| 1. |
- Dawod, Mohammed, et al.
(författare)
-
Antiproliferative Systemic Therapies for Metastatic Small Bowel Neuroendocrine Tumours
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Current Treatment Options in Oncology. - : Springer Nature. - 1527-2729 .- 1534-6277. ; 22:8
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are a heterogeneous group of malignancies with rising incidence and prevalence. Outcome and therapy of small bowel neuroendocrine tumours (SBNETs) is variable, depending on the grade, differentiation, tumour burden, as well as the site of the tumour origin. Because of this, multidisciplinary approach is essential. Large randomized clinical trials, with somatostatin analogues (PROMID, CLARINET) or with peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) with 177-lutetium (NETTER-1 trial) as well as the mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor (mTOR) everolimus (RADIANT trials), represent milestones for the medical management of unresectable grade 1 and 2 SBNETS over the last decade. Novel therapies, such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI), are on the cutting edge. However, multiple unsolved questions remain. This review provides a comprehensive review of the main systemic therapeutic options for advanced SBNETs and discusses the latest guideline recommendations for palliative treatment.
|
|
| 2. |
- Lamarca, Angela, et al.
(författare)
-
Advanced small-bowel well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumours : An international survey of practice on 3(rd)-line treatment
- 2021
-
Ingår i: World Journal of Gastroenterology. - : BAISHIDENG PUBLISHING GROUP INC. - 1007-9327 .- 2219-2840. ; 27:10, s. 976-989
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND Somatostatin analogues are an established first-line therapy for well differentiated small bowel neuroendocrine tumours (Wd-SBNETs), while and peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) is frequently used as a second-line therapy. Adequate treatment selection of third-line treatment remains challenging due to the limited prospective data currently available on the best therapeutic sequence. AIM To understand current practice and rationale for decision-making by physicians in the 3(rd)-line setting by building an online survey. METHODS Weighted average (WA) of likelihood of usage between responders (1 very unlikely; 4 very likely) was used to reflect the relevance of factors explored. RESULTS Replies from representatives of 28 centers were received (5/8/2020-21/9/2020); medical oncologist (53.6%), gastroenterologist (17.9%); United Kingdom (21.4%), Spain (17.9%), Italy (14.3%). Majority from European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) Centres of Excellence (57.1%), who followed ENETS guidelines (82.1%). Generally speaking, 3(rd)-line treatment for Wd-SBNETs was: everolimus (EVE) (66.7%), PRRT (18.5%), liver embolization (LE) (7.4%) and interferon-alpha (IFN) (3.7%); chemotherapy (0%); decision was based on clinical trial data (59.3%), or personal experience (22.2%). EVE was most likely used if Ki-67 < 10% (WA 3.27/4) or age < 70 years (WA 3.23/4), in the 3(rd)-line setting (WA 3.23/4); regardless of presence/absence of carcinoid syndrome (CS), rate of progression or extent of disease. Chemotherapy was mainly utilised only if rapid progression (within 6 mo) (WA 3.35/4), Ki-67 10%-20% (WA 2.77/4), negative somatostatin receptor imaging (WA 2.65/4) or high tumour burden (WA 2.77/4); temozolomide or streptozocin was used with capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) (57.7%), FOLFOX (5-FU combined with oxaliplatin) (23.1%). LE was selected if presence of CS (WA 3.24/4) or Ki-67 < 10% (WA 2.8/4), after progression to other treatments (WA 2.8/4). IFN was rarely used (WA 1.3/4). CONCLUSION Everolimus was the most frequently used therapeutic option in the third-line setting. The most important factors for decision-making included Ki-67, rate of progression, functionality and tumour burden; since this decision is based on multiple factors, it highlights the need for a multidisciplinary assessment.
|
|
| 3. |
- Öberg, Kjell, et al.
(författare)
-
A Delphic consensus assessment : imaging and biomarkers in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumor disease management
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Endocrine Connections. - 2049-3614. ; 5:5, s. 174-187
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The complexity of the clinical management of neuroendocrine neoplasia (NEN) is exacerbated by limitations in imaging modalities and a paucity of clinically useful biomarkers. Limitations in currently available imaging modalities reflect difficulties in measuring an intrinsically indolent disease, resolution inadequacies and inter-/intra-facility device variability and that RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) criteria are not optimal for NEN. Limitations of currently used biomarkers are that they are secretory biomarkers (chromogranin A, serotonin, neuron-specific enolase and pancreastatin); monoanalyte measurements; and lack sensitivity, specificity and predictive capacity. None of them meet the NIH metrics for clinical usage. A multinational, multidisciplinary Delphi consensus meeting of NEN experts (n = 33) assessed current imaging strategies and biomarkers in NEN management. Consensus (>75%) was achieved for 78% of the 142 questions. The panel concluded that morphological imaging has a diagnostic value. However, both imaging and current single-analyte biomarkers exhibit substantial limitations in measuring the disease status and predicting the therapeutic efficacy. RECIST remains suboptimal as a metric. A critical unmet need is the development of a clinico-biological tool to provide enhanced information regarding precise disease status and treatment response. The group considered that circulating RNA was better than current general NEN biomarkers and preliminary clinical data were considered promising. It was resolved that circulating multianalyte mRNA (NETest) had clinical utility in both diagnosis and monitoring disease status and therapeutic efficacy. Overall, it was concluded that a combination of tumor spatial and functional imaging with circulating transcripts (mRNA) would represent the future strategy for real-time monitoring of disease progress and therapeutic efficacy.
|
|
