy has been highlighted by application of many clinical practice guidelines and standards pertaining to the endoscopic procedures and reporting are underlined. The aim of the proposed "standardised reporting" is to (1) facilitate recognition of gastrointestinal neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN) on initial endoscopy, (2) to enable interdisciplinary decision making for treatment by a multidisciplinary team, (3) to provide a basis for a standardised endoscopic follow-up which allows detection of recurrence or progression reliably, (4) to make endoscopic reports on NEN comparable between different units, and (5) to allow research collaboration between NEN centres in terms of consistency of their endoscopic data. The ultimate goal is to improve disease management, patient outcome and reduce the diagnostic burden on the side of the patient by ensuring the highest possible diagnostic accuracy and validity of endoscopic exams and possibly interventions.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHOD

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

RESULT

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

CONCLUSION

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

Diagnosis and Management of Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors (NETs)

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