CT-based radiomics to distinguish progressive from stable neuroendocrine liver metastases treated with somatostatin analogues: an explorative study.

BACKGROUND: Accurate response evaluation in patients with neuroendocrine liver metastases (NELM) remains a challenge. Radiomics has shown promising results regarding response assessment. PURPOSE: To differentiate progressive (PD) from stable disease (SD) with radiomics in patients with NELM undergoing somatostatin analogue (SSA) treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 46 patients with histologically confirmed gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NET) with ≥1 NELM and ≥2 computed tomography (CT) scans were included. Response was assessed with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST1.1). Hepatic target lesions were manually delineated and analyzed with radiomics. Radiomics features were extracted from each NELM on both arterial-phase (AP) and portal-venous-phase (PVP) CT. Multiple instance learning with regularized logistic regression via LASSO penalization (with threefold cross-validation) was used to classify response. Three models were computed: (i) AP model; (ii) PVP model; and (iii) AP + PVP model for a lesion-based and patient-based outcome. Next, clinical features were added to each model. RESULTS: In total, 19 (40%) patients had PD. Median follow-up was 13 months (range 1-50 months). Radiomics models could not accurately classify response (area under the curve 0.44-0.60). Adding clinical variables to the radiomics models did not significantly improve the performance of any model. CONCLUSION: Radiomics features were not able to accurately classify response of NELM on surveillance CT scans during SSA treatment.

Change in incidence, characteristics and management of colorectal neuroendocrine tumours in the Netherlands in the last decade.

BACKGROUND: Neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) are rare. However, a rising incidence has been reported over the past decades. For colorectal NETs, this is presumably caused by an increased awareness of colorectal diseases and colonoscopic procedures. This study aims to analyse the change in incidence of colorectal NETs, characteristics and management and evaluate the proportion of colorectal NETs detected in a national colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programme. METHODS: Histopathological reports on colorectal well-differentiated NETs detected between 2006 and 2016 were collected from the Dutch pathology database (PALGA) containing nationwide histo- and cytopathology reports of all pathology laboratories in the Netherlands. RESULTS: Colorectal NETs were detected in 1055 individuals. Increasing incidence rates were observed from 0.36 per 100,000 inhabitants in 2006 to 0.75 per 100,000 inhabitants in 2011 (p value < 0.001), remaining stable afterward. Most NETs were grade I (73.5%) and detected in the rectum (76.4%). The majority (88.2%) were detected by colonoscopy, and the final intervention depended significantly on primary location of the tumour; 94.6% of rectal NETs were endoscopically removed, whereas 61.0% of colonic NETs were removed by surgery. There was an increase in local excision both of rectal and colonic NETs over the years instead of radical resection. Screening for CRC started in 2014 and contributed by detecting 32% of the diagnosed colorectal NETs within the invited age group, of which 94.6% were detected at an early stage. CONCLUSION: The incidence of reported colorectal NETs in the Netherlands doubled over the last decade. The Dutch CRC screening programme had a clear contribution to colorectal NETs incidence among its target population. A shift to more local management of detected lesions was observed over time.

Nutritional and vitamin status in patients with neuroendocrine neoplasms.

Symptoms of gastroenteropancreatic located neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs) are often related to food intake and manifest as abdominal pain or diarrhoea which can influence patients nutritional status. Malnutrition is common in cancer patients and influences quality of life, treatment options and survival but is also present in up to 40% of patients with GEP-NENs. As part of malnutrition there are often deficiencies in fat-soluble vitamins, mainly vitamin D. Little knowledge exists on trace elements. Several factors influence the development of malnutrition such as size and localisation of the primary tumour as well as metastases, side effects from treatment but also hormone production of the tumour itself. One of the main influencing factors leading to malnutrition is diarrhoea which leads to dehydration and electrolyte disturbances. Treatment of diarrhoea should be guided by its cause. Screening for malnutrition should be part of routine care in every GEP-NEN patient. Multidisciplinary treatment including dietician support is necessary for all malnourished patients with GEP-NENs.

Risk of venous thromboembolism in lung cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To evaluate venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk factors in lung cancer patients. RECENT FINDINGS: VTE incidence is around 40-100 cases per 1000 person-years in lung carcinoma patients vs. an estimated 1-2 cases per 1000 person-years in the general population. Patients with adenocarcinoma have higher risk of VTE than patients with squamous cell lung carcinoma. VTE risk appears two-fold higher in nonsmall-cell lung cancer than in small-cell lung cancer patients. Other risk factors are pneumonectomy, metastatic disease, use of specific chemotherapeutic drugs in combination with novel targeted drugs, such as antiangiogenic agents, and elevated prechemotherapy platelet counts. Tissue factor (TF), the initiator of the clotting cascade, may be (over)expressed in lung carcinoma cells. Active TF-bearing microparticles, which may originate from the tumour cells themselves, have been found in the circulation of cancer patients. Microparticle-associated TF activity may provide a link between cancer and thrombosis and play a decisive role in the pathogenesis of the prothrombotic state in cancer patients. SUMMARY: Risk factors of VTE in lung cancer patients are adenocarcinoma, metastatic disease, pneumonectomy and anticancer therapy including chemotherapy and anti-VEGF targeted drugs. Other risk factors include pretreatment platelet counts and active TF-expressing circulating microparticles.

Sequential versus combination chemotherapy with capecitabine, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin in advanced colorectal cancer (CAIRO): a phase III randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimum use of cytotoxic drugs for advanced colorectal cancer has not been defined. Our aim was to investigate whether combination treatment is better than sequential administration of the same drugs in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. METHODS: We randomly assigned 820 patients with advanced colorectal cancer to receive either first-line treatment with capecitabine, second-line irinotecan, and third-line capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (sequential treatment; n=410) or first-line treatment capecitabine plus irinotecan and second-line capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (combination treatment; n=410). The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov with the number NCT00312000. FINDINGS: 17 patients (nine in the sequential treatment group, eight in the combination group) were found to be ineligible and were excluded from the analysis. 675 (84%) patients died during the study: 336 in the sequential group and 339 in the combination group. Median overall survival was 16.3 (95% CI 14.3-18.1) months for sequential treatment and 17.4 (15.2-19.2) months for combination treatment (p=0.3281). The hazard ratio for combination versus sequential treatment was 0.92 (95% CI 0.79-1.08; p=0.3281). The frequency of grade 3-4 toxicity over all lines of treatment did not differ significantly between the two groups, except for grade 3 hand-foot syndrome, which occurred more often with sequential treatment than with combination treatment (13%vs 7%; p=0.004). INTERPRETATION: Combination treatment does not significantly improve overall survival compared with the sequential use of cytotoxic drugs in advanced colorectal cancer. Thus sequential treatment remains a valid option for patients with advanced colorectal cancer.