1. |
- Dromain, Clarisse, et al.
(författare)
-
Tumour Growth Rate to predict the outcome of patients with Neuroendocrine Tumours : Performance and sources of variability
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Neuroendocrinology. - : S. Karger. - 0028-3835 .- 1423-0194. ; 111:9, s. 831-839
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- INTRODUCTION: Tumor growth rate (TGR), percentage of change in tumor volume/month, has been previously identified as an early radiological biomarker for treatment monitoring in neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) patients. We assessed the performance and reproducibility of TGR 3 months (TGR3m) as a predictor factor of progression-free survival (PFS), including the impact of imaging method and reader variability.METHODS: Baseline and 3-months (±1month) CT/MRI images from patients with advanced, grade 1-2 NETs were retrospectively reviewed by 2 readers. Influence of number of targets, tumor burden and location of lesion on the performance of TGR3m to predict PFS was assessed by uni/multivariable Cox regression analysis. Agreement between readers was assessed by the Lin's concordance coefficient (LCC) and Kappa (KC).RESULTS: A total of 790 lesions were measured in 222 patients. Median PFS was 22.9 months. On univariable analysis, number of lesions (DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: TGR3m is a robust and early radiological biomarker able to predict PFS. It may be used to identify patients with advanced NETs who require closer radiological follow-up.
|
|
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.
|
|