Literature DB >> 34342086

Temozolomide in Grade 3 Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: A Multicenter Retrospective Review.

David L Chan1,2, Emily K Bergsland3, Jennifer A Chan4, Rujuta Gadgil4, Thorvardur R Halfdanarson5, Kathleen Hornbacker6, Virginia Kelly7, Pamela L Kunz6, Patrick W McGarrah5, Nitya P Raj7, Diane L Reidy7, Alia Thawer1, Julia Whitman3, Linda Wu8, Christoph Becker6, Simron Singh1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Grade 3 gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (G3 GEPNENs) are often aggressive, and the optimal treatment is unclear for this subgroup of neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs). Temozolomide (TEM)-based regimens have been increasingly used to treat grade 1-2 NENs, but their efficacy in G3 NENs remains undetermined. We aimed to assess the clinical efficacy of TEM-containing regimens in advanced grade 3 GEPNENs.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multicenter retrospective review (2008-2018) of patients with metastatic/unresectable G3 GEPNENs who received a TEM-containing regimen was undertaken within a North American partnership to pool data. The primary endpoint was time to treatment failure (TTF). Radiologic response was extracted from local reports.
RESULTS: One hundred and thirty patients in six high-volume NEN centers were included (median age 55, 64% male, 18% functional, 67% pancreatic NEN). Forty-nine percent were well-differentiated, 35% poorly differentiated, and 15% unknown based on local pathology reports. The regimen used was capecitabine and temozolomide (CAPTEM) in 92% and TEM alone in 8%. Radiological response by local assessment was seen in 36% of patients. Median TTF was 3.6 months and median overall survival (OS) 19.2 months. Six percent of patients required discontinuation of therapy due to adverse events. TTF was longer in first-line treatment (7.8 months vs. 2.9 months; hazard ratio, 1.62; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-2.36; p = .015) and in patients with pancreatic NENs (panNENs) compared with gastrointestinal NENs (5.8 months vs 1.8 months; p = .04). The overall response rate was higher in the first-line setting (51% vs 29%; p = .02) and in panNEN (41% vs 23%; p = .04).
CONCLUSION: This is the largest TEM treatment series in G3 NEN, involving collaboration of several major North American NEN centers as a partnership. Thirty-six percent of patients showed some degree of radiographic response, and treatment was generally well tolerated, although the median duration of response was short. Response rates and time to treatment failure were superior in the first-line setting. CAPTEM should be considered a viable treatment option in this setting. Further randomized trials are warranted. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are heterogeneous, and optimal treatment for aggressive grade 3 (G3) NENs remains undetermined. The capecitabine and temozolomide (CAPTEM) regimen has been used in low-grade pancreas NENs but there are few data for its safety and efficacy in the G3 setting. This article reports on the efficacy of temozolomide-containing regimens, particularly CAPTEM, in management of G3 NENs. The good tolerance and response rate show that CAPTEM should be considered a viable regimen in treatment of G3 NENs pending confirmatory prospective studies.
© 2021 AlphaMed Press.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Capecitabine and temozolomide; Chemotherapy; Neuroendocrine tumors; Outcomes; Temozolomide

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34342086      PMCID: PMC8571741          DOI: 10.1002/onco.13923

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oncologist        ISSN: 1083-7159


  30 in total

1.  ENETS Consensus Guidelines for High-Grade Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors and Neuroendocrine Carcinomas.

Authors:  R Garcia-Carbonero; H Sorbye; E Baudin; E Raymond; B Wiedenmann; B Niederle; E Sedlackova; C Toumpanakis; M Anlauf; J B Cwikla; M Caplin; D O'Toole; A Perren
Journal:  Neuroendocrinology       Date:  2016-01-05       Impact factor: 4.914

2.  Post-first-line FOLFOX chemotherapy for grade 3 neuroendocrine carcinoma.

Authors:  J Hadoux; D Malka; D Planchard; J Y Scoazec; C Caramella; J Guigay; V Boige; S Leboulleux; P Burtin; A Berdelou; Y Loriot; P Duvillard; C N Chougnet; D Déandréis; M Schlumberger; I Borget; M Ducreux; E Baudin
Journal:  Endocr Relat Cancer       Date:  2015-03-13       Impact factor: 5.678

3.  Phase 3 Trial of 177Lu-Dotatate for Midgut Neuroendocrine Tumors.

Authors:  Jonathan Strosberg; Ghassan El-Haddad; Edward Wolin; Andrew Hendifar; James Yao; Beth Chasen; Erik Mittra; Pamela L Kunz; Matthew H Kulke; Heather Jacene; David Bushnell; Thomas M O'Dorisio; Richard P Baum; Harshad R Kulkarni; Martyn Caplin; Rachida Lebtahi; Timothy Hobday; Ebrahim Delpassand; Eric Van Cutsem; Al Benson; Rajaventhan Srirajaskanthan; Marianne Pavel; Jaime Mora; Jordan Berlin; Enrique Grande; Nicholas Reed; Ettore Seregni; Kjell Öberg; Maribel Lopera Sierra; Paola Santoro; Thomas Thevenet; Jack L Erion; Philippe Ruszniewski; Dik Kwekkeboom; Eric Krenning
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2017-01-12       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  The NANETS consensus guidelines for the diagnosis and management of poorly differentiated (high-grade) extrapulmonary neuroendocrine carcinomas.

Authors:  Jonathan R Strosberg; Domenico Coppola; David S Klimstra; Alexandria T Phan; Matthew H Kulke; Gregory A Wiseman; Larry K Kvols
Journal:  Pancreas       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 3.327

5.  A Consensus-Developed Morphological Re-Evaluation of 196 High-Grade Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms and Its Clinical Correlations.

Authors:  Hege Elvebakken; Aurel Perren; Jean-Yves Scoazec; Laura H Tang; Birgitte Federspiel; David S Klimstra; Lene W Vestermark; Abir S Ali; Inti Zlobec; Tor Å Myklebust; Geir O Hjortland; Seppo W Langer; Henning Gronbaek; Ulrich Knigge; Eva Tiensuu Janson; Halfdan Sorbye
Journal:  Neuroendocrinology       Date:  2020-10-01       Impact factor: 4.914

6.  High metabolic tumour volume on FDG PET predicts poor survival from neuroendocrine neoplasms.

Authors:  David L Chan; Elizabeth Bernard; Geoffrey Schembri; Paul Roach; Meaghan Johnson; Nick Pavlakis; Stephen J Clarke; Dale Bailey
Journal:  Neuroendocrinology       Date:  2019-11-12       Impact factor: 4.914

7.  18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography predicts survival of patients with neuroendocrine tumors.

Authors:  Tina Binderup; Ulrich Knigge; Annika Loft; Birgitte Federspiel; Andreas Kjaer
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2010-01-26       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 8.  Genetics and Epigenetics of Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms.

Authors:  Andrea Mafficini; Aldo Scarpa
Journal:  Endocr Rev       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 19.871

Review 9.  Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours.

Authors:  Irvin M Modlin; Kjell Oberg; Daniel C Chung; Robert T Jensen; Wouter W de Herder; Rajesh V Thakker; Martyn Caplin; Gianfranco Delle Fave; Greg A Kaltsas; Eric P Krenning; Steven F Moss; Ola Nilsson; Guido Rindi; Ramon Salazar; Philippe Ruszniewski; Anders Sundin
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 41.316

10.  Outcomes of Capecitabine and Temozolomide (CAPTEM) in Advanced Neuroendocrine Neoplasms (NENs).

Authors:  Katharine Thomas; Brianne A Voros; Meghan Meadows-Taylor; Matthew P Smeltzer; Ryan Griffin; J Philip Boudreaux; Ramcharan Thiagarajan; Eugene A Woltering; Robert A Ramirez
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2020-01-14       Impact factor: 6.639

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Advances in the Diagnosis and Therapeutic Management of Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms (GEP-NENs).

Authors:  Krzysztof Kaliszewski; Maksymilian Ludwig; Maria Greniuk; Agnieszka Mikuła; Karol Zagórski; Jerzy Rudnicki
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-17       Impact factor: 6.575

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.