Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) is an established treatment of metastatic neuroendocrine tumors grade 1–2 (G1–G2). However, its possible benefit in high-grade gastroenteropancreatic (GEP) neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN G3) is largely unknown. We therefore aimed to assess the benefits and side effects of PRRT in patients with GEP NEN G3. We performed a retrospective cohort study at 12 centers to assess the efficacy and toxicity of PRRT in patients with GEP NEN G3. Outcomes were response rate, disease control rate, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicity. We included 149 patients (primary tumor: pancreatic n = 89, gastrointestinal n = 34, unknown n = 26). PRRT was first-line (n = 30), second-line (n = 62) or later-line treatment (n = 57). Of 114 patients evaluated, 1% had complete response, 41% partial response, 38% stable disease and 20% progressive disease. Of 104 patients with documented progressive disease before PRRT, disease control rate was 69%. The total cohort had median PFS of 14 months and OS of 29 months. Ki-67 21–54% (n = 125) vs Ki-67 ≥55% (n = 23): PFS 16 vs 6 months (P < 0.001) and OS 31 vs 9 months (P < 0.001). Well (n = 60) vs poorly differentiated NEN (n = 62): PFS 19 vs 8 months (P < 0.001) and OS 44 vs 19 months (P < 0.001). Grade 3–4 hematological or renal toxicity occurred in 17% of patients. This large multicenter cohort of patients with GEP NEN G3 treated with PRRT demonstrates promising response rates, disease control rates, PFS and OS as well as toxicity in patients with mainly progressive disease. Based on these results, PRRT may be considered for patients with GEP NEN G3.
The aim of this study was to examine the impact of features of dysmetabolism on liver disease severity, evolution, and clinical outcomes in a real‐life cohort of patients treated with direct acting antivirals for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. To this end, we considered 7,007 patients treated between 2014 and 2018, 65.3% with advanced fibrosis, of whom 97.7% achieved viral eradication (NAVIGATORE‐Lombardia registry). In a subset (n = 748), liver stiffness measurement (LSM) was available at baseline and follow‐up. Higher body mass index (BMI; odds ratio [OR] 1.06 per kg/m2, 1.03‐1.09) and diabetes (OR 2.01 [1.65‐2.46]) were independently associated with advanced fibrosis at baseline, whereas statin use was protective (OR 0.46 [0.35‐0.60]; P < 0.0001 for all). The impact of BMI was greater in those without diabetes (P = 0.003). Diabetes was independently associated with less pronounced LSM improvement after viral eradication (P = 0.001) and in patients with advanced fibrosis was an independent predictor of the most frequent clinical events, namely de novo hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC; hazard ratio [HR] 2.09 [1.20‐3.63]; P = 0.009) and cardiovascular events (HR 2.73 [1.16‐6.43]; P = 0.021). Metformin showed a protective association against HCC (HR 0.32 [0.11‐0.96]; P = 0.043), which was confirmed after adjustment for propensity score (P = 0.038). Diabetes diagnosis further refined HCC prediction in patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease at high baseline risk (P = 0.024). Conclusion: Metabolic comorbidities were associated with advanced liver fibrosis at baseline, whereas statins were protective. In patients with advanced fibrosis, diabetes increased the risk of de novo HCC and of cardiovascular events. Optimization of metabolic comorbidities treatment by a multi‐disciplinary management approach may improve cardiovascular and possibly liver‐related outcomes.
The present real-world experience shows that sunitinib is a safe and effective treatment for panNETs, even in the clinical setting of heavily pre-treated, progressive diseases.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.