Peritoneal Metastases from Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: Incidence, Risk Factors and Prognosis

Background Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) are rare neoplasms and data on peritoneal metastases (PM) from these tumors are scarce. Objective The aim of this study was to present population-based data on the incidence, risk factors, and survival of synchronous PM in GEP-NETs....

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Annals of surgical oncology 2017-08, Vol.24 (8), p.2199-2205
Hauptverfasser: Madani, Ariana, Thomassen, Irene, van Gestel, Yvette R. B. M., van der Bilt, Jarmila D. W., Haak, Harm R., de Hingh, Ignace H. J. T., Lemmens, Valery E. P. P.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) are rare neoplasms and data on peritoneal metastases (PM) from these tumors are scarce. Objective The aim of this study was to present population-based data on the incidence, risk factors, and survival of synchronous PM in GEP-NETs. Methods Data from all patients diagnosed with a GEP-NET during 2007–2013 were collected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Age-standardized incidence rates were calculated and risk factors for developing PM were determined using multivariable logistic regression analysis. Survival was investigated using Kaplan–Meier and Cox regression analyses. Results A total of 4114 patients were diagnosed with a GEP-NET. PM were diagnosed in 234 patients (19% of patients with metastasized disease, representing 6% of all GEP-NETs). The incidence of patients diagnosed with PM was 1.6:1,000,000 persons per year. Risk factors for developing PM were higher age (odds ratio [OR] 1.4, 95% CI 1.0–2.0) and primary tumor location in the small intestine (OR 3.5, 95% CI 2.1–5.7) or colon (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.4–4.4). Small intestinal NETs with PM had the best survival, while appendiceal NETs with PM had the poorest survival (5-year survival rates of 67 and 7%, respectively). Multivariate analysis showed that survival in patients with PM was worse compared with patients without metastases; however, the presence of PM among all metastasized patients was not associated with worse survival. Conclusions This nationwide population-based study provides relevant insight into the incidence and risk factors of PM in GEP-NETs, and reveals detailed site-specific data on the presence of PM and survival data that may contribute to develop individualized treatment strategies in patients with these heterogeneous neoplasms.
ISSN:1068-9265
1534-4681
DOI:10.1245/s10434-016-5734-x