Literature DB >> 18506737

Prognostic relevance of a novel TNM classification system for upper gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

Ulrich-Frank Pape1, Henning Jann, Jacqueline Müller-Nordhorn, Angelina Bockelbrink, Uta Berndt, Stefan N Willich, Martin Koch, Christoph Röcken, Guido Rindi, Bertram Wiedenmann.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) of the gastroenteropancreatic (GEP) system comprise a rare but challenging group of malignant neoplasms and occur at virtually any site of the GEP system. In 2006, a new TNM classification system was proposed for the staging and grading of upper GEP NETs.
METHODS: The prognostic relevance of the TNM classification system was analyzed retrospectively in 202 patients from a referral center with histologically proven foregut NET. Patients were classified according to previous classification systems and the TNM classification. Survival data were acquired and statistical analyses were performed by using log-rank and Cox regression testing.
RESULTS: Primary tumors were gastric (n = 48), duodenal (n = 23), and pancreatic (n = 131). During the observation period, 21% of patients died. The overall 5- and 10-year survival rates were 75% and 64%, respectively. Previous classification systems discriminated between low-grade and high-grade malignant NETs but did not allow further prognostic differentiation. In contrast, the proposed TNM classification was able to differentiate significantly between different tumor stages (stages I-III vs stage IV; P < .01) and cellular proliferation rates according to Ki-67 labeling (grade 1 vs grade 2, P = .04; grade 1 vs grade 3 and grade 2 vs grade 3, P < .01). Cox regression analysis confirmed an increased risk of reduced survival for patients with stage III or IV NET and grade 2 or 3 NET.
CONCLUSIONS: The current results demonstrated the prognostic relevance of the newly proposed TNM classification system for foregut NETs with statistical significance for the subgroups of both the staging classification and the grading system. Thus, the new classification system provides a valid and powerful tool for prognostic stratification of GEP NETs in clinical practice and research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18506737     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.23549

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  126 in total

1.  High KIT and PDGFRA are associated with shorter patients survival in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, but mutations are a rare event.

Authors:  Thomas Knösel; Yuan Chen; Annelore Altendorf-Hofmann; Christine Danielczok; Martin Freesmeyer; Utz Settmacher; Christine Wurst; Stefan Schulz; Lin Lin Yang; Iver Petersen
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-12-08       Impact factor: 4.553

Review 2.  Surgical treatment of gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors.

Authors:  Volker Fendrich; Detlef K Bartsch
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2011-02-01       Impact factor: 3.445

3.  [The ENETS and UICC TNM classification of neuroendocrine tumors of the gastrointestinal tract and the pancreas: comment].

Authors:  G Klöppel; G Rindi; A Perren; P Komminoth; D S Klimstra
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 1.011

4.  The ENETS and AJCC/UICC TNM classifications of the neuroendocrine tumors of the gastrointestinal tract and the pancreas: a statement.

Authors:  Günter Klöppel; Guido Rindi; Aurel Perren; Paul Komminoth; David S Klimstra
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2010-04-27       Impact factor: 4.064

5.  Long-term outcomes and prognostic factors in 78 Japanese patients with advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms: a single-center retrospective study.

Authors:  Lingaku Lee; Hisato Igarashi; Nao Fujimori; Masayuki Hijioka; Ken Kawabe; Yoshinao Oda; Robert T Jensen; Tetsuhide Ito
Journal:  Jpn J Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 3.019

6.  Curative versus palliative surgical resection of liver metastases in patients with neuroendocrine tumors: a meta-analysis of observational studies.

Authors:  Stefano Bacchetti; Enrico Maria Pasqual; Serena Bertozzi; Ambrogio P Londero; Andrea Risaliti
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2014-11

7.  Revised staging classification improves outcome prediction for small intestinal neuroendocrine tumors.

Authors:  Michelle Kang Kim; Richard R P Warner; Sasan Roayaie; Noam Harpaz; Stephen C Ward; Steven Itzkowitz; Juan P Wisnivesky
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-09-16       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Ki-67 cytological index can distinguish well-differentiated from poorly differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a comparative cytohistological study of 53 cases.

Authors:  Gabriele Carlinfante; Paola Baccarini; Debora Berretti; Tiziana Cassetti; Maurizio Cavina; Rita Conigliaro; Alessandro De Pellegrin; Luca Di Tommaso; Carlo Fabbri; Adele Fornelli; Andrea Frasoldati; Giorgio Gardini; Luisa Losi; Livia Maccio; Raffaele Manta; Nico Pagano; Romano Sassatelli; Silvia Serra; Lorenzo Camellini
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2014-05-08       Impact factor: 4.064

Review 9.  Neuroendocrine neoplasia of the gastrointestinal tract revisited: towards precision medicine.

Authors:  Guido Rindi; Bertram Wiedenmann
Journal:  Nat Rev Endocrinol       Date:  2020-08-24       Impact factor: 43.330

10.  Epidemiological study of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors in Japan.

Authors:  Tetsuhide Ito; Hironobu Sasano; Masao Tanaka; R Yoshiyuki Osamura; Iwao Sasaki; Wataru Kimura; Koji Takano; Takao Obara; Miyuki Ishibashi; Kazuwa Nakao; Ryuichiro Doi; Akira Shimatsu; Toshirou Nishida; Izumi Komoto; Yukio Hirata; Kazuhiko Nakamura; Hisato Igarashi; Robert T Jensen; Bertram Wiedenmann; Masayuki Imamura
Journal:  J Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 7.527

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.