+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Chemotherapy in Resected Neuroendocrine Carcinomas of the Digestive Tract: A National Study from the French Group of Endocrine Tumours

      Read this article at

          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.


          Background: Neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs) of the digestive tract are rare and aggressive tumours. In localised disease the treatment is surgery. Based on expert consensus, international guidelines recommend the administration of adjuvant chemotherapy combining etoposide and platinum derivatives, justified by the high risk of metastatic relapse. However, no clinical study has proven the benefit of neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy. Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the effect of neoadjuvant +/– adjuvant and adjuvant therapy in this indication. Methods: We performed a retrospective observational French study to evaluate overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), prognostic factors for survival, and chemotherapy toxicity. Results: Seventy-three patients had surgical resection of a localised digestive NEC between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2016. The majority of patients presented colorectal (35%) tumours and the median Ki-67 value was 70%. Forty-three patients received chemotherapy, either perioperative (neoadjuvant +/– adjuvant) or adjuvant. The median OS and DFS for the whole population was 24 and 9 months, respectively. The median OS and DFS for patients receiving chemotherapy was 62 and 13 months, respectively. Positive postoperative node status and Ki-67 ≥80% had a negative prognostic impact on OS and DFS. Administration of chemotherapy had a positive prognostic impact on OS and DFS. Sixteen grade 3/4 toxicities were reported without toxic death. Conclusions: Our results suggest a positive effect on survival of chemotherapy in resected digestive NECs, but further studies are needed to confirm these results.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 26

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

          Predictive and prognostic factors for treatment and survival in 305 patients with advanced gastrointestinal neuroendocrine carcinoma (WHO G3): the NORDIC NEC study.

          As studies on gastrointestinal neuroendocrine carcinoma (WHO G3) (GI-NEC) are limited, we reviewed clinical data to identify predictive and prognostic markers for advanced GI-NEC patients. Data from advanced GI-NEC patients diagnosed 2000-2009 were retrospectively registered at 12 Nordic hospitals. The median survival was 11 months in 252 patients given palliative chemotherapy and 1 month in 53 patients receiving best supportive care (BSC) only. The response rate to first-line chemotherapy was 31% and 33% had stable disease. Ki-67<55% was by receiver operating characteristic analysis the best cut-off value concerning correlation to the response rate. Patients with Ki-67<55% had a lower response rate (15% versus 42%, P<0.001), but better survival than patients with Ki-67≥55% (14 versus 10 months, P<0.001). Platinum schedule did not affect the response rate or survival. The most important negative prognostic factors for survival were poor performance status (PS), primary colorectal tumors and elevated platelets or lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels. Advanced GI-NEC patients should be considered for chemotherapy treatment without delay.PS, colorectal primary and elevated platelets and LDH levels were prognostic factors for survival. Patients with Ki-67<55% were less responsive to platinum-based chemotherapy, but had a longer survival. Our data indicate that it may not be correct to consider all GI-NEC as one single disease entity.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Treatment of neuroendocrine carcinomas with combined etoposide and cisplatin. Evidence of major therapeutic activity in the anaplastic variants of these neoplasms.

            Forty-five patients with metastatic neuroendocrine tumors were treated with a regimen of etoposide 130 mg/m2/d for 3 days plus cisplatin 45 mg/m2/d on days 2 and 3. Both drugs were given by continuous intravenous infusion. Among 27 patients with well-differentiated carcinoid tumors or islet cell carcinomas, only two partial objective tumor regressions were observed (7%). Among 18 patients prospectively classified as having anaplastic neuroendocrine carcinomas, however, there were nine partial regressions and three complete regressions, an overall regression rate of 67%. For anaplastic disease, the median duration of regression was 8 months (range to 21 months). Tumor response was unrelated to primary site, endocrine hyperfunction, or prior therapy experience. The median survival of all patients with anaplastic tumors was 19 months; this seemed favorable when considering the small experiences with these rare tumors reported in the literature. Toxicity, which was severe for most patients, consisted primarily of vomiting, leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia, alopecia, and neuropathy. The anaplastic neuroendocrine tumor is strongly responsive to therapy with combined etoposide and cisplatin. Patients with undifferentiated carcinomas, originating in typical neuroendocrine tumor sites (small and large bowel, pancreas, and stomach) or of unknown origin, who have consistent histologic findings by light microscopy should be evaluated for this possibility with appropriate immune staining or electron microscopy.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found

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

               R. Garcia-Carbonero (corresponding) ,  H Sorbye,  E Baudin (2016)

                Author and article information

                S. Karger AG
                April 2020
                21 August 2019
                : 110
                : 5
                : 404-412
                aDepartment of Medical Oncology, Saint-Antoine Hospital, Paris, France
                bSorbonne University, Paris, France
                cDepartment of Medical Oncology, Edouard Herriot Hospital, Lyon, France
                dDepartment of Pathology, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Paris, France
                eDepartment of Gastroenterology and Digestive Oncology, Amiens University Hospital, Amiens, France
                fDepartment of Gastroenterology and Pancreatology, Beaujon Hospital, Clichy, France
                gDepartment of Endocrinology, CHU Lille, Lille, France
                hDepartment of Gastroenterology, CHU Rennes, Rennes 1 University, Rennes, France
                iGastroenterology and Digestive Oncology, Cochin Hospital, Paris, France
                jDepartment of Digestive Oncology, Beaujon Hospital, Clichy, France
                kGastroenterology and Digestive Oncology, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Paris, France
                lDepartment of Pathology, Bichat Hospital and University Paris Diderot, Paris, France
                mDepartment of Pathology, Saint-Antoine Hospital, Paris, France
                nDepartment of Endocrinology, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
                Author notes
                *Dr. Anna Pellat, MD, Department of Medical Oncology, Saint-Antoine Hospital, 184 rue du Faubourg Saint-Antoine, FR–75012 Paris (France), E-Mail anna.pellat@aphp.fr
                502825 Neuroendocrinology 2020;110:404–412
                © 2019 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 3, Pages: 9
                Research Article


                Comment on this article