Survey of surgical resections for neuroendocrine liver metastases: A project study of the Japan Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (JNETS).
neuroendocrine liver metastasis
overall survival
postoperative complication
surgery
tumor recurrence
Journal
Journal of hepato-biliary-pancreatic sciences
ISSN: 1868-6982
Titre abrégé: J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci
Pays: Japan
ID NLM: 101528587
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2021
Jun 2021
Historique:
revised:
07
03
2021
received:
30
12
2020
accepted:
09
03
2021
pubmed:
2
4
2021
medline:
16
10
2021
entrez:
1
4
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Hepatic resection is considered the treatment of choice for neuroendocrine liver metastases (NELM). However, the safety and efficacy of resection have not been fully evaluated using a large cohort. The aim of the present study was to collect real-world data regarding hepatic resections for NELM. A retrospective, multicenter survey was conducted. The background characteristics of patients undergoing an initial hepatic resection for NELM, the operative details, pathological findings, and patient outcomes were investigated. A total of 222 patients were enrolled from 30 institutions. The primary tumor site was the pancreas in 58.6%, and the presentation of NELM was synchronous in 63.1% of the cases. Concomitant resection of the primary tumor and liver metastases was performed for 66.4% of the synchronous metastases, and the 90-day morbidity and mortality rates were 12.6% and 0.9%, respectively. The operations resulted in R2 resections in 26.1% of the cases, and 83.4% of the patients experienced recurrence after R0/1 resections. However, the patients were treated using multiple modalities after R2 resection or recurrence, and the overall survival rate was relatively favorable, with 5-year and 10-year survival rates of 70.2%, and 43.4%, respectively. Univariable and multivariable analyses identified the tumor grading (G3) of the primary tumor as a significant prognostic factor for both the recurrence-free and overall survivals. The present data confirmed the safety of the surgical resection of NELM. Although recurrences were frequent, the survival outcomes after resection were favorable when a multi-disciplinary treatment approach was used.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE
OBJECTIVE
Hepatic resection is considered the treatment of choice for neuroendocrine liver metastases (NELM). However, the safety and efficacy of resection have not been fully evaluated using a large cohort. The aim of the present study was to collect real-world data regarding hepatic resections for NELM.
METHODS
METHODS
A retrospective, multicenter survey was conducted. The background characteristics of patients undergoing an initial hepatic resection for NELM, the operative details, pathological findings, and patient outcomes were investigated.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 222 patients were enrolled from 30 institutions. The primary tumor site was the pancreas in 58.6%, and the presentation of NELM was synchronous in 63.1% of the cases. Concomitant resection of the primary tumor and liver metastases was performed for 66.4% of the synchronous metastases, and the 90-day morbidity and mortality rates were 12.6% and 0.9%, respectively. The operations resulted in R2 resections in 26.1% of the cases, and 83.4% of the patients experienced recurrence after R0/1 resections. However, the patients were treated using multiple modalities after R2 resection or recurrence, and the overall survival rate was relatively favorable, with 5-year and 10-year survival rates of 70.2%, and 43.4%, respectively. Univariable and multivariable analyses identified the tumor grading (G3) of the primary tumor as a significant prognostic factor for both the recurrence-free and overall survivals.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The present data confirmed the safety of the surgical resection of NELM. Although recurrences were frequent, the survival outcomes after resection were favorable when a multi-disciplinary treatment approach was used.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
489-497Informations de copyright
© 2021 Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery.
Références
Yao JC, Hassan M, Phan A, Dagohoy C, Leary C, Mares JE, et al. 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;26:3063-72.
Dasari A, Shen C, Halperin D, Zhao B, Zhou S, Xu Y, et al. Trends in the incidence, prevalence, and survival outcomes in patients with neuroendocrine tumors in the United States. JAMA Oncol. 2017;3:1335-1342.
Llyod RV, Osamura RY, Klöppel G, Roasi J, editors. WHO Classification of Tumours of Endocrine Organs, 4th edition. Lyon: IRAC; 2017.
WHO. The WHO Classification of Tumours Editorial Board. Digestive System Tumours. Lyon, France: International Agency for Resection on Cancer; 2019. (WHO classification of tumors series, 5th ed.; vol.1).
Saxena A, Chua TC, Sarkar A, Chu F, Liauw W, Zhao J, et al. Progression and survival results after radical hepatic metastasectomy of indolent advanced neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) supports an aggressive surgical approach. Surgery. 2011;149:209-20.
Frilling A, Modlin IM, Kidd M, Russell C, Breitenstein S, Salem R, et al. Recommendation for management of patients with neuroendocrine liver metastases. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:e8-e21.
Pavel M, O''Toole D, Costa F, Capdevila J, Gross D, Kianmanesh R, et al. . ENETS consensus guidelines update for the management of distant metastatic disease of intestinal, pancreatic, bronchial neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN) and NEN of unknown primary site. Neuroendocrinology. 2016;103(2):172-85.
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205-13.
Bosman FT, Cameiro F, Hruban RH, Theise ND. WHO classification of tumours of the digestive system, 4th edn. Lyon: IRAC; 2010.
Ito T, Igarashi H, Nakamura K, Sasano H, Okusaka T, Takano K, et al. Epidemiological trends of pancreatic and gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors in Japan: a nationwide survey analysis. J Gastroenterol. 2015;50:58-64.
Nuñez-Valdovinos B, Carmona-Bayonas A, Jimenez-Fonseca P, Capdevila J, Castaño-Pascul A, Benavent M, et al. Neuroendocrine tumor heterogeneity adds uncertainty to the World Health Organization 2010 Classification: real-world data from the Spanish Tumor Registry (R-GETNE). Oncologist. 2018;23:422-32.
Addeo P, Oussoultzoglou E, Fuchshuber P, Rosso E, Nobili C, Langella S, et al. Safety and outcome of combined liver and pancreatic resections. Br J Surg. 2014;101:693-700.
Tran TB, Dua MM, Spain DA, Visser BC, Norton JA, Poultsides GA. Hepato-pancreatectomy: how morbid? Results from the national surgical quality improvement project. HPB (Oxford). 2015;17:763-9.
Chamberlain RS, Canes D, Brown KT, Saltz L, Jarnagin W, Fing Y, et al. Hepatic neuroendocrine metastases: does intervention alter outcomes? J Am Coll Surg. 2000;190:432-45.
Maxwell JE, Sherman SK, O’Dorisio TM, Bellizzi AM, Howe JR. Liver-directed surgery of neuroendocrine metastases: what is the optimal strategy? Surgery. 2016;159:320-33.
Ejaz A, Reames BN, Maithel S, Poultsides GA, Bauer TW, Fields RC, et al. Cytoreductive debulking surgery among patients with neuroendocrine liver metastasis: a multi-institutional analysis. HPB (Oxford). 2018;20:277-84.
Morgan RE, Pommier SJ, Pommier RF. Expanded criteria for debulking of liver metastasis also apply to pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Surgery. 2018;163:218-25.
Mayo SC, de Jong MC, Pulitano C, Clary BM, Reddy SK, Clark Gamblin T, et al. Surgical management of hepatic neuroendocrine tumor metastasis: results from an international multi-institutional analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:3129-36.
Spolverato G, Bagante F, Aldrighetti L, Poultsides GA, Bauer TW, Fields RC, et al. Management and outcomes of patients with recurrent neuroendocrine liver metastasis after curative surgery: an international multi-institutional analysis. J Surg Oncol. 2017;116:298-306.
Kiritani S, Arita J, Matsumura M, Nishioka Y, Kudo H, Ichida A, et al. Repeat hepatectomy for patients with recurrent neuroendocrine liver metastasis: comparison with first hepatectomy. Surgery. 2020;167:404-9.
Nave H, Mössinger E, Feist H, Lang H, Raab H. Surgery as primary treatment in patients with liver metastases from carcinoid tumors: a retrospective, unicentric study over 13 years. Surgery. 2001;129:170-5.
Cho CS, Labow DM, Tang L, Kimstra DS, Loeffler AG, Leverson GE, et al. Histologic grade is correlated with outcome after resection of hepatic neuroendocrine neoplasms. Cancer. 2008;113:126-34.
Durante C, Boukheris H, Dromain C, Duvillard P, Leboulleux S, Elias D, et al. Prognostic factors influencing survival from metastatic (Stage IV) gastroenteropancreatic well-differentiated endocrine carcinoma. Endocr Relat Cancer. 2009;16:585-97.
Ruzzenente A, Bagante F, Bertuzzo F, Aldrighetti L, Ercolani G, Giuliante F, et al. A novel nomogram to predict the prognosis of patients undergoing liver resection for neuroendocrine liver metastasis: an analysis of the Italian Neuroendocrine Liver Metastasis Database. J Gastrointest Surg. 2017;21:41-8.
Zen Y, Heaton N. Elevated Ki-67 labeling index in ‘synchronous liver metastases’ of well differentiated enteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumor. Pathol Int. 2013;63:532-8.
Richards-Taylor S, Tilley C, Jaynes E, Hu H, Armstrong T, Pearce NW, et al. Clinically significant differences in Ki-67 proliferation index between primary and metastases in resected pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Pancreas. 2017;46:1354-8.
Panzuto F, Cicchese N, Partelli S, Rinzivillo M, Capurso G, Merola E, et al. Impact of Ki67 re-assessment at time of disease progression in patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms. PLoS One. 2017;12:e0179445.