Halfdanarson, Thorvardur R

High-grade neuroendocrine neoplasms are a rare disease entity and account for approximately 10% of all neuroendocrine neoplasms. Because of their rarity, there is an overall lack of prospectively collected data available to advise practitioners as to how best to manage these patients. As a result, best practices are largely based on expert opinion. Recently, a distinction was made between well-differentiated high-grade (G3) neuroendocrine tumors and poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas, and with this, pathologic details, appropriate imaging practices and treatment have become more complex. In an effort to provide practitioners with the best guidance for the management of patients with high-grade neuroendocrine neoplasms of the gastrointestinal tract, pancreas, and gynecologic system, the North American Neuroendocrine Tumor Society convened a panel of experts to develop a set of recommendations and a treatment algorithm that may be used by practitioners for the care of these patients. Here, we provide consensus recommendations from the panel on pathology, imaging practices, management of localized disease, management of metastatic disease and surveillance and draw key distinctions as to the approach that should be utilized in patients with well-differentiated G3 neuroendocrine tumors vs poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas.

Localized insulinoma is an uncommon entity that can result in substantial morbidity due to the associated hypoglycemia. Recent studies have suggested an increase in the incidence of insulinoma in recent decades that may possibly be secondary to increased awareness, incidental diagnoses, and better diagnostic methods. Diagnosing and localizing insulinoma within the pancreas can be challenging, but advances in nuclear imaging may improve diagnostic accuracy. Delays in diagnosis are common, but once a localized insulinoma is diagnosed and appropriately treated, the long-term prognosis is excellent. Surgical resection is considered the standard of care management option for localized insulinoma, but tumor ablation with endoscopic ultrasound guidance has also been shown to be an effective and safe method for therapy.

We conducted a retrospective/prospective worldwide study on patients with neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) and a molecularly proven SARS-CoV-2 positivity. Preliminary results regarding 85 patients of the INTENSIVE study have been published in 2021. Now we are reporting the 2-year analysis.Here, we are reporting data from consecutive patients enrolled between 1 June 2020, and 31 May 2022. Among the 118 contacted centers, 25 were active to enroll and 19 actively recruiting at the time of data cut-off for a total of 280 patients enrolled. SARS-CoV-2 positivity occurred in 47.5% of patients in 2020, 35.1% in 2021, and 17.4% in 2022. The median age for COVID-19 diagnosis was 60 years. Well-differentiated tumors, non-functioning, metastatic stage, and gastroenteropancreatic (GEP) primary sites represented most of the NENs. COVID-19-related pneumonia occurred in 22.8% of the total, with 61.3% of them requiring hospitalization; 11 patients (3.9%) needed sub-intensive or intensive care unit therapies and 14 patients died (5%), in 11 cases (3.9%) directly related to COVID-19. Diabetes mellitus and age at COVID-19 diagnosis > 70 years were significantly associated with COVID-19 mortality, whereas thoracic primary site with COVID-19 morbidity. A significant decrease in both hospitalization and pneumonia occurred in 2022 vs 2020. In our largest series of NEN patients with COVID-19, the NEN population is similar to the general population of patients with NEN regardless of COVID-19. However, older age, non-GEP primary sites and diabetes mellitus should be carefully considered for increased COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. Relevant information could be derived by integrating our results with NENs patients included in other cancer patients with COVID-19 registries.

Mixed acinar neuroendocrine carcinoma of the pancreas (MANEC-P) is an extremely rare malignancy with a poor prognosis. However, epidemiological estimates of MANEC-P remain unknown. This study aimed to estimate and compare the incidence, prevalence, and cancer-specific survival (CSS) of MANEC-P in the United States (US). Patients with MANEC-P were identified through the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) and National Program of Cancer Registries databases between 2000–2017. The primary outcomes included age-adjusted incidence rate, limited-duration prevalence, and CSS. A total of 630 patients were identified for the incidence analysis and 149 for the prevalence and CSS analyses. The MANEC-P incidence rate was 0.011 per 100,000 individuals, which was the lowest among pancreatic cancer histologic subtypes. The incidence rate was significantly higher in men and Black races and peaked at 75–79 years of age. The incidence rate was the lowest in the midwestern region (0.009) and the highest in the northeastern US (0.013). The 17-year prevalence was 0.00005%, indicating that 189 patients were alive in the United States at the beginning of 2018. The median CSS of MANEC-P was estimated to be 41 (23, 69) months. In conclusion, MANEC-P is very rare, and its incidence rate has been steady in the US over the last two decades. MANEC-P has a poor prognosis and is the 5th leading cause of pancreatic cancer-related death in the US.

Abstract Background This North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) N064A (Alliance) phase II trial evaluated upfront chemoradiotherapy incorporating the EGFR inhibitor panitumumab, followed by gemcitabine and panitumumab for unresectable, non-metastatic pancreatic cancer. Methods The treatment consisted of fluoropyrimidine and panitumumab given concurrently with radiotherapy followed by gemcitabine and panitumumab for 3 cycles followed by maintenance panitumumab. The primary endpoint was the 12-month overall survival (OS) rate and secondary endpoints included confirmed response rate (RR), OS, progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events. Enrollment of 50 patients was planned and the study fully accrued. Results Fifty-two patients were enrolled, but only 51 were treated and included in the analysis. The median age of patients was 65 years and 54.9% were women. Twenty-two patients received at least 1 cycle of systemic therapy following radiotherapy, but 29 patients received chemoradiotherapy only without receiving subsequent chemotherapy after completion of chemoradiotherapy. The overall RR was 5.9% (95% CI: 1.2%-16.2%). The 12-month OS rate was 50% (95% CI: 38%-67%) which fell short of the per-protocol goal for success (51.1%). The median PFS was 7.4 months (95% CI: 4.5-8.6) and the median OS was 12.1 months (95% CI 7.9-15.9). Grade 3 or higher adverse events were reported by 88%. Conclusion The combination of panitumumab, chemotherapy, and external beam radiation therapy was associated with very high rates of grades 3-4 toxicities and survival results did not meet the trial’s goal for success. This regimen is not recommended for further study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00601627).

PURPOSECholangiocarcinomas (CCA) are a group of heterogeneous tumors arising from the biliary epithelia. Significant sequencing efforts have provided further insights into the molecular mechanisms of this disease including fibroblast growth factor receptor ( FGFR) alterations, which occurs in approximately 15%-20% of intrahepatic CCAs. Herein, we describe the FGFR inhibitor (FGFRi)-associated treatment toxicity and cancer-specific outcomes from a multicenter single-institution cohort.METHODSThis is a retrospective study of patients with CCA and known FGFR alterations treated with FGFRi. We describe the toxicity and efficacy in patients treated at Mayo Clinic between January 2010 and December 2020.RESULTSOur group identified 61 patients with advanced or metastatic CCA, 19 males (31%) and 42 females (69%), harboring FGFR alterations who received FGFRi. The most common grade 1 or higher adverse events for all patients included fatigue (92%), AST elevations (78%), anemia (80%), decreased platelet count (63%), and hyperphosphatemia (74%). Median progression-free survival on FGFRi was 5.8 months for all patients (95% CI, 4.9 to 9.0). Females had significantly longer progression-free survival at 6.9 months (95% CI, 5.2 to 11.8) on FGFRi compared with males at 4.9 months (95% CI, 2.8 to not estimable; P = .038).CONCLUSIONFGFRi are well tolerated with clinical efficacy. With the recent approval of FGFRi by the US Food and Drug Administration and ongoing clinical trials for new FGFRi, understanding outcomes and toxicity associated with these medications is important for precision oncology.

Abstract Background and Objectives Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) in patients with hereditary cancer syndromes are typically multifocal. In contrast, sporadic pNETs are usually unifocal and the incidence of multifocal sporadic pNETs is unknown. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the incidence of multifocality in sporadic pNETs and any associated effect on recurrence risk and survival. Methods Patients who underwent resection of pNETs at Mayo Clinic from 2000 to 2019 were identified and clinical data were obtained from medical records. Syndromic disease was defined as pNETs arising in the setting of a hereditary cancer syndrome. Statistical comparisons were made using χ 2 , Fisher's exact, and Kruskal–Wallis tests and survival was assessed using the Kaplan–Meier method. Results Six hundred and sixty‐one patients with sporadic pNETs and fifty‐nine with syndromic pNETs were identified. Multifocal disease was present in 4.8% of sporadic patients and 84.7% of syndromic patients ( p < .001). Within patients with sporadic pNETs, clinicopathologic features and recurrence‐free and overall survival were similar between patients with unifocal and multifocal disease. Conclusions Multifocal sporadic pNETs are rare and multifocality is not associated with worse survival or increased recurrence risk. Patients with multifocal sporadic pNETs can likely be safely managed with a combination of resection and observation as indicated for each tumor.

PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to assess the impact of an interdisciplinary remote patient monitoring (RPM) program on clinical outcomes and acute care utilization in cancer patients with COVID-19. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional analysis following a prospective observational study performed at Mayo Clinic Cancer Center. Adult patients receiving cancer-directed therapy or in recent remission on active surveillance with polymerase chain reaction–confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection between March 18 and July 31, 2020, were included. RPM was composed of in-home technology to assess symptoms and physiologic data with centralized nursing and physician oversight. RESULTS: During the study timeframe, 224 patients with cancer were diagnosed with COVID-19. Of the 187 patients (83%) initially managed in the outpatient setting, those who did not receive RPM were significantly more likely to experience hospitalization than those receiving RPM. Following balancing of patient characteristics by inverse propensity score weighting, rates of hospitalization for RPM and non-RPM patients were 2.8% and 13%, respectively, implying that the use of RPM was associated with a 78% relative risk reduction in hospital admission rate (95% CI, 54 to 102; P = .002). Furthermore, when hospitalized, these patients experienced a shorter length of stay and fewer prolonged hospitalizations, intensive care unit admissions, and deaths, although these trends did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: The use of RPM and a centralized virtual care team was associated with a reduction in hospital admission rate and lower overall acute care resource utilization among cancer patients with COVID-19.

Background: The incidence and prevalence of neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are rapidly rising. Epidemiologic trends have been reported for common NENs, but specific data for lung NENs are lacking. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis utilizing the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Associated population data were utilized to report the annual age-adjusted incidence and overall survival (OS) trends. Trends for large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) and atypical carcinoid (AC) were reported from 2000–2015, while those for typical carcinoid (TC) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC) were reported from 1988–2015. Results: We examined a total of 124,969 lung NENs [103,890—SCLC; 3303—LCNEC; 8146—TC; 656—AC; 8974—Other]. The age-adjusted incidence rate revealed a decline in SCLC from 8.6 in 1988 to 5.3 in 2015 per 100,000; while other NENs showed an increase: TC increased from 0.57 in 1988 to 0.77 in 2015, AC increased from 0.17 in 2001 to 0.22 in 2015, and LCNEC increased from 0.16 in 2000 to 0.41 in 2015. The 5-year OS rate among SCLC, LCNEC, AC, and TC patients was 5%, 17%, 64%, and 84%, respectively. On multivariable analyses, OS and disease-specific survival (DSS) varied significantly by stage, sex, histological type, insurance type, marital status, and race, with a better survival noted in earlier stages, females, married, insured, Hispanic and other races, and urban population. Similarly, TC and AC had better survival compared to SCLC and LCNEC. Conclusion: The incidence of lung NENs is rising, possibly in part because of advanced radiological techniques. However, the incidence of SCLCs is waning, likely because of declining smoking habits. Such population-based studies are essential for resource allocation and to prioritize future research directions.

Background: Patient information is critical in shared decision-making and patient-centred management for neuroendocrine tumours (NETs). Most adults search the internet for health issues, with over half considering such information to be credible. Therefore, we evaluated the quality of online information on NETs. Methods: Searching for “Neuroendocrine Tumours”, the top 20 websites from Google and top 10 from Yahoo and Bing were identified. Open-access websites written in English were included. Websites indicated as advertisements or directed towards healthcare providers were excluded. Each website was evaluated using the JAMA benchmarks, DISCERN instrument, and the Health on the Internet (HONCode) seal by two independent reviewers. Results: We included 16 unique websites after removing duplicates. Four were education pages from healthcare institutions, 10 were Cancer Society pages, and 2 were general information pages. The average score for JAMA benchmarks was 2.3, with 19% of websites receiving the highest score of 4. Specifically, 31% met the benchmark for authorship, 69% for attribution, 94% for disclosure, and 44% for currency. The average score for the DISCERN instrument was 46.5, with no website achieving the maximum of 80 points. The HONCode seal was present in 3 out of 16 websites (18%). Conclusions: We identified major issues with the quality of online information for NETs using validated instruments. The majority of websites identified through common search engines are low-quality. Patients should be informed of the limited quality of online information on NETs. High-quality online information is needed to ensure that patients can avoid misinformation and actively participate in their care.