28
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares

          The flagship journal of the Society for Endocrinology. Learn more

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A Delphic consensus assessment: imaging and biomarkers in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumor disease management

      research-article
      1 , 2 , 1 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 4 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 5 , 2 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 17 , 19 , 9 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 19 , 23 ,   24 , , 25
      Endocrine Connections
      Bioscientifica Ltd
      biomarker, carcinoid, CTC, CT scan, Delphic consensus, imaging, mRNA, MRI, multianalyte, NETest, neuroendocrine tumor, PET, RECIST, somatostatin

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The complexity of the clinical management of neuroendocrine neoplasia (NEN) is exacerbated by limitations in imaging modalities and a paucity of clinically useful biomarkers. Limitations in currently available imaging modalities reflect difficulties in measuring an intrinsically indolent disease, resolution inadequacies and inter-/intra-facility device variability and that RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) criteria are not optimal for NEN. Limitations of currently used biomarkers are that they are secretory biomarkers (chromogranin A, serotonin, neuron-specific enolase and pancreastatin); monoanalyte measurements; and lack sensitivity, specificity and predictive capacity. None of them meet the NIH metrics for clinical usage. A multinational, multidisciplinary Delphi consensus meeting of NEN experts ( n = 33) assessed current imaging strategies and biomarkers in NEN management. Consensus (>75%) was achieved for 78% of the 142 questions. The panel concluded that morphological imaging has a diagnostic value. However, both imaging and current single-analyte biomarkers exhibit substantial limitations in measuring the disease status and predicting the therapeutic efficacy. RECIST remains suboptimal as a metric. A critical unmet need is the development of a clinico-biological tool to provide enhanced information regarding precise disease status and treatment response. The group considered that circulating RNA was better than current general NEN biomarkers and preliminary clinical data were considered promising. It was resolved that circulating multianalyte mRNA (NETest) had clinical utility in both diagnosis and monitoring disease status and therapeutic efficacy. Overall, it was concluded that a combination of tumor spatial and functional imaging with circulating transcripts (mRNA) would represent the future strategy for real-time monitoring of disease progress and therapeutic efficacy.

          Related collections

          Most cited references58

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          ENETS Consensus Guidelines Update for the Management of Patients with Functional Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors and Non-Functional Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors

            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            68Ga-DOTA-Tyr3-octreotide PET in neuroendocrine tumors: comparison with somatostatin receptor scintigraphy and CT.

            The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of a new somatostatin analog, (68)Ga-labeled 1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane-N,N',N'',N'''-tetraacetic acid-d-Phe(1)-Tyr(3)-octreotide ((68)Ga-DOTA-TOC), for PET in patients with known or suspected neuroendocrine tumors. PET was compared with conventional scintigraphy and dedicated CT. Eighty-four patients (48 men, 36 women; age range, 28-79 y; mean age +/- SD, 58.2 +/- 12.2 y) were prospectively studied. For analysis, patients were divided into 3 groups: detection of unknown primary tumor in the presence of clinical or biochemical suspicion of neuroendocrine malignancy (n = 13 patients), initial tumor staging (n = 36 patients), and follow-up after therapy (n = 35 patients). Each patient received 100-150 MBq (68)Ga-DOTA-TOC. Imaging results of PET were compared with (99m)Tc-labeled hydrazinonicotinyl-Tyr(3)-octreotide ((99m)Tc-HYNIC-TOC) and (111)In-DOTA-TOC. CT was also performed on every patient using a multidetector scanner. Each imaging modality was interpreted separately by observers who were unaware of imaging findings before comparison with PET. The gold standard for defining true-positive (TP), true-negative (TN), false-positive (FP), and false-negative (FN) results was based on all available histologic, imaging, and follow-up findings. PET was TP in 69 patients, TN in 12 patients, FP in 1 patient, and FN in 2 patients, indicating a sensitivity of 97%, a specificity of 92%, and an accuracy of 96%. The FP finding was caused by enhanced tracer accumulation in the pancreatic head, and the FN results were obtained in patients with a tumor of the gastrointestinal tract displaying liver metastases. (68)Ga-DOTA-TOC showed higher diagnostic efficacy compared with SPECT (TP in 37 patients, TN in 12 patients, FP in 1 patient, and FN in 34 patients) and diagnostic CT (TP in 41 patients, TN in 12 patients, FP in 5 patients, and FN in 26 patients). This difference was of statistical significance (P < 0.001). However, the combined use of PET and CT showed the highest overall accuracy. (68)Ga-DOTA-TOC PET shows a significantly higher detection rate compared with conventional somatostatin receptor scintigraphy and diagnostic CT with clinical impact in a considerable number of patients.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Consensus guidelines for the management and treatment of neuroendocrine tumors.

              Neuroendocrine tumors are a heterogeneous group of tumors originating in various anatomic locations. The management of this disease poses a significant challenge because of the heterogeneous clinical presentations and varying degrees of aggressiveness. The recent completion of several phase 3 trials, including those evaluating octreotide, sunitinib, and everolimus, demonstrate that rigorous evaluation of novel agents in this disease is possible and can lead to practice-changing outcomes. Nevertheless, there are many aspects to the treatment of neuroendocrine tumors that remain unclear and controversial. The North American Neuroendocrine Tumor Society published a set of consensus guidelines in 2010, which provided an overview for the treatment of patients with these malignancies. Here, we present a set of consensus tables intended to complement these guidelines and serve as a quick, accessible reference for the practicing physician.

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Endocr Connect
                Endocr Connect
                EC
                Endocrine Connections
                Bioscientifica Ltd (Bristol )
                2049-3614
                September 2016
                01 September 2016
                : 5
                : 5
                : 174-187
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Uppsala University Uppsala, Sweden
                [2 ]Erasmus Medical Center Rotterdam, Netherlands
                [3 ]Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center New York, New York, USA
                [4 ]Wren Laboratories Branford, Connecticut, USA
                [5 ]Netherlands Cancer Institute Amsterdam, Netherlands
                [6 ]University of Bologna Bologna, Italy
                [7 ]Zentralklinik Bad Berka Bad Berka, Germany
                [8 ]Dana Farber Cancer Institute Boston, Massachusetts, USA
                [9 ]Charite Hospital Berlin, Germany
                [10 ]University of Warmia and Mazury Olsztyn, Poland
                [11 ]Ospedale San Raffaele Milan, Italy
                [12 ]IEO (European Institute of Oncology) Milan, Italy
                [13 ]Imperial College London London, UK
                [14 ]National Institutes of Health Bethesda, Maryland, USA
                [15 ]Martini Ziekenhuis Groningen, Netherlands
                [16 ]University Hospital Freiburg Freiburg, Germany
                [17 ]Instituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori Meldola, Italy
                [18 ]Instituto Catala d’Oncologia Barcelona, Spain
                [19 ]H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center Tampa, Florida, USA
                [20 ]University of Verona Verona, Italy
                [21 ]Univeristy of Oxford Oxford, UK
                [22 ]University of Groningen Groningen, Netherlands
                [23 ]Medical University Innsbruck Innsbruck, Austria
                [24 ]Copenhagen University Copenhagen, Denmark
                [25 ]Yale University New Haven, Connecticut, USA
                Author notes
                Correspondence should be addressed to I M Modlin; Email: imodlin@ 123456optonline.net
                Article
                EC160043
                10.1530/EC-16-0043
                5045519
                27582247
                5402f41e-07c8-4ac6-8aae-4b06599d215a
                © 2016 The authors

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

                History
                : 18 August 2016
                : 31 August 2016
                Categories
                Research

                biomarker,carcinoid,ctc,ct scan,delphic consensus,imaging,mrna,mri,multianalyte,netest,neuroendocrine tumor,pet,recist,somatostatin

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log