Clinical Outcome of Patients with Gastric, Duodenal, or Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors after Incomplete Endoscopic Resection.

Objectives: Our aim was to investigate the clinical outcome of patients with well-differentiated gastric, duodenal, and rectal neuroendocrine tumors after treatment with incomplete endoscopic resection due to the finding of microscopic positive resection margins (R1). Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with type 1 gastric, non-ampullary non-functioning duodenal, or rectal neuroendocrine neoplasms with positive R1 margins after endoscopic resection. The rate of tumor recurrence and progression-free survival were considered to be the study's main endpoints. Statistical analysis was performed using MedCalc® v.17 software and a p-value of <0.05 was considered significant. A Cox proportional-hazard regression was performed to identify risk factors for disease recurrence/progression. Results: After evaluating 110 patients, a total of 58 patients were included in the final analysis (15 gastric NENs, 12 duodenal NENs, and 31 rectal NENs). After evidence of endoscopic R1 resection had been gathered, 26 patients (44.8%) underwent an endoscopic/surgical extension of the previous resection. Tumor progression (all local recurrences) occurred in five out of fifty-eight patients (8.6%) with a median PFS of 36 months. There were no tumor-related deaths. G2 grading and the gastric primary tumor site were the only features significantly associated with the risk of recurrence of the disease (HR: 11.97 [95% CI: 1.22-116.99], HR: 12.54 [95% CI: 1.28-122.24], respectively). Conclusions: Tumor progression rarely occurs in patients with microscopic positive margin excision (R1) after endoscopic resection and does not seem to affect patients' clinical outcomes.

Gastrointestinal side effects of somatostatin analogs in neuroendocrine tumors: a focused review.

Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are a group of well-differentiated heterogeneous neoplasms characterized by slow progression and distinct clinical and biological behavior. In the majority of patients with NET, first-line treatment is represented by somatostatin analogs (SSAs) that, despite being drugs with high tolerability (even at high doses) and providing to carcinoid symptoms control and anti-proliferative effects, may present some side effects, with potential impact on quality of life and nutritional status. The most frequent side effects are represented by gastrointestinal events in particular alterations in bowel habits (diarrhea and constipation), abdominal pain, exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, and cholelithiasis. Considering the relative rarity of NETs, literature about frequency and standard clinical management of adverse events SSA-related is still lacking and heterogeneous. The aim of this review is to arm gastroenterologists and other physicians treating NET patients with essential knowledge on the side effects of SSAs. By identifying and managing these adverse events early, healthcare professionals can offer optimal care, avert foreseeable complications, and ensure the best outcomes for patients. Without such early recognition, there is a risk of diminishing the patient's quality of life and their ability to sustain treatment over time.

Type 3 gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms: the rising promise of conservative endoscopic management.

Gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms (g-NENs) are rare tumors arising from the gastric enterochromaffin-like cells. Recent data suggests an increased detection rate, attributed to more frequent esophagogastroduodenoscopies. While type 3 g-NENs were historically deemed aggressive, emerging research indicates potential for conservative management, especially endoscopic resection, in well-differentiated, small tumors. European guidelines now advocate for endoscopic intervention in selected cases, but North American guidelines remain more conservative. Key factors influencing outcomes are tumor size, grading, and depth of gastric wall infiltration. Endoscopic resection has shown promise for tumors confined to submucosal layers without lymphovascular invasion. Given the complexities, a multidisciplinary team approach is essential for management decisions. Current insights are largely based on retrospective studies, underscoring the need for prospective research to optimize endoscopic approaches.

Epidemiology of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms: a review and protocol presentation for bridging tumor registry data with the Italian association for neuroendocrine tumors (Itanet) national database.

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are rare tumors with diverse clinical behaviors. Large databases like the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program and national NEN registries have provided significant epidemiological knowledge, but they have limitations given the recent advancements in NEN diagnostics and treatments. For instance, newer imaging techniques and therapies have revolutionized NEN management, rendering older data less representative. Additionally, crucial parameters, like the Ki67 index, are missing from many databases. Acknowledging these gaps, the Italian Association for Neuroendocrine Tumors (Itanet) initiated a national multicenter prospective database in 2019, aiming to gather data on newly-diagnosed gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine (GEP) NENs. This observational study, coordinated by Itanet, includes patients from 37 Italian centers. The database, which is rigorously maintained and updated, focuses on diverse parameters including age, diagnostic techniques, tumor stage, treatments, and survival metrics. As of October 2023, data from 1,600 patients have been recorded, with an anticipation of reaching 3600 by the end of 2025. This study aims at understanding the epidemiology, clinical attributes, and treatment strategies for GEP-NENs in Italy, and to introduce the Itanet database project. Once comprehensive follow-up data will be acquired, the goal will be to discern predictors of treatment outcomes and disease prognosis. The Itanet database will offer an unparalleled, updated perspective on GEP-NENs, addressing the limitations of older databases and aiding in optimizing patient care. STUDY REGISTRATION: This protocol was registered in clinicaltriasl.gov (NCT04282083).

The meaning of R1 resection after endoscopic removal of gastric, duodenal and rectal neuroendocrine tumors.

INTRODUCTION: Well-differentiated gastric, duodenal, and rectal neuroendocrine neoplasms (NETs) are rare diseases usually managed by endoscopic treatment. Although several endoscopic techniques are available, the number of patients with incomplete (R1) resection is significant. AREAS COVERED: This review focuses on the meaning of incomplete R1 findings after endoscopic resection in type I gastric NETs; nonfunctioning, non-ampullary duodenal NETs; and small rectal NETs. Data were identified by MEDLINE database search without publication date limitation. EXPERT OPINION: An incomplete R1 finding may have no significant impact on a patient's clinical outcome, particularly in small G1 type I gastric NETs, which have an indolent course. A 'stepwise approach,' which uses more advanced endoscopic techniques, or minimally invasive surgery may be justified to achieve complete margin-free resection. This approach must balance the tumor features and the procedure-related risk of complications, particularly in the duodenum, where the role of deep endoscopic resections is limited due to the thin duodenal wall. Gastric and rectal NETs that are incompletely removed after initial resection are more easily amenable to deep endoscopic techniques. However, this might not be necessary for patients with comorbidities, elderly, or both due to the uncertainty of how R1 finding impacts a patient's clinical outcome.

Utility of histopathological revision in the management of gastro-entero-pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasia.

BACKGROUND: Histological evaluation and grading assessment are key points in the diagnostic work-up of gastroentero-pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs). AIM: To analyze the impact of histopathological revision on the clinical management of patients with GEP-NEN. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients referred to our Center of Excellence between 2015 and 2021 were included in this study. Immunohistochemical slides at the time of initial diagnosis were reviewed to assess tumor morphology, diagnostic immunohistochemistry, and Ki67. RESULTS: 101 patients were evaluated, with 65 (64.4%) gastrointestinal, 25 (24.7%) pancreatic, and 11 (10.9%) occult neoplastic lesions suspected to be of GEP origin. The main changes resulting from the revision were: first Ki-67 assessment in 15.8% of patients, Ki-67 change in 59.2% of patients and grading modification in 23.5% of patients. An additional immunohistochemical evaluation was performed in 78 (77.2%) patients, leading to a confirmation of GEP origin in 10 of 11 (90.9%) of unknown primary site neoplastic lesions and an exclusion of NEN diagnosis in 2 (2%) patients. After histopathological revision, a significant modification in clinical management was proposed in 42 (41.6%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Histopathological revision in a referral NEN center is strongly advised in newly diagnosed GEP-NENs to properly plan prognostic stratification and therapeutic choice.

Effectiveness and safety of baricitinib in rheumatoid arthritis: a monocentric, longitudinal, real-life experience.

OBJECTIVES: Baricitinib is a Janus-kinase (JAK) 1/2 inhibitor, approved for the treatment of moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients with inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs). We report the first real-life experience with baricitinib in a monocentric cohort of unselected RA patients. METHODS: We enrolled consecutive RA patients starting baricitinib. At baseline and after 4, 12, 24 and 48 weeks we assessed the disease activity by composite indices (SDAI, CDAI and DAS28CRP) and ultrasonography, and we recorded any adverse events. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients achieving SDAI remission at week 4. RESULTS: We enrolled 59 patients [(F:M = 50:9, median age 58.1 years (IQR 12.8), median disease duration 144 (IQR 150) months] treated with baricitinib in combination with a csDMARD (52.5%) or monotherapy (47.5%) for a median follow-up of 24 weeks (IQR 36). The 12-month drug retention rate was 74%. At weeks 4, 12, 24 and 48 we observed a significant reduction of DAS28, CDAI and SDAI, global health and pain (p<0.001 for all). After 4 weeks of treatment, 12% of patients achieved SDAI remission. Concomitant csDMARDs, previous biological DMARDs, gender, seropositivity and BMI did not affect the efficacy of baricitinib. Baricitinib allowed a significant reduction in prednisone dose after 12 and 24 weeks and a rapid and sustained ultrasound improvement. No serious adverse events, serious infections or cardiovascular events were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirms the efficacy and safety profile and rapid onset of the effect of baricitinib in RA patients in a real-life setting.