Benjamin M Motz1, Patrick D Lorimer1, Danielle Boselli2, Joshua S Hill1, Jonathan C Salo3. 1. Levine Cancer Institute, Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, 1021 Morehead Medical Drive #6100, Charlotte, NC, 28204, USA. 2. Levine Cancer Institute, Department of Biostatistics, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC, USA. 3. Levine Cancer Institute, Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, 1021 Morehead Medical Drive #6100, Charlotte, NC, 28204, USA. jonathan.salo@carolinashealthcare.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for resectable small bowel neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) recommend regional lymphadenectomy. However, no consensus exists on the optimal nodal harvest. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with resectable small bowel NETs (1998-2013). Patients with metastatic disease and missing lymph node harvest data were excluded. We performed logistic regression of factors determining nodal positivity and multivariable survival analyses. RESULTS: Of 11,852 patients, 81.8% underwent lymphadenectomy. 79.3% were node positive (N+) and 46.9% of patients had tumors < 1 cm. Independent predictors of N+ were large tumor size, ileal location, and neuroendocrine carcinoma histology. Logistic regression found no difference between observed and expected proportions of N+ patients with lymphadenectomy greater than or equal to eight nodes. Lower metastatic node ratio predicted improved survival on multivariable analysis and is associated with high-volume institutions. CONCLUSION: Small bowel NETs have high rates of nodal metastasis, even in patients with small tumors, and many patients do not undergo lymphadenectomy despite the clear benefit. Lymphadenectomy of eight nodes is optimal to identify N+ patients. Additionally, minimizing metastatic node ratio with complete regional lymphadenectomy is associated with improved survival in these patients.
BACKGROUND: Current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for resectable small bowel neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) recommend regional lymphadenectomy. However, no consensus exists on the optimal nodal harvest. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with resectable small bowel NETs (1998-2013). Patients with metastatic disease and missing lymph node harvest data were excluded. We performed logistic regression of factors determining nodal positivity and multivariable survival analyses. RESULTS: Of 11,852 patients, 81.8% underwent lymphadenectomy. 79.3% were node positive (N+) and 46.9% of patients had tumors < 1 cm. Independent predictors of N+ were large tumor size, ileal location, and neuroendocrine carcinoma histology. Logistic regression found no difference between observed and expected proportions of N+ patients with lymphadenectomy greater than or equal to eight nodes. Lower metastatic node ratio predicted improved survival on multivariable analysis and is associated with high-volume institutions. CONCLUSION:Small bowel NETs have high rates of nodal metastasis, even in patients with small tumors, and many patients do not undergo lymphadenectomy despite the clear benefit. Lymphadenectomy of eight nodes is optimal to identify N+ patients. Additionally, minimizing metastatic node ratio with complete regional lymphadenectomy is associated with improved survival in these patients.
Entities:
Keywords:
Carcinoid; Lymphadenectomy; Neuroendocrine tumor; Small bowel
Authors: Christine S Landry; Heather Y Lin; Alexandria Phan; Chusilp Charnsangavej; Eddie K Abdalla; Thomas Aloia; J Nicolas Vauthey; Matthew H G Katz; James C Yao; Jason B Fleming Journal: World J Surg Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Jiping Wang; Ping Dang; Chandrajit P Raut; Prakash K Pandalai; Ugwuji N Maduekwe; David W Rattner; Gregory Y Lauwers; Sam S Yoon Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: James C Yao; Manal Hassan; Alexandria Phan; Cecile Dagohoy; Colleen Leary; Jeannette E Mares; Eddie K Abdalla; Jason B Fleming; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Asif Rashid; Douglas B Evans Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-06-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Waddah B Al-Refaie; Greer Gay; Beth A Virnig; Jennifer F Tseng; Andrew Stewart; Selwyn M Vickers; Todd M Tuttle; Barry W Feig Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-01-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Steven M Asch; Eve A Kerr; Joan Keesey; John L Adams; Claude M Setodji; Shaista Malik; Elizabeth A McGlynn Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-03-16 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Alberto Marchet; Simone Mocellin; Alessandro Ambrosi; Paolo Morgagni; Domenico Garcea; Daniele Marrelli; Franco Roviello; Giovanni de Manzoni; Annamaria Minicozzi; Giovanni Natalini; Francesco De Santis; Luca Baiocchi; Arianna Coniglio; Donato Nitti Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Epameinondas Dogeas; Maximiliano Magallanes; Matthew R Porembka; Sam C Wang; Adam C Yopp; Patricio M Polanco; John C Mansour; Michael A Choti; Herbert J Zeh; Mathew M Augustine Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2019-01-31 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Praveen D Chatani; John G Aversa; James D McDonald; Tahsin M Khan; Xavier M Keutgen; Naris Nilubol Journal: Surgery Date: 2021-04-02 Impact factor: 4.348