Ling-Jun Song1, Lin Yuan1. 1. Pathology Center, Shanghai General Hospital/Faculty of Basic Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine Shanghai, P. R. China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Colorectal mixed adenoneuroendocrine carcinoma (MANEC) and adenocarcinoma with neuroendocrine differentiation (ANED) are recognized as different tumors pathologically and clinically. In a population-based study, the clinicopathologic characteristics and treatment strategies of the two tumors were comparatively analyzed. METHODS: Patients with colorectal adenocarcinoma (ADEC), neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC), MANEC and ANED were identified diagnosis from 2010 to 2014 using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. The clinicopathologic data were analyzed by Chi-square test, univariable and multivariable Cox regression. Nomogram was performed to provide a prognostic evaluation for colorectal MANEC and ANED. RESULTS: Totally 82121 patients were recruited in this cohort. There was no difference between MANEC and ANED in clinicopathologic characteristics and prognosis (P>0.05). The survival data showed that 1-year and 3-year survival rates were 84.70% and 67.83% for ADEC, 66.83% and 51.98% for NEC, and 54.27% and 37.68% for MANEC and ANED, respectively. Stage and surgery were independent prognostic factors of colorectal MANEC/ANED. We also found that the prognosis was significantly different without vs with chemotherapy (P=0.000) in stage III colorectal MANEC/ANED; without vs with surgery (P=0.007), and without vs with chemotherapy (P=0.000) in stage IV colorectal MANEC/ANED. Radiation did nothing for improving the prognosis of colorectal MANEC/ANED in stage III and stage IV (P=0.557, 0.677). CONCLUSIONS: MANEC and ANED should be merged into the same category pathologically and clinically, and had the poorest prognosis. Stage and surgery were independent prognostic risk factors for colorectal MANEC/ANED. The prognosis of MANEC/ANED could not benefit from radiation. IJCEP
BACKGROUND:Colorectal mixed adenoneuroendocrine carcinoma (MANEC) and adenocarcinoma with neuroendocrine differentiation (ANED) are recognized as different tumors pathologically and clinically. In a population-based study, the clinicopathologic characteristics and treatment strategies of the two tumors were comparatively analyzed. METHODS:Patients with colorectal adenocarcinoma (ADEC), neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC), MANEC and ANED were identified diagnosis from 2010 to 2014 using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. The clinicopathologic data were analyzed by Chi-square test, univariable and multivariable Cox regression. Nomogram was performed to provide a prognostic evaluation for colorectal MANEC and ANED. RESULTS: Totally 82121 patients were recruited in this cohort. There was no difference between MANEC and ANED in clinicopathologic characteristics and prognosis (P>0.05). The survival data showed that 1-year and 3-year survival rates were 84.70% and 67.83% for ADEC, 66.83% and 51.98% for NEC, and 54.27% and 37.68% for MANEC and ANED, respectively. Stage and surgery were independent prognostic factors of colorectal MANEC/ANED. We also found that the prognosis was significantly different without vs with chemotherapy (P=0.000) in stage III colorectal MANEC/ANED; without vs with surgery (P=0.007), and without vs with chemotherapy (P=0.000) in stage IV colorectal MANEC/ANED. Radiation did nothing for improving the prognosis of colorectal MANEC/ANED in stage III and stage IV (P=0.557, 0.677). CONCLUSIONS: MANEC and ANED should be merged into the same category pathologically and clinically, and had the poorest prognosis. Stage and surgery were independent prognostic risk factors for colorectal MANEC/ANED. The prognosis of MANEC/ANED could not benefit from radiation. IJCEP
Authors: Matthew H Kulke; Manisha H Shah; Al B Benson; Emily Bergsland; Jordan D Berlin; Lawrence S Blaszkowsky; Lyska Emerson; Paul F Engstrom; Paul Fanta; Thomas Giordano; Whitney S Goldner; Thorvardur R Halfdanarson; Martin J Heslin; Fouad Kandeel; Pamela L Kunz; Boris W Kuvshinoff; Christopher Lieu; Jeffrey F Moley; Gitonga Munene; Venu G Pillarisetty; Leonard Saltz; Julie Ann Sosa; Jonathan R Strosberg; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Christopher Wolfgang; James C Yao; Jennifer Burns; Deborah Freedman-Cass Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Lowell B Anthony; Jonathan R Strosberg; David S Klimstra; William J Maples; Thomas M O'Dorisio; Richard R P Warner; Gregory A Wiseman; Al B Benson; Rodney F Pommier Journal: Pancreas Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 3.327
Authors: P E Bernick; D S Klimstra; J Shia; B Minsky; L Saltz; W Shi; H Thaler; J Guillem; P Paty; A M Cohen; W D Wong Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 4.585