Introduction: The optimal treatment for small, asymptomatic, nonfunctioning pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (NF-PanNEN) is still controversial. European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) guidelines recommend a watchful strategy for asymptomatic NF-PanNEN <2 cm of diameter. Several retrospective series demonstrated that a non-operative management is safe and feasible, but no prospective studies are available. Aim of the ASPEN study is to evaluate the optimal management of asymptomatic NF-PanNEN ≤2 cm comparing active surveillance and surgery.Methods: ASPEN is a prospective international observational multicentric cohort study supported by ENETS. The study is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov with the identification code NCT03084770. Based on the incidence of NF-PanNEN the number of expected patients to be enrolled in the ASPEN study is 1,000 during the study period (2017–2022). Primary endpoint is disease/progression-free survival, defined as the time from study enrolment to the first evidence of progression (active surveillance group) or recurrence of disease (surgery group) or death from disease. Inclusion criteria are: age >18 years, the presence of asymptomatic sporadic NF-PanNEN ≤2 cm proven by a positive fine-needle aspiration (FNA) or by the presence of a measurable nodule on high-quality imaging techniques that is positive at 68Gallium DOTATOC-PET scan.Conclusion: The ASPEN study is designed to investigate if an active surveillance of asymptomatic NF-PanNEN ≤2 cm is safe as compared to surgical approach.

No abstract

Lutetium peptide receptor radio nuclide therapy (Lu-PRRT) is an effective treatment for progressive, metastatic, somatostatin-receptor-positive, well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumours (WD-NETs). Here, we report a single centre experience of real-world efficacy, long-term side effects, and challenges of this treatment. This was a retrospective analysis. All patients linked with our centre who had Lu-PRRT were included. Clinicopathological data were analysed using descriptive statistics, Kaplan-Meier, and Cox regression. A total of 45 patients had Lu-PRRT, of those 30 (67%) were males, and 13 (29%) were more than 65 years old. The primary site was small intestine in 30 (67%) patients, pancreas in seven (16%) patients, and lung in three (7%) patients. The tumor was grade 1 in 15 (35%) patients, grade 2 in 22 (48%) patients, and grade 3 in six (13%) patients. A total of 41 (91%) patients had liver metastasis, and 20 (44%) patients had carcinoid syndrome. Lu-PRRT was the secondline therapy in all patients. Krenning's score was 4 in 36 (80%) patients and 3 in nine (20%) patients. The median waiting time to start Lu-PRRT therapy was 87 days. The median follow-up was 41 months. A total of 23 (51%) patients had a partial response, 18 (40%) patients had stable disease, and four (9%) patients had progression. None of the patients had a complete response. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 38 months (95% CI: 25.8-50.1). The median overall survival (OS) was not reached. Nine patients died during follow-up (death from any cause). Prior treatment with targeted therapies or high dose somatostatin analogues were negative predictors of Lu-PRRT outcome (p-values of < .001 and < .045, respectively). There were two serious haematological toxicities, one patient developed acute myeloid leukaemia (AML), and the other developed chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML).Lu-PRRT is an effective second-line treatment for metastatic WD-NETs. The effect of targeted therapies on Lu-PRRT outcome was significant and needs to be clarified in further studies.

No abstract

No abstract