Literature DB >> 30447216

Prevalence of metastasis and survival of 788 patients with T1 rectal carcinoid tumors.

Saowanee Ngamruengphong1, Ayesha Kamal1, Venkata Akshintala1, Gulara Hajiyeva1, Yuri Hanada1, Yen-I Chen1, Omid Sanaei1, Daniela Fluxa1, Yamile Haito Chavez1, Vivek Kumbhari1, Vikesh K Singh1, Anne Marie Lennon1, Marcia Irene Canto1, Mouen A Khashab1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Prevalence of rectal carcinoids is increasing, partly because of increased colorectal cancer screening. Local excision (endoscopic or transanal excision) is usually performed for small (<1-2 cm) rectal carcinoids, but data on clinical outcomes from large population-based U.S. studies are lacking. The aims of this study were to determine the prevalence of metastasis of resected small rectal carcinoid tumors using a large national cancer database and to evaluate the long-term survival of patients after local resection as compared with radical surgery.
METHODS: The Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database was used to identify 788 patients with rectal T1 carcinoids <2 cm in size. Prevalence of metastases at initial diagnosis and risk factors for metastases were analyzed. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) was calculated.
RESULTS: A total of 727 patients (92.3%) had tumors ≤10 mm in diameter and 61 (7.7%) had tumors 11 to 19 mm. Overall, 12 patients (1.5%) had metastasis at the time of diagnosis with prevalence of 1.1% in lesions ≤10 mm and 6.6% in lesions 11 to 19 mm (P = .01). Survival of patients with T1 rectal carcinoids without metastasis was significantly better than those with metastasis (5-year CSS of 100% vs 78%, P < .001). Of 559 patients with T1N0M0 rectal carcinoids ≤10 mm, 5-year CSS was 100% in both groups who underwent local excision and those who underwent radical surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: Larger T1 rectal carcinoid tumors (11-19 mm) have significantly higher risk of lymph node metastases compared with those ≤10 mm. Survival is worse with metastatic disease. Local therapy is adequate for T1N0M0 rectal carcinoids ≤10 mm in size with excellent long-term outcomes.
Copyright © 2019 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30447216     DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2018.11.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  8 in total

1.  Grade G2 Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumor Is Much More Invasive Compared With G1 Tumor.

Authors:  Yi-Wei Li; Yi-Ping He; Fang-Qi Liu; Jun-Jie Peng; San-Jun Cai; Ye Xu; Ming-He Wang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-03-11       Impact factor: 6.244

Review 2.  Current updates and future directions in diagnosis and management of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms.

Authors:  Andrew Canakis; Linda S Lee
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2022-05-16

3.  Assessment of the Risk of Nodal Involvement in Rectal Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: The NOVARA Score, a Multicentre Retrospective Study.

Authors:  Angela Dalia Ricci; Sara Pusceddu; Francesco Panzuto; Fabio Gelsomino; Sara Massironi; Claudio Giovanni De Angelis; Roberta Modica; Gianluca Ricco; Martina Torchio; Maria Rinzivillo; Natalie Prinzi; Felice Rizzi; Giuseppe Lamberti; Davide Campana
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-01-28       Impact factor: 4.241

Review 4.  Endoscopic treatment for rectal neuroendocrine tumor: which method is better?

Authors:  Seung Min Hong; Dong Hoon Baek
Journal:  Clin Endosc       Date:  2022-07-11

5.  Comparison of endoscopic submucosal resection with ligation and endoscopic submucosal dissection for small rectal neuroendocrine tumors: A multicenter retrospective study.

Authors:  Kenshi Matsuno; Hideaki Miyamoto; Hideki Kitada; Shinichi Yoshimatsu; Fumio Tamura; Kouichi Sakurai; Kotaro Fukubayashi; Takashi Shono; Hiroko Setoyama; Taichi Matsuyama; Shinichiro Suko; Rei Narita; Munenori Honda; Masakuni Tateyama; Hideaki Naoe; Jun Morinaga; Yasuhito Tanaka; Ryosuke Gushima
Journal:  DEN open       Date:  2022-09-15

6.  Factors associated with worse outcomes for colorectal neuroendocrine tumors in radical versus local resections.

Authors:  Osayande Osagiede; Elizabeth Habermann; Courtney Day; Emmanuel Gabriel; Amit Merchea; Riccardo Lemini; Iktej S Jabbal; Dorin T Colibaseanu
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2020-10

7.  Prognostic significance for colorectal carcinoid tumors based on the 8th edition TNM staging system.

Authors:  Piqing Gong; Chunhua Chen; Zhan Wang; Xukun Zhang; Wenxin Hu; Zhiqian Hu; Xinxing Li
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2020-09-08       Impact factor: 4.452

8.  Endoscopic full thickness resection vs. transanal endoscopic microsurgery for local treatment of rectal neuroendocrine tumors - a retrospective analysis.

Authors:  Markus Brand; Stanislaus Reimer; Joachim Reibetanz; Sven Flemming; Marko Kornmann; Alexander Meining
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2020-11-19       Impact factor: 2.571

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.