Author
Listed:
- Paula B Araujo
- Sonia Cheng
- Ozgur Mete
- Stefano Serra
- Emilie Morin
- Sylvia L Asa
- Shereen Ezzat
Abstract
Background: The increasing incidence and heterogeneous behavior of intestinal neuroendocrine tumors (iNETs) pose a clinicopathological challenge. Our goal was to decribe the prognostic value of the new WHO 2010 grading and the AJCC/UICC TNM staging systems for iNETs. Moreover, outcomes of patients treated with somatostatin analogs were assessed. Methods: We collected epidemiological and clinicopathological data from 93 patients with histologically proven iNETs including progression and survival outcomes. The WHO 2010 grading and the AJCC/UICC TNM staging systems were applied for all cases. RECIST criteria were used to define progression. Kaplan-Meier analyses for progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were performed. Results: Mean follow-up was 58.6 months (4–213 months). WHO 2010 grading yielded PFS and disease-specific OS of 125.0 and 165.8 months for grade 1 (G1), 100.0 and 144.2 months for G2 and 15.0 and 15.8 months for G3 tumors (p = 0.004 and p = 0.001). Using AJCC staging, patients with stage I and II tumors had no progression and no deaths. Stage III and IV patients demonstrated PFS of 138.4 and 84.7 months (p = 0.003) and disease-specific OS of 210.0 and 112.8 months (p = 0.017). AJCC staging also provided informative PFS (91.2 vs. 50.0 months, p = 0.004) and OS (112.3 vs. 80.0 months, p = 0.005) measures with somatostatin analog use in stage IV patients. Conclusion: Our findings underscore the complementarity of WHO 2010 and AJCC classifications in providing better estimates of iNETS disease outcomes and extend the evidence for somatostatin analog benefit in patients with metastatic disease.
Suggested Citation
Paula B Araujo & Sonia Cheng & Ozgur Mete & Stefano Serra & Emilie Morin & Sylvia L Asa & Shereen Ezzat, 2013.
"Evaluation of the WHO 2010 Grading and AJCC/UICC Staging Systems in Prognostic Behavior of Intestinal Neuroendocrine Tumors,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(4), pages 1-9, April.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0061538
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0061538
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0061538. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.