Primary Tumor Resection Offers Survival Benefit in Patients with Metastatic Midgut Neuroendocrine Tumors

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (8) ◽  
pp. 2795-2803 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monica Polcz ◽  
Cameron Schlegel ◽  
Gretchen C. Edwards ◽  
Fei Wang ◽  
Marcus Tan ◽  
...  
Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (8) ◽  
pp. 2246
Author(s):  
Marina Tsoli ◽  
Maria-Eleni Spei ◽  
Göran Wallin ◽  
Gregory Kaltsas ◽  
Kosmas Daskalakis

The role of primary tumor resection in patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (PanNENs) and unresectable distant metastases remains controversial. We aimed to evaluate the effect of palliative primary tumor resection (PPTR) on overall survival (OS) in this setting. We searched the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and SCOPUS databases up to January 2020 and used the Newcastle–Ottawa scale (NOS) criteria to assess quality/risk of bias. A total of 5661 articles were screened. In 10 studies, 5551 unique patients with stage IV PanNEN and unresectable metastases were included. The five-year OS for PanNEN patients undergoing PPTR in stage IV was 56.6% vs. 23.9% in the non-surgically treated patients (random effects relative risk (RR): 1.70; 95% CI: 1.53–1.89). Adjusted analysis of pooled hazard ratios (HR) confirmed longer OS in PanNEN patients undergoing PPTR (random effects HR: 2.67; 95% CI: 2.24–3.18). Cumulative OS analysis confirmed an attenuated survival benefit over time. The complication rate of PPTR was as high as 27%. In conclusion, PPTR may exert a survival benefit in stage IV PanNEN. However, the included studies were subject to selection bias, and special consideration should be given to PPTR anchored to a multimodal treatment strategy. Further longitudinal studies are warranted, with long-term follow-up addressing the survival outcomes associated with surgery in stage IV disease.


2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (11) ◽  
pp. 4525-4532 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Gangi ◽  
Nicholas Manguso ◽  
Jun Gong ◽  
Jessica S. Crystal ◽  
Shirley C. Paski ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1099-1099
Author(s):  
Nadeem Bilani ◽  
Leah Elson ◽  
Elizabeth Blessing Elimimian ◽  
Hong Liang ◽  
Zeina A. Nahleh

1099 Background: There is no clear evidence of a survival benefit of primary tumor resection in patients with stage IV breast cancer (BC). This large study evaluated factors associated with undergoing primary tumor resection, and whether resection at the primary site, or distant site resection (metastasectomy), was associated with better overall survival (OS). Methods: This retrospective analysis of stage IV BC cases used the 2004-2016 National Cancer Database (NCDB) population. To evaluate variables associated with primary tumor resection, we used univariate analyses (chi-squared and Wilcoxon rank-sum test), followed by multivariate logistic regression. Consequently, we conducted multivariate Cox regression survival analyses on the following groups: 1) all stage IV BC patients; 2) a subset of those with only 1 site of metastasis; and 3) another subset with metastasis to > 1 distant site. Results: A total of 54,871 stage IV BC patients were included in this analysis. From this, we analyzed a subset with only 1 distant site involved (n = 30,480) and another subset with multiple secondary sites (n = 17,344). In total, 15,661 patients underwent surgery at the primary site: 11,451 (73.1%) were non-Hispanic white; 2479 (15.8%) were non-Hispanic black; 981 (6.3%) were Hispanic and 484 (3.1%) were Asian. Variables associated with undergoing resection of the primary tumor were: age, race, Charlson/Deyo score, insurance and facility type, involved breast quadrant, receptor status, N-staging, extent of metastasis and year of diagnosis. Survival analysis of all stage IV patients showed that both lumpectomy (HR 0.59, 95% CI: 0.57-0.62, p < 0.0001) and mastectomy (HR 0.62, 95% CI: 0.60-0.64, p < 0.0001) were associated with better OS when compared to no surgery. The statistical effect was larger in the subgroup with metastasis to 1 site, but still significant in the subgroup with multiple metastatic sites. Distant site resection also yielded a survival benefit compared to no metastasectomy across all 3 groups. In the subgroup with metastasis to only 1 site, metastasectomy was associated with better OS when the metastatic site was liver (HR 0.60, 95% CI: 0.43-0.82, p = 0.0018), lung (HR 0.47, 95% CI: 0.37-0.61, p < 0.0001), and brain (HR 0.70, 95% CI: 0.55-0.88, p = 0.0022). Conclusions: Across all 3 patient subgroups, primary tumor resection (lumpectomy or mastectomy) and metastasectomy were associated with improved OS. Additional stratified analysis in the subgroup with only 1 metastatic site showed benefit of metastasectomy when that site was the lung, liver or brain.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document