Literature DB >> 27811856

Predictive factors of antiproliferative activity of octreotide LAR as first-line therapy for advanced neuroendocrine tumours.

Faidon-Marios Laskaratos1, Martin Walker2, Keval Naik1, Emmanouil Maragkoudakis1, Nikolaos Oikonomopoulos1, Lee Grant3, Tim Meyer1,4, Martyn Caplin1, Christos Toumpanakis1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The antiproliferative activity of octreotide LAR in neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) has been demonstrated by small retrospective studies and confirmed by a prospective phase III trial (PROMID). However, there are limited data about the duration and predictors of response. The aim of our retrospective study was to determine the time to radiological progression (TTRP) of disease and the factors that were associated with better response.
METHODS: A total of 254 treatment naïve patients with advanced NETs and positive somatostatin receptor scintigraphy were included. Mean follow-up period was 42 months.
RESULTS: The location of primary was in the small bowel in 204, pancreas in 22, lungs in 14, rectum in 7 and unknown in 7 patients. Most tumours were well-differentiated, G1 (58%) and G2 (23%). The majority of patients commenced octreotide LAR due to functional symptoms (57%), radiological progression (10%) or in the presence of asymptomatic and stable disease on the basis of data from the PROMID trial (18.5%). Partial response occurred in 5%. For all patients, the median TTRP was 37 months (95% confidence interval, CI: 32-52 months). There was a statistically significant shorter TTRP in patients with pancreatic tumours, liver metastases and intermediate grade tumours. Extremely raised (>10 times the upper limit of normal) baseline chromogranin A levels were associated with an unfavourable outcome. In contrast, male sex, carcinoid heart disease and initiation of treatment in the presence of stable disease were predictive of a better response. Age, extra-hepatic metastases, presence of mesenteric desmoplasia, previous resection and functional status of the primary tumour did not affect response.
CONCLUSIONS: The duration of the antiproliferative effect of octreotide LAR seems to be longer than previously reported. This study has identified several predictors of response in a large cohort of patients with NETs on somatostatin analogue therapy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27811856      PMCID: PMC5129835          DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2016.349

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Cancer        ISSN: 0007-0920            Impact factor:   7.640


Neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) are rare neoplasms with an incidence between 2 and 9.3 per 100 000 persons per year (Ramage ). They represent a heterogeneous group of neoplasms, arising from neuroendocrine cells derived from the diffuse endocrine system. They may be associated with a specific syndrome due to hormone hypersecretion, which differentiates ‘functional' from ‘non-functional' tumours. Somatostatin analogues (SSA) are commonly used to treat symptoms associated with hormone hypersecretion and have a favourable safety profile. The antiproliferative activity of SSA in NETs has been recently confirmed in two randomised placebo-controlled trials (Rinke ; Toumpanakis and Caplin, 2013; Caplin ). The PROMID trial was a placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomised study assessing the effect of octreotide LAR on the control of tumour growth in patients with metastatic, well-differentiated midgut NETs. The study demonstrated that octreotide LAR significantly lengthened the time to tumour progression compared with placebo (median time to tumour progression 14.3 months vs 6 months, respectively; Rinke ). More recently, another randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluated the effect of lanreotide in patients with metastatic, well- or moderately differentiated, non-functional enteropancreatic NETs (the CLARINET trial). This study showed that lanreotide was associated with a significantly prolonged progression-free survival compared with placebo (median progression-free survival not reached vs 18 months, respectively; Caplin ). However, there are limited data regarding the duration of response and factors predictive of tumour control in patients with NETs on SSA therapy. The aims of the present study were to determine the mean time to radiological progression (TTRP) of disease and factors affecting radiological response to SSA therapy in a large cohort of patients with NETs treated with octreotide LAR.

Materials and methods

Patients

A total of 254 patients with NETs treated with octreotide LAR (as monotherapy) in our centre from 2001 to 2014, were included in this retrospective study. All patients had confirmed histopathological diagnosis. All patients were treatment-naïve, but primary tumour resection before somatostatin analogue therapy was not an exclusion criterion. In addition, all patients had a positive somatostatin receptor scintigraphy before commencement of octreotide LAR.

Somatostatin analogue therapy

All patients (who were somatostatin naïve) had an initial test dose of subcutaneous (s.c.) octreotide (50 μg). If no immediate adverse effect was noted, patients either had an initial 2-week course of s.c. octreotide (100/200 μg tds) and then were switched over to octreotide LAR or patients were given monthly octreotide LAR after no reaction to a single test dose of s.c. octreotide. The initial dose of octreotide LAR was 20 mg/28 days in 198 patients and 30 mg/28 days in 56 patients.

Study design

A retrospective review of patient electronic records was performed. Data collected included patient demographics (age, sex), data on the characteristics of treatment with octreotide LAR (dose, indication), tumour characteristics (location of primary, functional status, grade, presence of carcinoid heart disease and mesenteric desmoplasia, presence of liver or extra-hepatic metastases, extent of liver involvement, resection of primary and TTRP), and biochemical data (baseline serum chromogranin A (CgA)). NET tumours were retrospectively classified and graded according to WHO 2010 (Bosman ). Tumours were graded into three levels based on tumour cell proliferation: G1: mitotic count<2 per 10 high-power fields and/or Ki67⩽2% G2: mitotic count 2–20 per 10 high-power fields and/or Ki67 3–20% G3: mitotic count>20 per 10 high-power fields and/or Ki67⩾20% (Rindi ). Extent of liver involvement (0: absence of liver metastases, 1: volume of liver metastases affecting <25% of hepatic parenchyma, 2: volume of liver metastases affecting 25–50% of hepatic parenchyma, 3: volume of liver metastases affecting >50% of hepatic parenchyma) was evaluated by one experienced radiologist (L.G.). The presence of mesenteric desmoplasia was assessed by computed tomography imaging. However, assessment of the extent or degree of desmoplastic reaction was not performed due to the absence of established classification systems. The aims of this retrospective study were to demonstrate the mean TTRP, as well as identify factors affecting the antiproliferative activity of octreotide LAR in a large cohort of patients with NETs. Radiological assessment was based on cross-sectional imaging in 4–6 month intervals, using the revised RECIST (version 1.1) criteria (Eisenhauer ). Many variables were assessed as potential predictive factors of response to treatment with octreotide LAR: age, sex, treatment indication, location of primary tumour, extent of liver involvement, extra-hepatic metastases (bone, peritoneum, mesentery), presence of carcinoid heart disease and mesenteric desmoplasia, tumour grade, functional status (functional or non-functional), resection of primary tumour and baseline CgA level.

Statistical analysis

Non-parametric Kaplan–Meier techniques were used to evaluate times to radiological progression, including the median and associated 95% CI, in strata defined by the various explanatory variables. A semi-parametric Cox regression model was used to perform multivariate analysis on a sample of 152 patients with complete information on all covariates of interest (Collett, 2003). By including fewer covariates, additional multivariate models were fitted to larger patient samples to test the robustness of the findings to potential sample bias.

Results

Patient characteristics

A total of 254 patients were included in this retrospective study. The patients' mean age was 60.5±12.8 years. The male to female ratio was 1.1 : 1. The location of the primary tumour was in the small bowel in 204 (80%), pancreas in 22 (8.5%), lung in 14 (5.5%), rectum in 7 (2.5%) and unknown in 7 patients (2.5%). The histological grade was G1 in 148 (58%), G2 in 59 (23%), G3 in 1 (0.5%) and not available in 47 patients (18.5%). The study population included 183 patients with functional tumours (72%) (of which 97% were serotonin secreting, 1% glucagonomas, 1.5% gastrinomas and 0.5% insulinomas), 67 with non-functional tumours (26%), whereas data on functional status were not available in 4 patients (2%). The primary tumour had been resected before commencement of octreotide LAR in 117 (46%) patients. Indications for commencement of octreotide LAR included functional symptoms in 57%, radiological progression in 10%, a combination of functional symptoms and radiological progression in 3%, whereas 18.5% of patients were asymptomatic with stable disease and started treatment on the basis of data from the PROMID trial (CLARINET trial data were not available during the period covered in this retrospective cohort study). The duration of stable disease before initiation of SSA therapy in this group of patients was at least 3 months. A total of 8% of patients were commenced on octreotide LAR due to a combination of functional symptoms and stable disease (on the basis of data from the PROMID trial) and the indication was not clearly recorded in 3.5% of cases. A summary of patient baseline characteristics is provided in Table 1.
Table 1

Patient baseline characteristics

 N=254
Sex
Male134
Female120
Indication for treatment
Functional symptoms145
Functional symptoms+progression8
Functional symptoms+PROMID data21
Progression24
PROMID data47
Unknown9
Location of primary
Lung14
Pancreas22
Rectum7
Small bowel204
Unknown7
Grade
Low148
Intermediate59
High1
Unknown47
Functional status
Functional183
Non-functional67
Unknown4
Carcinoid heart disease
Yes24
No229
Unknown1
Desmoplasia
Yes67
No185
Unknown2
Chromogranin A
Normal29
Up to 10 times higher than upper limit of normal98
>10 times higher than upper limit of normal35
Unknown92
Primary tumour resection
Yes117
No134
Unknown3

Abbreviation: PROMID=prospective phase III trial.

Partial (objective) response, TTRP and univariate analysis of predictive factors of tumour control during treatment with octreotide LAR

Partial (objective) response was noted in 13 patients (5%). For all patients the median and mean TTRP were 37 months (95% CI: 32–52 months) and 51 months (95% CI: 45–57 months), respectively (Figure 1).
Figure 1

Kaplan–Meier estimate of the survival function for the time to tumour progression for all 254 patients. The crosses indicate right-censored data whereby patients' tumours were stable at the last time of contact before being lost to follow-up. The median time to tumour progression is 37 months (95% CI: 32–52 months), given by the time at which the Kaplan–Meier estimate of the survival function is 0.5. The mean time to tumour progression is 51 months (95% CI: 45–57 months), calculated using a restricted upper time limit of 120 months.

The univariate analysis demonstrated that liver and skeletal metastases, G2 tumours and baseline serum CgA levels more than 10 times the upper limit of normal were predictive factors of a shorter TTRP, whereas male sex was associated with a statistically significantly longer TTRP. Pancreatic and rectal primary tumours demonstrated a trend towards shorter TTRP and tumours associated with carcinoid heart disease demonstrated a trend towards longer TTRP, but both associations did not reach the level of statistical significance. In contrast, age, treatment indication, peritoneal or mesenteric metastases, functional status, presence of mesenteric desmoplasia and resection of primary tumour were not found to be predictive factors affecting response to treatment. The results of the univariate analysis are shown in Table 2.
Table 2

Descriptive univariate analysis of explanatory factors predicting time to tumour progression for patients treated with octreotide

     Cox regression
Explanatory factorLevelsSample sizeProgression eventsKM median months to progression (95% CI)CoefficientP-values
Age⩽601156443 (32, 71)NANA
 >601396633 (28, 65)0.040.84
SexFemale1207232 (23, 45)NANA
 Male1345849 (36, 96)−0.420.02
Reason for treatmentFunctional1458332 (27, 51)NANA
 Functional & progression8443 (21, NA)−0.230.65
 Functional & PROMID211030 (19, NA)0.170.62
 Progression241150 (35, NA)−0.560.10
 PROMID471753 (28, NA)−0.250.35
Primary tumourSmall bowel20410143 (32, 64)NANA
 Pancreas221720 (12, 79)0.520.058
 Lung146NA (11, NA)0.370.38
 Rectum748 (4, NA)1.40.062
Volume liver metastases05116105 (36, NA)NANA
 1793937 (26, 79)0.630.036
 2372023 (13, NA)0.880.0089
 3261533 (20, NA)0.870.016
Skeletal metastasesNo22111040 (33, 60)NANA
 Yes321920 (16, NA)0.510.043
Peritoneal metastasesNo1768746 (30, 71)NANA
 Yes784333 (30, 45)0.280.14
Mesenteric metastasesNo20910937 (31, 64)NANA
 Yes431932 (22, NA)−0.0430.86
Carcinoid heartNo22911936 (30, 51)NANA
 Yes241072 (33, NA)−0.580.082
Grade1 (low)1487145 (33, 72)NANA
 2 (intermediate)593721 (15, 37)0.73<0.001
FunctionalNo1839245 (31, 65)NANA
 Yes673436 (26, NA)−0.0270.89
DesmoplasiaNo1859636 (30, 64)NANA
 Yes673236 (30, NA)−0.140.5
Tumour resectedNo1347236 (30, NA)NANA
 Yes1175543 (30, 78)−0.170.36
Chromogranin A<60 (normal)291093 (35, NA)NANA
 61–600 (elevated)984253 (19, 79)0.590.097
 >600 (very elevated)352230 (19, NA)1.150.0029

Abbreviations: CI=confidence interval; KM=Kaplan–Meier; NA=not available.

For the Cox regression results: (a) coefficients are negative for a slower time to tumour progression (a better response) and vice versa, and (b) baseline factor levels are not associated with a coefficient or P-value and are denoted NA. Some upper confidence limits for the KM estimate of the median time to progression could not be estimated from the available data and are denoted NA. The median time to progression of bronchial primary tumours could also not be estimated from the available data.

Multivariate analysis of predictive factors of tumour control during treatment with octreotide LAR

The multivariate analysis demonstrated that G2 tumours, liver metastases and pancreatic primary tumours were predictors of a shorter TTRP. In contrast, male sex and presence of carcinoid heart disease were predictors of a longer TTRP. In addition, initiation of treatment in asymptomatic patients with stable disease was predictive of a better response to octreotide LAR. Age, presence of skeletal, peritoneal and mesenteric metastases, functional status, tumour resection and presence of mesenteric desmoplasia were not found to be predictive of tumour response to therapy. The results of the multivariate analysis are shown in Table 3.
Table 3

Coefficients, s.e. and P-values for the maximum Cox regression (proportional hazards) model

Explanatory factorLevelsCoefficients.e.P-values
Age⩽60NANANA
 >600.331.40.26
SexFemaleNANANA
 Male−0.460.270.010
Skeletal metastasesNoNANANA
 Yes−0.0270.430.95
Peritoneal metastasesNoNANANA
 Yes−0.380.320.24
MesentericNoNANANA
metastasesYes0.220.360.54
Carcinoid heart diseaseNoNANANA
 Yes−1.50.630.019*
FunctionalNoNANANA
 Yes−0.00110.330.99
DesmoplasiaNoNANANA
 Yes−0.0220.330.95
Tumour resectedNoNANANA
 Yes−0.0570.280.84
Treatment indicationFunctionalNANANA
 Functional and progression−1.871.20.11
 Functional and PROMID−0.290.430.51
 Progression−0.990.510.051
 PROMID−1.00.360.011*
Primary tumourSmall bowelNANANA
 Pancreas1.40.410.001**
 Lung−1.51.00.15
 Rectum0.881.10.43
Volume of liver0NANANA
metastases11.10.410.006**
 21.20.470.013*
 31.20.490.016*
Tumour gradeLowNANANA
 Intermediate1.00.290.001*
 HighNANANA

Abbreviations: NA=not available; PROMID=prospective phase III trial.

Coefficients are negative for a slower time to tumour progression (a better response) and vice versa. Baseline factor levels are not associated with a coefficient or P-value and are denoted NA. Sample size is 152 (254 total). Likelihood-ratio statistic=55 on 21 degrees of freedom (comparing with the null intercept-only model), P<0.001.

*P<0.05; **P<0.01.

Two additional multivariate analysis models including fewer co-variates were fitted to larger patient samples with complete data, in order to assess the validity of these findings given the potential risk of sampling bias (Supplementary Tables 1 and 2).

TTRP stratified by factors predictive of response to treatment with octreotide LAR

The following factors were identified by multivariate analysis as predictive of a favourable or unfavourable response to treatment with octreotide LAR and the TTRP stratified by each of these factors was calculated separately:

Tumour grade

The median TTRP was 45 months (95% CI: 33–72 months) for patients with G1 tumours and 21 months (95% CI: 15–37 months) for patients with G2 tumours (Figure 2).
Figure 2

Kaplan–Meier estimates of the survival function for time to tumour progression in patients with advanced neuroendocrine tumours, stratified by different variables.

Liver involvement

The median TTRP was 105 months (95% CI: 36, NA) for patients without liver metastases, 37 months (95% CI: 26–79 months) for patients with volume of liver metastases <25%, 23 months (95% CI: 13, NA) for patients with volume of liver metastases 25–50% and 33 months (95% CI: 20, NA) for patients with volume of liver metastases >50% (Figure 2).

Location of primary tumour

The median TTRP was 20 months (95% CI: 12–79 months) for patients with a pancreatic primary tumour, 43 months (95% CI: 32–64 months) for patients with a small bowel primary, 4 months (95% CI: 11, NA) for patients with a lung primary and 8 months (95% CI: 4, NA) for those with a rectal primary (Figure 2).

Treatment indication

The median TTRP was 53 months (95% CI: 28, NA) for asymptomatic patients with stable disease. The median TTRP was 32 months (95% CI: 27–51 months) for patients whose indication was functional symptoms and 50 months (95% CI: 35, NA) for patients whose indication was radiological progression. The median TTRP was 43 months (95% CI: 21, NA) for patients with a combination of functional symptoms and radiological progression and 20 months (95% CI: 19, NA) for patients, whose indications were both functional symptoms and stable disease (initiated on SSA therapy on the basis of evidence from the PROMID trial; Figure 2).

Carcinoid heart disease

The median TTRP was 36 months (95% CI: 30–51 months) for patients without carcinoid heart disease and 72 months (95% CI: 33, NA) for patients with carcinoid heart disease (Figure 2). A subsequent analysis of electronic records of patients with carcinoid heart disease revealed that the majority of patients had mild carcinoid heart disease with NYHA class I (54%) or II (37.5%). Most of these patients (92%) also had N-terminal pro b-type natriuretic peptide (NT pro-BNP) values of <400 pg ml−1, which has been proposed as a cut-off value predictive of a diagnosis of chronic heart failure (Al-Mohammad ).

Sex

The median TTRP was 32 months (95% CI: 23–45 months) for female and 49 months (95% CI: 36–96 months) for male patients (Figure 2).

Discussion

Partial (objective) response and TTRP

The present study demonstrated that in a large cohort of patients with NETs on octreotide LAR the partial (objective) response rate was 5%. This is in keeping with the results of other prospective and retrospective studies, which have shown partial (objective) response rates of 0–10% (Saltz ; Arnold ; di Bartolomeo ; Eriksson ; Wymenga ; Ducreux ; Aparicio ; Shojamanesh ; Faiss ; Rinke ; Toumpanakis ; Martín-Richard ; Palazzo ; Ramundo ; Supplementary Table 3). However, in our study the TTRP was 37 months, which is longer than that reported in most other studies (Arnold ; Shojamanesh ; Butturini ; Rinke ; Toumpanakis ; Palazzo ; Martín-Richard ; Caplin ; Supplementary Table 3). It is possible that differences in the baseline patient and tumour characteristics among various studies may account for this variation in TTRP.

Predictive factors of tumour response

There is only a small number of studies that have identified predictors of tumour response to SSA therapy and these are summarised in Supplementary Table 4. Our study is the largest retrospective study in the literature aiming to determine predictive factors of radiological response to SSA therapy. Its large sample size has allowed the analysis of multiple variables as potential predictive factors. Such analysis was not feasible in previous studies due to the small study samples. Some of our study findings are in keeping with those of previously published studies, although some differences are also present. In our study, the multivariate analysis revealed that G2 tumours were less likely to respond to octreotide LAR. Similarly, a small prospective study demonstrated that lower proliferation index (Ki67) predicted superior tumour growth control, although this association did not quite reach the level of statistical significance, perhaps due to the small sample size (Martín-Richard ). Another small prospective study which included advanced, well-differentiated, non-functional pancreatic NETs concluded that tumour progression correlated with a Ki67⩾5%, weight loss and absence of abdominal pain (Butturini ). Our study also showed that liver metastases are predictive of a poor response to treatment. Palazzo also found that Ki67<5%, hepatic tumour load<25% and pre-treatment stability were associated with disease stability on lanreotide therapy. The PROMID trial also suggested that the antiproliferative activity of octreotide LAR was more pronounced in patients with a low (⩽10%) hepatic tumour load and a resected primary tumour (Rinke ). A previous retrospective study performed in our centre showed that in a subgroup of patients with G1 tumours, bilobar liver metastases at the time of commencement of treatment and plasma CgA levels>1000 pmol l−1 were predictive of radiological progression (Toumpanakis ). Interestingly, our univariate analysis also showed that CgA levels>10 times the upper limit of normal were predictive of a poor response, although this could not be confirmed in the multivariate analysis due to missing data in a large number of subjects. In addition, our multivariate analysis showed that pancreatic tumours were less likely to respond to treatment. A previous prospective study also demonstrated that patients with midgut NETs showed a statistically significant prolonged length of time to tumour progression compared with foregut tumours (most of which were pancreatic), although the study population included not only patients treated with lanreotide, but also patients treated with interferon or a combination of both drugs (Faiss ). Moreover, our results demonstrated that asymptomatic patients with stable disease were more likely to respond to treatment. Similarly, other studies have shown that rapidly progressive tumours are less likely to respond to treatment compared with stable or slowly progressive tumours before initiation of SSA (Aparicio ; Shojamanesh ; Palazzo ). The present study also revealed that male sex and carcinoid heart disease were favourable predictive factors of tumour response. These variables were statistically significant across all multivariate analysis models. This was an unexpected finding, as carcinoid heart disease is associated with poor prognosis. However, an analysis of the electronic case notes of patients with carcinoid heart disease revealed that the vast majority of cases had only mild disease and it is possible that they were perhaps followed-up and treated more aggressively, which resulted in a more favourable outcome. Finally, primary tumour resection has been identified in other studies as predictive of a better response to SSA therapy (Panzuto ). In our study, this factor was not found to be significant in any of the multivariate analysis models. Although many of our study findings are in keeping with those of other studies, some differences are also present. These may be due to differences in predictive factors assessed, heterogeneity of study populations, differences in sample sizes and use of different SSAs amongst various studies. In practical terms, however, decisions regarding initiation of SSA therapy still need to be made on a case-by-case basis, although these may be influenced by the presence of associated predictive factors.

Limitations and conclusions

There are several limitations to this study. Because of retrospective data collection the results are potentially subject to interpretation bias and bias because of missing data. In addition, this is a single-centre cohort study in a tertiary and quaternary referral centre which attracts many referrals outside its geographical catchment area. Therefore, the profile of our patients and clinical practices may not be typical of regional centres and the extrapolation of our findings to other populations can be questioned. It is difficult to quantify the degree of potential bias, but the fact that many of our results are in keeping with those of previous studies suggests that this may not be a major area of concern. Furthermore, in our study the vast majority of patients had small bowel primary tumours (n=204) followed by pancreatic (n=22), lung (n=14) and rectal primaries (n=7). Therefore, our results may be more reliable for patients with small bowel and pancreatic NETs and less robust for other NETs. Finally, the majority of patients with functional tumours were those with carcinoid syndrome as a result of a small bowel primary NET. Only a minority of patients had functional pancreatic tumours, such as insulinoma or glucagonoma. As a result, our findings on the impact of functional status on the antiproliferative activity of SSA therapy mainly reflect the presence or not of carcinoid syndrome. In conclusion, the current study suggests that the duration of the anti-proliferative effect of octreotide LAR is longer than previously reported. Male sex, carcinoid heart disease and possibly disease stability at the time of commencement of SSA therapy are predictive of a better response, although the vast majority of patients had minor cardiac disturbance and might have been treated and followed-up more aggressively resulting in a more positive outcome. Age, extra-hepatic metastases (other than perhaps skeletal), mesenteric desmoplasia, tumour functional status and primary tumour resection do not appear to have any effect on treatment. In contrast, liver (and perhaps skeletal) metastases, intermediate grade tumours, pancreatic primary tumours and possibly extremely raised CgA levels may be associated with an unfavourable response.
  22 in total

1.  Diagnosis and management of adults with chronic heart failure: summary of updated NICE guidance.

Authors:  Abdallah Al-Mohammad; Jonathan Mant; Philippe Laramee; Sharon Swain
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-08-25

2.  Long-term clinical outcome of somatostatin analogues for treatment of progressive, metastatic, well-differentiated entero-pancreatic endocrine carcinoma.

Authors:  F Panzuto; M Di Fonzo; E Iannicelli; R Sciuto; C L Maini; G Capurso; M Milione; M S Cattaruzza; M Falconi; V David; V Ziparo; P Pederzoli; C Bordi; G Delle Fave
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2005-12-19       Impact factor: 32.976

3.  High-dose treatment with lanreotide of patients with advanced neuroendocrine gastrointestinal tumors: clinical and biological effects.

Authors:  B Eriksson; J Renstrup; H Imam; K Oberg
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 32.976

4.  Somatostatin analogue octreotide and inhibition of tumour growth in metastatic endocrine gastroenteropancreatic tumours.

Authors:  R Arnold; M E Trautmann; W Creutzfeldt; R Benning; M Benning; C Neuhaus; R Jürgensen; K Stein; H Schäfer; C Bruns; H J Dennler
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 23.059

5.  Prospective study of the antitumor efficacy of long-term octreotide treatment in patients with progressive metastatic gastrinoma.

Authors:  Homayoun Shojamanesh; Fathia Gibril; Adeline Louie; Jeremiah V Ojeaburu; Showkat Bashir; Alaa Abou-Saif; Robert T Jensen
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2002-01-15       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Prospective, randomized, multicenter trial on the antiproliferative effect of lanreotide, interferon alfa, and their combination for therapy of metastatic neuroendocrine gastroenteropancreatic tumors--the International Lanreotide and Interferon Alfa Study Group.

Authors:  Siegbert Faiss; Ulrich-Frank Pape; Michael Böhmig; Yvonne Dörffel; Ulrich Mansmann; Werner Golder; Ernst Otto Riecken; Bertram Wiedenmann
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2003-07-15       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Placebo-controlled, double-blind, prospective, randomized study on the effect of octreotide LAR in the control of tumor growth in patients with metastatic neuroendocrine midgut tumors: a report from the PROMID Study Group.

Authors:  Anja Rinke; Hans-Helge Müller; Carmen Schade-Brittinger; Klaus-Jochen Klose; Peter Barth; Matthias Wied; Christina Mayer; Behnaz Aminossadati; Ulrich-Frank Pape; Michael Bläker; Jan Harder; Christian Arnold; Thomas Gress; Rudolf Arnold
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-08-24       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Clinical efficacy of octreotide in the treatment of metastatic neuroendocrine tumors. A study by the Italian Trials in Medical Oncology Group.

Authors:  M di Bartolomeo; E Bajetta; R Buzzoni; L Mariani; C Carnaghi; L Somma; N Zilembo; A di Leo
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1996-01-15       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Lanreotide in metastatic enteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

Authors:  Martyn E Caplin; Marianne Pavel; Jarosław B Ćwikła; Alexandria T Phan; Markus Raderer; Eva Sedláčková; Guillaume Cadiot; Edward M Wolin; Jaume Capdevila; Lucy Wall; Guido Rindi; Alison Langley; Séverine Martinez; Joëlle Blumberg; Philippe Ruszniewski
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2014-07-17       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Antiproliferative effects of lanreotide autogel in patients with progressive, well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumours: a Spanish, multicentre, open-label, single arm phase II study.

Authors:  Marta Martín-Richard; Bartomeu Massutí; Eva Pineda; Vicente Alonso; Maribel Marmol; Daniel Castellano; Emilio Fonseca; Antonio Galán; Marta Llanos; Maria Angeles Sala; Carlos Pericay; Fernando Rivera; Javier Sastre; Angel Segura; Maria Quindós; Pascal Maisonobe
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2013-09-20       Impact factor: 4.430

View more
  11 in total

Review 1.  The Treatment Landscape and New Opportunities of Molecular Targeted Therapies in Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.

Authors:  Fabiola Amair-Pinedo; Ignacio Matos; Tamara Saurí; Jorge Hernando; Jaume Capdevila
Journal:  Target Oncol       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 4.493

2.  Outcome of Patients With Metastatic Lung Neuroendocrine Tumors Submitted to First Line Monotherapy With Somatostatin Analogs.

Authors:  Elisa Lenotti; Andrea Alberti; Francesca Spada; Vito Amoroso; Patrick Maisonneuve; Salvatore Grisanti; Alice Baggi; Susanna Bianchi; Nicola Fazio; Alfredo Berruti
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2021-04-27       Impact factor: 5.555

Review 3.  Octreotide long-acting repeatable in the treatment of neuroendocrine tumors: patient selection and perspectives.

Authors:  Hanford Yau; Mustafa Kinaan; Suzanne L Quinn; Andreas G Moraitis
Journal:  Biologics       Date:  2017-12-06

Review 4.  Antiproliferative effect of somatostatin analogs in advanced gastro-entero-pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Elettra Merola; Francesco Panzuto; Gianfranco Delle Fave
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-07-11

Review 5.  Chromogranin A: From Laboratory to Clinical Aspects of Patients with Neuroendocrine Tumors.

Authors:  Paola Di Giacinto; Francesca Rota; Laura Rizza; Davide Campana; Andrea Isidori; Andrea Lania; Andrea Lenzi; Paolo Zuppi; Roberto Baldelli
Journal:  Int J Endocrinol       Date:  2018-07-02       Impact factor: 3.257

6.  Prediction of Progression-Free Survival in Patients With Advanced, Well-Differentiated, Neuroendocrine Tumors Being Treated With a Somatostatin Analog: The GETNE-TRASGU Study.

Authors:  Alberto Carmona-Bayonas; Paula Jiménez-Fonseca; Ángela Lamarca; Jorge Barriuso; Ángel Castaño; Marta Benavent; Vicente Alonso; María Del Carmen Riesco-Martínez; Teresa Alonso-Gordoa; Ana Custodio; Manuel Sánchez Cánovas; Jorge Hernando Cubero; Carlos López; Adelaida Lacasta; Ana Fernández Montes; Mónica Marazuela; Guillermo Crespo; Pilar Escudero; José Ángel Diaz; Eduardo Feliciangeli; Javier Gallego; Marta Llanos; Ángel Segura; Felip Vilardell; Juan Carlos Percovich; Enrique Grande; Jaume Capdevila; Juan W Valle; Rocío García-Carbonero
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2019-08-07       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Predictors of antiproliferative effect of lanreotide autogel in advanced gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms.

Authors:  Faidon-Marios Laskaratos; Eleni Armeni; Heer Shah; Maria Megapanou; Dimitrios Papantoniou; Aimee R Hayes; Shaunak Navalkissoor; Gopinath Gnanasegaran; Conrad von Stempel; Edward Phillips; Myles Furnace; Lukasz Kamieniarz; Margarita Kousteni; Tu Vinh Luong; Jennifer Watkins; Dalvinder Mandair; Martyn Caplin; Christos Toumpanakis
Journal:  Endocrine       Date:  2019-09-25       Impact factor: 3.633

Review 8.  Molecular Signatures and Their Clinical Utility in Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.

Authors:  Praveen Dilip Chatani; Sunita Kishore Agarwal; Samira Mercedes Sadowski
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2021-01-18       Impact factor: 5.555

9.  Antineoplastic effects of histone deacetylase inhibitors in neuroendocrine cancer cells are mediated through transcriptional regulation of Notch1 by activator protein 1.

Authors:  Samuel Jang; Haining Jin; Madhuchhanda Roy; Alice L Ma; Shaoqin Gong; Renata Jaskula-Sztul; Herbert Chen
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2017-08-04       Impact factor: 4.452

10.  Cetuximab Conjugated with Octreotide and Entrapped Calcium Alginate-beads for Targeting Somatostatin Receptors.

Authors:  Ahmed A H Abdellatif; Mohamed A Ibrahim; Mohammed A Amin; Hamzah Maswadeh; Muhammed N Alwehaibi; Sultan N Al-Harbi; Zayed A Alharbi; Hamdoon A Mohammed; Ahmed B M Mehany; Imran Saleem
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-03-13       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.