A Simple Morphological Classification to Estimate the Malignant Potential of Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors

Overview

Journal J Gastroenterol

Specialty Gastroenterology

Date 2017 May 11

PMID 28488114

Citations 4

Authors

Atsushi Oba

Atsushi Kudo

Keiichi Akahoshi

Mitsuhiro Kishino

Takumi Akashi

Eriko Katsuta

Yasuhito Iwao

Hiroaki Ono

Yusuke Mitsunori

Daisuke Ban

Shinji Tanaka

Yoshinobu Eishi

Ukihide Tateishi

Minoru Tanabe

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: A novel morphological classification using resected specimens predicted malignant potential and prognosis in patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (P-NETs). The aim of this study was to examine the predictive ability of morphological diagnoses made using non-invasive multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) in P-NETs.

Methods: Between 2002 and 2015, 154 patients were diagnosed with P-NETs at the Tokyo Medical and Dental University, and 82 patients who underwent surgical treatment were enrolled. The primary tumors were classified by MDCT into three types: Type I, simple nodular tumor; Type II, simple nodular tumor with extra-nodular growth; and Type III, confluent multinodular tumor. Patients were stratified by 15 clinical specialists according to classification and without any other clinical or pathological information. Clinicopathological features and patient survival were reviewed retrospectively.

Results: The mean observation time was 1004 days. Forty-six, 22, and 14 patients had Type I, II, and III tumors, respectively. Morphological classification was significantly correlated with advanced features such as tumor size, Ki-67 index, and synchronous liver metastasis (p < 0.001 for all). There were significant differences between all three tumor types as judged by ENETS TNM classification (p < 0.001), AJCC TNM classification (p = 0.046), WHO 2004 classification (p < 0.001), and WHO 2010 classification (p < 0.001). Five-year progression-free survival (PFS) rates for patients with Type I, II, and III tumors were 97, 43, and 31%, respectively (I vs. II, p < 0.001; I vs. III, p < 0.001; II vs. III, p = 0.017). Multivariate analysis revealed Type II/III tumors and synchronous liver metastasis to be independent risk factors for poor PFS.

Conclusion: A novel simple morphological classification system would predict Type II and III tumors that may have higher malignant potential than Type I tumors.

Citing Articles

Prediction of the lymphatic, microvascular, and perineural invasion of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors using preoperative magnetic resonance imaging.

Liu Y, Zhu H, Chen M, Sun W, Li X, Sun Y World J Gastrointest Surg. 2024; 15(12):2809-2819.

PMID: 38222000 PMC: 10784819. DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v15.i12.2809.

Infiltrative Growth Predicts the Risk of Recurrence After Surgery in Well-Differentiated Non-Functioning Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.

Schiavo Lena M, Partelli S, Andreasi V, Muffatti F, Redegalli M, Brunetto E Endocr Pathol. 2022; 34(1):142-155.

PMID: 36564582 DOI: 10.1007/s12022-022-09745-x.

Preoperative prediction of lymph node metastasis in nonfunctioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors from clinical and MRI features: a multicenter study.

Zhu H, Nie P, Jiang L, Hu J, Zhang X, Li X Insights Imaging. 2022; 13(1):162.

PMID: 36209332 PMC: 9547759. DOI: 10.1186/s13244-022-01301-9.

Prognostic and predictive factors on overall survival and surgical outcomes in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: recent advances and controversies.

Lee L, Ito T, Jensen R Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2019; 19(12):1029-1050.

PMID: 31738624 PMC: 6923565. DOI: 10.1080/14737140.2019.1693893.

References

Nakayama H, Takayama T, Okubo T, Higaki T, Midorikawa Y, Moriguchi M . Proposal of objective morphological classification system for hepatocellular carcinoma using preoperative multiphase computed tomography. J Gastroenterol. 2013; 49(10):1430-7. DOI: 10.1007/s00535-013-0908-9. View

Yao J, Hassan M, Phan A, Dagohoy C, Leary C, Mares J . One hundred years after "carcinoid": epidemiology of and prognostic factors for neuroendocrine tumors in 35,825 cases in the United States. J Clin Oncol. 2008; 26(18):3063-72. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2007.15.4377. View

Horton K, Hruban R, Yeo C, Fishman E . Multi-detector row CT of pancreatic islet cell tumors. Radiographics. 2006; 26(2):453-64. DOI: 10.1148/rg.262055056. View

Ito T, Igarashi H, Jensen R . Therapy of metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs): recent insights and advances. J Gastroenterol. 2012; 47(9):941-60. PMC: 3754804. DOI: 10.1007/s00535-012-0642-8. View

Inayoshi J, Ichida T, Sugitani S, Tsuboi Y, Genda T, Honma N . Gross appearance of hepatocellular carcinoma reflects E-cadherin expression and risk of early recurrence after surgical treatment. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2003; 18(6):673-7. DOI: 10.1046/j.1440-1746.2003.03021.x. View

Kloppel G . Classification and pathology of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms. Endocr Relat Cancer. 2011; 18 Suppl 1:S1-16. DOI: 10.1530/ERC-11-0013. View

DAssignies G, Couvelard A, Bahrami S, Vullierme M, Hammel P, Hentic O . Pancreatic endocrine tumors: tumor blood flow assessed with perfusion CT reflects angiogenesis and correlates with prognostic factors. Radiology. 2008; 250(2):407-16. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2501080291. View

Nagano Y, Shimada H, Takeda K, Ueda M, Matsuo K, Tanaka K . Predictive factors of microvascular invasion in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma larger than 5 cm. World J Surg. 2008; 32(10):2218-22. DOI: 10.1007/s00268-008-9585-x. View

Luo G, Javed A, Strosberg J, Jin K, Zhang Y, Liu C . Modified Staging Classification for Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors on the Basis of the American Joint Committee on Cancer and European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society Systems. J Clin Oncol. 2016; 35(3):274-280. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2016.67.8193. View

10.

Yamada S, Fujii T, Suzuki K, Inokawa Y, Kanda M, Nakayama G . Preoperative Identification of a Prognostic Factor for Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors Using Multiphase Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography. Pancreas. 2015; 45(2):198-203. DOI: 10.1097/MPA.0000000000000443. View

11.

Falconi M, Bartsch D, Eriksson B, Kloppel G, Lopes J, OConnor J . ENETS Consensus Guidelines for the management of patients with digestive neuroendocrine neoplasms of the digestive system: well-differentiated pancreatic non-functioning tumors. Neuroendocrinology. 2012; 95(2):120-34. DOI: 10.1159/000335587. View

12.

Ito T, Igarashi H, Nakamura K, Sasano H, Okusaka T, Takano K . Epidemiological trends of pancreatic and gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors in Japan: a nationwide survey analysis. J Gastroenterol. 2014; 50(1):58-64. DOI: 10.1007/s00535-014-0934-2. View

13.

Katsuta E, Kudo A, Akashi T, Mitsunori Y, Matsumura S, Aihara A . Macroscopic morphology for estimation of malignant potential in pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2016; 142(6):1299-306. DOI: 10.1007/s00432-016-2128-1. View

14.

Murakata A, Tanaka S, Mogushi K, Yasen M, Noguchi N, Irie T . Gene expression signature of the gross morphology in hepatocellular carcinoma. Ann Surg. 2011; 253(1):94-100. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181f9bc00. View

15.

Rodallec M, Vilgrain V, Couvelard A, Rufat P, OToole D, Barrau V . Endocrine pancreatic tumours and helical CT: contrast enhancement is correlated with microvascular density, histoprognostic factors and survival. Pancreatology. 2005; 6(1-2):77-85. DOI: 10.1159/000090026. View

16.

Klimstra D, Modlin I, Coppola D, Lloyd R, Suster S . The pathologic classification of neuroendocrine tumors: a review of nomenclature, grading, and staging systems. Pancreas. 2010; 39(6):707-12. DOI: 10.1097/MPA.0b013e3181ec124e. View

17.

Shimada M, Rikimaru T, Hamatsu T, Yamashita Y, Terashi T, Taguchi K . The role of macroscopic classification in nodular-type hepatocellular carcinoma. Am J Surg. 2001; 182(2):177-82. DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9610(01)00682-1. View