Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Due to their increasing incidence, neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are being detected more frequently by endoscopists while they are performing diagnostic upper or lower gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopies. These procedures are usually performed for unrelated indications or for screening, with the tumours often being detected incidentally. The most common scenario is of an endoscopist being surprised by receiving a histology report of a well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumour (NET) after biopsying a small polyp that was initially thought to be benign. This article aims to provide some guidance about what to do next in that situation. All patients with NET should, however, be referred to a fully constituted NEN multidisciplinary team for definitive investigations and management.In general, the site, size and number of any possible NENs should be fully assessed during the initial endoscopy and representative endoscopic images should be captured. If the initial endoscopic assessment was inadequate, the procedure may need to be repeated. Possible NENs should be sampled using biopsy forceps. Endoscopic resection should only be attempted following histological confirmation of the diagnosis and tumour grade and after additional investigations have been performed to fully stage the tumour and determine its hormone production status. This is essential so that patients do not undergo either unnecessary or inadequate endoscopic resections.This article discusses the endoscopic features and subsequent assessment of NENs that arise in the stomach, duodenum, terminal ileum and rectum, as these are the common tumour sites within the GI tract.
Due to their increasing incidence, neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are being detected more frequently by endoscopists while they are performing diagnostic upper or lower gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopies. These procedures are usually performed for unrelated indications or for screening, with the tumours often being detected incidentally. The most common scenario is of an endoscopist being surprised by receiving a histology report of a well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumour (NET) after biopsying a small polyp that was initially thought to be benign. This article aims to provide some guidance about what to do next in that situation. All patients with NET should, however, be referred to a fully constituted NEN multidisciplinary team for definitive investigations and management.In general, the site, size and number of any possible NENs should be fully assessed during the initial endoscopy and representative endoscopic images should be captured. If the initial endoscopic assessment was inadequate, the procedure may need to be repeated. Possible NENs should be sampled using biopsy forceps. Endoscopic resection should only be attempted following histological confirmation of the diagnosis and tumour grade and after additional investigations have been performed to fully stage the tumour and determine its hormone production status. This is essential so that patients do not undergo either unnecessary or inadequate endoscopic resections.This article discusses the endoscopic features and subsequent assessment of NENs that arise in the stomach, duodenum, terminal ileum and rectum, as these are the common tumour sites within the GI tract.
Background: Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are neoplastic tumors developing in every part of the body, mainly in the gastrointestinal tract and pancreas. Their treatment involves the surgical removal of the tumor and its metastasis, long-acting somatostatin analogs, chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and radioligand therapy (RLT). Materials and Methods: A total of 127 patients with progressive neuroendocrine neoplasms underwent RLT—4 courses, administered every 10 weeks—with the use of 7.4 GBq [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE or tandem therapy with 1.85 GBq [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE and 1.85 GBq [90Y]Y-DOTA-TATE. Assessment of short- and long-term complications, as well as the calculation of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were performed. Results: RLT caused a statistically but not clinically significant decrease in blood morphology parameters during both short- and long-term observations. Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) significantly decreased only in a long-term observation after RLT; however, it was clinically acceptable. Computed predictions of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) indicated that five years post-RLT, there is a 74% chance of patients surviving, with only a 58.5% likelihood of disease progression. Conclusions: Computed predictions of PFS and OS confirmed treatment efficiency and good patient survival. RLT should be considered a safe and reliable line of treatment for patients with progressive NENs as it causes only a low number of low-grade adverse events.
Objectives: Our aim was to investigate the clinical outcome of patients with well-differentiated gastric, duodenal, and rectal neuroendocrine tumors after treatment with incomplete endoscopic resection due to the finding of microscopic positive resection margins (R1). Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with type 1 gastric, non-ampullary non-functioning duodenal, or rectal neuroendocrine neoplasms with positive R1 margins after endoscopic resection. The rate of tumor recurrence and progression-free survival were considered to be the study’s main endpoints. Statistical analysis was performed using MedCalc® v.17 software and a p-value of <0.05 was considered significant. A Cox proportional-hazard regression was performed to identify risk factors for disease recurrence/progression. Results: After evaluating 110 patients, a total of 58 patients were included in the final analysis (15 gastric NENs, 12 duodenal NENs, and 31 rectal NENs). After evidence of endoscopic R1 resection had been gathered, 26 patients (44.8%) underwent an endoscopic/surgical extension of the previous resection. Tumor progression (all local recurrences) occurred in five out of fifty-eight patients (8.6%) with a median PFS of 36 months. There were no tumor-related deaths. G2 grading and the gastric primary tumor site were the only features significantly associated with the risk of recurrence of the disease (HR: 11.97 [95% CI: 1.22–116.99], HR: 12.54 [95% CI: 1.28–122.24], respectively). Conclusions: Tumor progression rarely occurs in patients with microscopic positive margin excision (R1) after endoscopic resection and does not seem to affect patients’ clinical outcomes.
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.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.