Abstract #805732: Duodenal Neuroendocrine Tumor with Liver Metastasis with High Circulating Levels of Calcitonin and Negative Octreoscan and Normal Chromogranin-A

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 ◽  
pp. 216-217
Author(s):  
Jose Paz-Ibarra
Keyword(s):  
Liver Metastasis ◽  
Neuroendocrine Tumor ◽  
Chromogranin A ◽  
Circulating Levels

scholarly journals A Case of Primary Mesenteric Carcinoid Tumor (Neuroendocrine Tumor : NET G1) with Liver Metastasis, Coexisted with Rectal Cancer

2014 ◽  
Vol 39 (5) ◽  
pp. 971-978
Author(s):  
Masakazu Ikenaga ◽  
Ho Min Kim ◽  
Yusuke Matsuura ◽  
Toshiki Hitora ◽  
Masaki Hirota ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Liver Metastasis ◽  
Neuroendocrine Tumor ◽  
Carcinoid Tumor

scholarly journals A case report of neuroendocrine tumor (G3) at lower rectum with liver metastasis

Medicine ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 97 (38) ◽  
pp. e12423 ◽  
Author(s):  
Huayan Yuan ◽  
Yuanyuan Yang ◽  
Wuyi Wang ◽  
Yong Cheng
Keyword(s):  
Case Report ◽  
Liver Metastasis ◽  
Neuroendocrine Tumor ◽  
Lower Rectum

scholarly journals Gastric neuroendocrine tumor treated with endoscopic submucosal dissection

2016 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 176-179
Author(s):  
Pawel Bojar ◽  
Jaroslaw Swatek ◽  
Jaroslaw Drabko ◽  
Katarzyna Golec ◽  
Anna Ostrowska ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection ◽  
Neuroendocrine Tumor ◽  
Effective Treatment ◽  
Male Patient ◽  
Microscopic Examination ◽  
Chromogranin A ◽  
Primary Diagnosis ◽  
Biopsy Sample ◽  
Submucosal Dissection ◽  
Proper Diagnosis

Abstract A case of a 59-year-old male patient with gastric neuroendocrine tumor which was misdiagnosed as adenocarcinoma, is presented. Herein, primary diagnosis was made due to the similarity of endoscopic pictures of both diseases and dues to the inappropriate interpretation of a small biopsy sample. The patient was qualified for endoscopic submucosal dissection. Microscopic examination of whole lesion, supplemented by immmunohistochemical reactions (chromogranin A, synaptophysin, cytokeratins 7 and 20, Ki67) revealed gastric neuroendocrine tumor (NET) G2. The lesson learnt is that to provide effective treatment to the patient, it is necessary to use all available methods to make a proper diagnosis and to distinguish the suspected disease from others with similar features.

Abstract 3633: Prognostic value of chromogranin A and alkaline phosphatase in patients with advanced neuroendocrine tumor

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monica Ter-Minassian ◽  
Jennifer A. Chan ◽  
Susanne M. Hooshmand ◽  
Lauren K. Brais ◽  
Anastassia Daskalova ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Alkaline Phosphatase ◽  
Neuroendocrine Tumor ◽  
Chromogranin A ◽  
Prognostic Value

Application of post-embedding immunogold technique in the diagnostic evaluation of fine-needle aspirates of neuroendocrine tumors

1991 ◽  
Vol 49 ◽  
pp. 274-275
Author(s):  
M. Diocee ◽  
E. Ravinsky ◽  
G. Quinonez
Keyword(s):  
Neuroendocrine Tumor ◽  
Chromogranin A ◽  
Room Temperature ◽  
Diagnostic Feature ◽  
Electron Microscopic ◽  
Sodium Metaperiodate ◽  
Fine Needle ◽  
Fine Needle Aspirates ◽  
Transmission Electron ◽  
Diamond Knife

The diagnostic feature of a neuroendocrine tumor by transmission electron microscopy (TEM) is the presence of neurosecretory granules (NSG). However, other electron dense inclusions like lipid droplets and primary lysosomes may mimic NSC. In this study, post-embedding immunogold (PEI) technique using chromogranin A antibody has been used to confirm the ultrastructural impression of neuroendocrine tumor. This technique is contrasted with immunohistochemical results.Material for this study was obtained from 5 transabdominal fine needle aspirates of multiple hepatic masses of unknown nature, processed for light and electron microscopic examinations and immunohistochemistry. Thin gold sections were cut (Reichart) with a Diatome diamond knife and mounted on 200 mesh nickel grids. A nickel grid with section side down was placed on drops of 11% aqueous sodium metaperiodate for 30 minutes, and was then washed with distilled water. Grids were incubated in 1% albumin for 15 minutes and transferred directly to chromogranin A and incubated for 60 minutes at room temperature.

Inefficacy of chromogranin a assays as neuroendocrine tumor diagnostic tools compared to the NETest.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4612-4612
Author(s):  
Anna Malczewska ◽  
Mark S. Kidd ◽  
Alexandra Kitz ◽  
Beata Kos-Kudla ◽  
Irvin Mark Modlin
Keyword(s):  
Neuroendocrine Tumor ◽  
Chromogranin A ◽  
Pearson Correlation ◽  
Insurance Companies ◽  
Diagnostic Tools ◽  
Entire Group ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Nccn Guidelines ◽  
The Usa ◽  
High Concordance

4612 Background: Chromogranin A (CgA) remains a commonly used diagnostic and monitoring tool for neuroendocrine tumor disease despite NCCN guidelines identifying it as a category 3 (major concerns about utility) biomarker. Several commercial assays have been developed to measure this protein (or its fragments) and are available both at CLIA-certified laboratories (USA) as well as in NET Centres of Excellence (CoEs - Europe). CgA is typically reimbursed by insurance companies and appears in several guidelines (e.g., ENETS). We sought to directly evaluate the accuracy of detecting NET disease using two different CgA assays, one in the USA (NEOLISA, EuroDiagnostica, IBL-America, CLIA-certified laboratory) and one in an ENETS CoE (CgA ELISA, Demeditec Diagnostics, Germany). We compared the results to the NETest, a circulating mRNA assay, recently validated as an IVD for NETs. Methods: Patients: NETs ( n=258) including lung: n=43; duodenum n=9; gastric: n=44; pancreas: n=67; small bowel: n=40; appendix: n=10; rectum: n=45. No image-evidence of disease ( n=122) (IND) and image-positive disease (IPD) ( n=136). CgA assays (plasma): NEOLISA, ULN >108ng/ml, DD: ULN>99ng/ml. Data mean±SEM. NETest (whole blood): qRT-PCR - multianalyte algorithmic analyses, CLIA-laboratory. All samples de-identified and assessed blinded. Statistics: Mann-Whitney U-test, Pearson correlation & McNemar-test. Results: In the entire group ( n=258), NEOLISA assay CgA levels were significantly ( p<0.0001) higher (216±91ng/ml) vs. the DD-assay (76±8ng/ml). The assays exhibited a high concordance in output (Pearson r=0.81, p<0.0001), but there were 10.9% ( n=31) discordant results. This reflected the NEOLISA assay detecting more CgA-positive samples. IPD group: CgA-positives were detected in 48/136 (35%, NEOLISA) vs. 28 (21%, DD-assay). McNemar’s Chi2=15.04, p<0.001 OR: 11.0, indicating the NEOLISA was significantly better than the DD-assay. The NETest, in contrast, was positive in 135/136 (99%; OR: 87-106, p<0.0001). IND group: CgA-positives were detected in 12/122 (10%, NEOLISA) vs. 9 (7%, DD-assay; p=NS). The majority (75%) of positives were associated with gastric NETs. The NETest was positive in 7 (6%); 4 were gastric NETs and 3 exhibited elevated CgA. Conclusions: Two standard CgA assays used for NET management (one accepted by Medicare in the USA, the second used at a CoE in Europe) only detect NET disease in 21-35% of cases. In contrast, a circulating mRNA fingerprint, the NETest, is ~99% accurate for detecting NET disease.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document