Dirk-Jan van Beek1, Helena M Verkooijen2, Sjoerd Nell1, Bert A Bonsing3, Casper H van Eijck4, Harry van Goor5, Frederik J H Hoogwater6, Elisabeth J M Nieveen van Dijkum7, Geert Kazemier8, Cornelis H C Dejong9,10, Lodewijk A A Brosens11, Frank J Wessels12, Inne H M Borel Rinkes1, Gerlof D Valk13, Menno R Vriens14. 1. Department of Endocrine Surgical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 2. Imaging Division, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 5. Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. 6. Department of Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. 7. Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Center location Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 8. Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Center location VUmc University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 9. Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, NUTRIM School for Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht, The Netherlands. 10. Department of Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Aachen, Aachen, Germany. 11. Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 12. Department of Radiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 13. Department of Endocrine Oncology, University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 14. Department of Endocrine Surgical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands, mvriens@umcutrecht.nl.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) have a high prevalence in patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) and are the leading cause of death. Tumor size is still regarded as the main prognostic factor and therefore used for surgical decision-making. We assessed reliability and agreement of radiological and pathological tumor size in a population-based cohort of patients with MEN1-related pNETs. METHODS: Patients were selected from the Dutch MEN1 database if they had undergone a resection for a pNET between 2003 and 2018. Radiological (MRI, CT, and endoscopic ultrasonography [EUS]) and pathological tumor size were collected from patient records. Measures of agreement (Bland-Altman plots with limits of agreement [LoA] and absolute agreement) and reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC] and unweighted kappa) were calculated for continuous and categorized (< or ≥2 cm) pNET size. RESULTS: In 73 included patients, the median radiological and pathological tumor sizes measured were 22 (3-160) and 21 (4-200) mm, respectively. Mean bias between radiological and pathological tumor size was -0.2 mm and LoA ranged from -12.9 to 12.6 mm. For the subgroups of MRI, CT, and EUS, LoA of radiological and pathological tumor size ranged from -9.6 to 10.9, -15.9 to 15.8, and -13.9 to 11.0, respectively. ICCs for the overall cohort, MRI, CT, and EUS were 0.80, 0.86, 0.75, and 0.76, respectively. Based on the 2 cm criterion, agreement was 81.5%; hence, 12 patients (18.5%) were classified differently between imaging and pathology. Absolute agreement and kappa values of MRI, CT, and EUS were 88.6, 85.7, and 75.0%, and 0.77, 0.71, and 0.50, respectively. CONCLUSION: Within a population-based cohort, MEN1-related pNET size was not systematically over- or underestimated on preoperative imaging. Based on agreement and reliability measures, MRI is the preferred imaging modality.
BACKGROUND: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) have a high prevalence in patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) and are the leading cause of death. Tumor size is still regarded as the main prognostic factor and therefore used for surgical decision-making. We assessed reliability and agreement of radiological and pathological tumor size in a population-based cohort of patients with MEN1-related pNETs. METHODS: Patients were selected from the Dutch MEN1 database if they had undergone a resection for a pNET between 2003 and 2018. Radiological (MRI, CT, and endoscopic ultrasonography [EUS]) and pathological tumor size were collected from patient records. Measures of agreement (Bland-Altman plots with limits of agreement [LoA] and absolute agreement) and reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC] and unweighted kappa) were calculated for continuous and categorized (< or ≥2 cm) pNET size. RESULTS: In 73 included patients, the median radiological and pathological tumor sizes measured were 22 (3-160) and 21 (4-200) mm, respectively. Mean bias between radiological and pathological tumor size was -0.2 mm and LoA ranged from -12.9 to 12.6 mm. For the subgroups of MRI, CT, and EUS, LoA of radiological and pathological tumor size ranged from -9.6 to 10.9, -15.9 to 15.8, and -13.9 to 11.0, respectively. ICCs for the overall cohort, MRI, CT, and EUS were 0.80, 0.86, 0.75, and 0.76, respectively. Based on the 2 cm criterion, agreement was 81.5%; hence, 12 patients (18.5%) were classified differently between imaging and pathology. Absolute agreement and kappa values of MRI, CT, and EUS were 88.6, 85.7, and 75.0%, and 0.77, 0.71, and 0.50, respectively. CONCLUSION: Within a population-based cohort, MEN1-related pNET size was not systematically over- or underestimated on preoperative imaging. Based on agreement and reliability measures, MRI is the preferred imaging modality.
Authors: Rajesh V Thakker; Paul J Newey; Gerard V Walls; John Bilezikian; Henning Dralle; Peter R Ebeling; Shlomo Melmed; Akihiro Sakurai; Francesco Tonelli; Maria Luisa Brandi Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2012-06-20 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Frederic Triponez; David Dosseh; Pierre Goudet; Patrick Cougard; Catherine Bauters; Arnaud Murat; Guillaume Cadiot; Patricia Niccoli-Sire; Jean-Alain Chayvialle; Alain Calender; Charles A G Proye Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: S C Chandrasekharappa; S C Guru; P Manickam; S E Olufemi; F S Collins; M R Emmert-Buck; L V Debelenko; Z Zhuang; I A Lubensky; L A Liotta; J S Crabtree; Y Wang; B A Roe; J Weisemann; M S Boguski; S K Agarwal; M B Kester; Y S Kim; C Heppner; Q Dong; A M Spiegel; A L Burns; S J Marx Journal: Science Date: 1997-04-18 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Elfi B Conemans; Lodewijk A A Brosens; Gabriela M Raicu-Ionita; Carolina R C Pieterman; Wouter W de Herder; Olaf M Dekkers; Ad R Hermus; Anouk N van der Horst-Schrivers; Peter H Bisschop; Bas Havekes; Madeleine L Drent; H Th Marc Timmers; G Johan Offerhaus; Gerlof D Valk; Menno R Vriens Journal: Pancreatology Date: 2017-07-31 Impact factor: 3.996
Authors: Clarisse Dromain; Thierry de Baere; Jean Lumbroso; Hubert Caillet; Agnès Laplanche; Valerie Boige; Michel Ducreux; Pierre Duvillard; Dominique Elias; Martin Schlumberger; Robert Sigal; Eric Baudin Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-01-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: M Falconi; B Eriksson; G Kaltsas; D K Bartsch; J Capdevila; M Caplin; B Kos-Kudla; D Kwekkeboom; G Rindi; G Klöppel; N Reed; R Kianmanesh; R T Jensen Journal: Neuroendocrinology Date: 2016-01-05 Impact factor: 4.914
Authors: Joanne M de Laat; Emma Tham; Carolina R C Pieterman; Menno R Vriens; Johannes A N Dorresteijn; Michiel L Bots; Magnus Nordenskjöld; Rob B van der Luijt; Gerlof D Valk Journal: Eur J Endocrinol Date: 2012-05-11 Impact factor: 6.664
Authors: Dirk-Jan van Beek; Sjoerd Nell; Helena M Verkooijen; Inne H M Borel Rinkes; Gerlof D Valk; Menno R Vriens Journal: Surgery Date: 2020-11-19 Impact factor: 4.348
Authors: Alexander Appelstrand; Fredrik Bergstedt; Anna-Karin Elf; Henrik Fagman; Per Hedenström Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-04-08 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Mark J C van Treijen; Catharina M Korse; Wieke H Verbeek; Margot E T Tesselaar; Gerlof D Valk Journal: Endocr Connect Date: 2022-09-07 Impact factor: 3.221