OBJECTIVE: To validate the 2010 American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) and 2006 European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) tumor staging systems for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNETs) using the largest, single-institution series of surgically resected patients in the literature. BACKGROUND: The natural history and prognosis of PanNETs have been poorly defined because of the rarity and heterogeneity of these neoplasms. Currently, there are 2 main staging systems for PanNETs, which can complicate comparisons of reports in the literature and thereby hinder progress against this disease. METHODS: Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted on the prognostic factors of survival using 326 sporadic, nonfunctional, surgically resected PanNET patients who were cared for at our institution between 1984 and 2011. Current and proposed models were tested for survival prognostication validity as measured by discrimination (Harrel's c-index, HCI) and calibration. RESULTS: Five-year overall-survival rates for AJCC stages I, II, and IV are 93% (88%-99%), 74% (65%-83%), and 56% (42%-73%), respectively, whereas ENETS stages I, II, III, and IV are 97% (92%-100%), 87% (80%-95%), 73% (63%-84%), and 56% (42%-73%), respectively. Each model has an HCI of 0.68, and they are no different in their ability to predict survival. We developed a simple prognostic tool just using grade, as measured by continuous Ki-67 labeling, sex, and binary age that has an HCI of 0.74. CONCLUSIONS: Both the AJCC and ENETS staging systems are valid and indistinguishable in their survival prognostication. A new, simpler prognostic tool can be used to predict survival and decrease interinstitutional mistakes and uncertainties regarding these neoplasms.
OBJECTIVE: To validate the 2010 American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) and 2006 European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) tumor staging systems for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNETs) using the largest, single-institution series of surgically resected patients in the literature. BACKGROUND: The natural history and prognosis of PanNETs have been poorly defined because of the rarity and heterogeneity of these neoplasms. Currently, there are 2 main staging systems for PanNETs, which can complicate comparisons of reports in the literature and thereby hinder progress against this disease. METHODS: Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted on the prognostic factors of survival using 326 sporadic, nonfunctional, surgically resected PanNET patients who were cared for at our institution between 1984 and 2011. Current and proposed models were tested for survival prognostication validity as measured by discrimination (Harrel's c-index, HCI) and calibration. RESULTS: Five-year overall-survival rates for AJCC stages I, II, and IV are 93% (88%-99%), 74% (65%-83%), and 56% (42%-73%), respectively, whereas ENETS stages I, II, III, and IV are 97% (92%-100%), 87% (80%-95%), 73% (63%-84%), and 56% (42%-73%), respectively. Each model has an HCI of 0.68, and they are no different in their ability to predict survival. We developed a simple prognostic tool just using grade, as measured by continuous Ki-67 labeling, sex, and binary age that has an HCI of 0.74. CONCLUSIONS: Both the AJCC and ENETS staging systems are valid and indistinguishable in their survival prognostication. A new, simpler prognostic tool can be used to predict survival and decrease interinstitutional mistakes and uncertainties regarding these neoplasms.
Authors: Franz Sellner; Sabine Thalhammer; Stefan Stättner; Josef Karner; Martin Klimpfinger Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2011-02-24 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: Yuchen Jiao; Chanjuan Shi; Barish H Edil; Roeland F de Wilde; David S Klimstra; Anirban Maitra; Richard D Schulick; Laura H Tang; Christopher L Wolfgang; Michael A Choti; Victor E Velculescu; Luis A Diaz; Bert Vogelstein; Kenneth W Kinzler; Ralph H Hruban; Nickolas Papadopoulos Journal: Science Date: 2011-01-20 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Brian K P Goh; Pierce K H Chow; Yu-Meng Tan; Peng-Chung Cheow; Yaw-Fui A Chung; Khee-Chee Soo; Wai-Keong Wong; London L P J Ooi Journal: ANZ J Surg Date: 2010-08-27 Impact factor: 1.872
Authors: Robert C G Martin; David A Kooby; Sharon M Weber; Nipun B Merchant; Alex A Parikh; Clifford S Cho; Syed A Ahmad; Hong Jin Kim; William Hawkins; Charles R Scoggins Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2010-11-20 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Matthew H Kulke; Johanna Bendell; Larry Kvols; Joel Picus; Rodney Pommier; James Yao Journal: J Hematol Oncol Date: 2011-06-14 Impact factor: 17.388
Authors: David A Kleiman; Toni Beninato; Samuel Sultan; Michael J P Crowley; Brendan Finnerty; Ritu Kumar; Nicole C Panarelli; Yi-Fang Liu; Michael D Lieberman; Marco Seandel; Todd Evans; Olivier Elemento; Rasa Zarnegar; Thomas J Fahey Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2014-05-23 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Chad M McCall; Chanjuan Shi; Toby C Cornish; David S Klimstra; Laura H Tang; Olca Basturk; Liew Jun Mun; Trevor A Ellison; Christopher L Wolfgang; Michael A Choti; Richard D Schulick; Barish H Edil; Ralph H Hruban Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2013-11 Impact factor: 6.394