Gastroenteric neuroendocrine neoplasms classification: Comparison of prognostic models

被引:33
作者
Dolcetta-Capuzzo, Anna [1 ]
Villa, Valentina [1 ]
Albarello, Luca [2 ]
Franchi, Giulia M. [1 ]
Gemma, Marco [3 ]
Scavini, Marina [1 ]
Di Palo, Saverio [4 ]
Orsenigo, Elena [4 ]
Bosi, Emanuele [1 ]
Doglioni, Claudio [2 ]
Manzoni, Marco F. [1 ]
机构
[1] Ist Sci San Raffaele, Endocrine Tumors Unit, Dept Endocrinol & Internal Med, I-20132 Milan, Italy
[2] Ist Sci San Raffaele, Dept Pathol, I-20132 Milan, Italy
[3] Ist Sci San Raffaele, Dept Head & Neck Anesthesia & Neurointens Care, I-20132 Milan, Italy
[4] Ist Sci San Raffaele, Dept Gen Surg, I-20132 Milan, Italy
关键词
neuroendocrine tumors; neuroendocrine neoplasm; gastroenteric tract; prognosis; classification; TNM; World Health Organization; ENDOCRINE TUMORS; CONSENSUS GUIDELINES; CARCINOID-TUMORS; SURVIVAL; MANAGEMENT; PATHOLOGY; PANCREAS; BIOLOGY; MIDGUT; SYSTEM;
D O I
10.1002/cncr.27716
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: Gastroenteric neuroendocrine neoplasms (GE-NENs) display highly variable clinical behavior. In an attempt to assess a better prognostic description, in 2010, the World Health Organization (WHO) updated its previous classification, and the European Neuroendocrine Tumors Society (ENETS) proposed a new grading and TNM-based staging system. In the current study, the authors evaluated the prognostic significance of these models and compared their efficacy in describing patients' long-term survival to assess the best prognostic model currently available for clinicians. METHODS: The study cohort was composed of 145 patients with extrapancreatic GE-NEN who were observed from 1986 to 2008 at a single center and were classified according to the WHO and ENETS classifications. Survival evaluations were performed using Kaplan-Meyer analyses on 131 patients. Only deaths from neoplasia were considered. A P value < .05 was considered significant. Prognostic efficacy was assessed by determining the Harrell concordance index (c-index). RESULTS: Both the 2010 WHO and the ENETS classification were able to efficiently divide patients into classes with different prognoses. According to the model comparison, the ENETS TNM-based staging system appeared to be the strongest. All combined models were effective prognostic predictors, but the model that included the 2010 WHO classification plus ENETS staging had a higher c-index. CONCLUSIONS: Both the 2010 WHO classification and the ENETS staging system are valid instruments for GE-NENs prognostic assessment, with TNM-based stage appearing to be the best available choice for clinicians, both alone and in association with other classifications. Cancer 2013. (c) 2012 American Cancer Society.
引用
收藏
页码:36 / 44
页数:9
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]  
Anlauf M, 2007, REV PERSPECT, V451, P29, DOI DOI 10.1007/S0042
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2000, WHO CLASSIFICATION T
[3]  
[Anonymous], WHO CLASSIFICATION T
[4]   ENETS Consensus Guidelines for the Standards of Care in Neuroendocrine Tumors: Follow-Up and Documentation [J].
Arnold, Rudolf ;
Chen, Yuan-Jia ;
Costa, Frederico ;
Falconi, Massimo ;
Gross, David ;
Grossman, Ashley B. ;
Hyrdel, Rudolf ;
Kos-Kudla, Beata ;
Salazar, Ramon ;
Ploeckinger, Ursula .
NEUROENDOCRINOLOGY, 2009, 90 (02) :227-233
[5]  
Dralle H, 2005, SURGERY, V138, P977
[6]   Prognostic Factors and Survival in 324 Patients with Pancreatic Endocrine Tumor Treated at a Single Institution [J].
Ekeblad, Sara ;
Skogseid, Britt ;
Dunder, Kristina ;
Oberg, Kjell ;
Eriksson, Barbro .
CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH, 2008, 14 (23) :7798-7803
[7]   Surgical strategy in the treatment of gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumours [J].
Falconi, M ;
Bettini, R ;
Scarpa, A ;
Capelli, P ;
Pederzoli, P .
ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY, 2001, 12 :S101-S103
[8]  
Fischer L, 2008, BRIT J SURG, V95, P627, DOI 10.1002/bjs.6051
[9]  
Harrell FE, 1996, STAT MED, V15, P361, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19960229)15:4<361::AID-SIM168>3.0.CO
[10]  
2-4