Literature DB >> 29545717

Utility of CT in differentiating liver metastases of well-differentiated gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms from poorly-differentiated neuroendocrine neoplasms.

Yong Cui1, Xiaoting Li1, Shunyu Gao1, Zhongwu Li1, Yanling Li1, Ming Lu1, Yingshi Sun1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the capability of dynamic enhanced computed tomography (CT) to differentiate liver metastases (LMs) of well-differentiated from poorly-differentiated gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs).
METHODS: Patients with LMs of GEP-NENs who underwent dynamic enhanced CT examination in Peking University Cancer Hospital from January 2009 to October 2015 were included and data were retrospectively analyzed. We assessed the qualitative and quantitative CT features to identify the significant differentiating CT features of LMs of poorly-differentiated GEP-NENs from those of well-differentiated GEP-NENs using univariate analysis and a multivariate logistic regression model.
RESULTS: The study included 22 patients with LMs of well-differentiated GEP-NENs and 32 patients with LMs of poorly-differentiated GEP-NENs. Univariate analysis revealed statistically significant differences between the LMs of well- and poorly-differentiated GEP-NENs in terms of feeding arteries (36.4% vs. 75.0%, χ2=8.061, P=0.005), intratumoral neovascularity (18.2% vs. 59.4%, χ2=9.047, P=0.003), lymphadenopathy (27.3% vs. 81.2%, χ2=15.733, P<0.001), tumor-to-aortic ratio in the hepatic arterial and portal venous phase (T-A/AP: 0.297±0.080vs. 0.251±0.059, t=2.437, P=0.018; T-A/PVP: 0.639±0.138 vs. 0.529±0.117, t=3.163, P=0.003) and tumor-to-liver ratio in the hepatic arterial phase (T-L/AP: 1.108±0.267 vs. 0.907±0.240, t=2.882, P=0.006). The LMs of poorly-differentiated GEP-NENs showed more feeding arteries, more intratumoral neovascularity, more lymphadenopathy and a lower tumor-to-aortic ratio. Multivariate analysis suggested that intratumoral neovascularity [P=0.015, OR=0.108, 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.018-0.646], lymphadenopathy (P=0.001, OR=0.055, 95% CI, 0.009-0.323) and T-A/PVP (P=0.004, OR=5.3E-5, 95% CI, 0.000-0.044) were independent factors for differentiating LMs of poorly-differentiated from well-differentiated GEP-NENs.
CONCLUSIONS: Dynamic enhanced CT features (intratumoral neovascularity, lymphadenopathy and T-A/PVP) are useful in the pathological classification of LMs of GEP-NENs.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Diagnosis; gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm; neoplasm grading; tomography, X-ray computed

Year:  2018        PMID: 29545717      PMCID: PMC5842231          DOI: 10.21147/j.issn.1000-9604.2018.01.04

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Chin J Cancer Res        ISSN: 1000-9604            Impact factor:   5.087


  19 in total

1.  ENETS Consensus Guidelines for the management of patients with liver and other distant metastases from neuroendocrine neoplasms of foregut, midgut, hindgut, and unknown primary.

Authors:  Marianne Pavel; Eric Baudin; Anne Couvelard; Eric Krenning; Kjell Öberg; Thomas Steinmüller; Martin Anlauf; Bertram Wiedenmann; Ramon Salazar
Journal:  Neuroendocrinology       Date:  2012-02-15       Impact factor: 4.914

2.  Contrast-enhanced MDCT in patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours: correlation with histological findings and diagnostic performance in differentiation between tumour grades.

Authors:  E Belousova; G Karmazanovsky; A Kriger; D Kalinin; L Mannelli; A Glotov; N Karelskaya; O Paklina; A Kaldarov
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  2016-11-24       Impact factor: 2.350

3.  Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours: correlation between MSCT features and pathological classification.

Authors:  Yanji Luo; Zhi Dong; Jie Chen; Tao Chan; Yuan Lin; Minhu Chen; Zi-Ping Li; Shi-Ting Feng
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-07-22       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Retrospective analysis of the clinicopathological characteristics of gastrointestinal neuroendocrine neoplasms.

Authors:  Zhiqiang Wang; Wenliang Li; Tianxing Chen; Jun Yang; Lilin Luo; Lianyu Zhang; Baocun Sun; Rui Liang
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2015-07-13       Impact factor: 2.447

Review 5.  Therapeutic strategies for neuroendocrine liver metastases.

Authors:  Andrea Frilling; Ashley K Clift
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2014-10-01       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 6.  Diagnosis and management of gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors: An evidence-based Canadian consensus.

Authors:  Simron Singh; Sylvia L Asa; Chris Dey; Hagen Kennecke; David Laidley; Calvin Law; Timothy Asmis; David Chan; Shereen Ezzat; Rachel Goodwin; Ozgur Mete; Janice Pasieka; Juan Rivera; Ralph Wong; Eva Segelov; Daniel Rayson
Journal:  Cancer Treat Rev       Date:  2016-05-17       Impact factor: 12.111

7.  Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumour (PNET): Staging accuracy of MDCT and its diagnostic performance for the differentiation of PNET with uncommon CT findings from pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Jung Hoon Kim; Hyo Won Eun; Young Jae Kim; Jeong Min Lee; Joon Koo Han; Byung-Ihn Choi
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-08-08       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Pancreatic endocrine tumors: tumor blood flow assessed with perfusion CT reflects angiogenesis and correlates with prognostic factors.

Authors:  Gaspard d'Assignies; Anne Couvelard; Stéphane Bahrami; Marie-Pierre Vullierme; Pascal Hammel; Olivia Hentic; Alain Sauvanet; Pierre Bedossa; Philippe Ruszniewski; Valérie Vilgrain
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2008-12-18       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Neuroendocrine liver metastases: Value of apparent diffusion coefficient and enhancement ratios for characterization of histopathologic grade.

Authors:  Cecilia Besa; Stephen Ward; Yong Cui; Guido Jajamovich; Michelle Kim; Bachir Taouli
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2016-05-26       Impact factor: 4.813

10.  Retrospective analysis of interventional treatment of hepatic metastasis from gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

Authors:  Peng Liu; Xu Zhu; Jie Li; Ming Lu; Jiahua Leng; Ying Li; Jiangyuan Yu
Journal:  Chin J Cancer Res       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 5.087

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.