Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background: Gastroenteropancreatic (GEP) neuroendocrine neoplasms with Ki-67 > 20% were subdivided in the most recent 2019 World Health Organization histopathological classification into grade 3 (G3) neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), described as well-differentiated tumors, and neuroendocrine carcinomas, which are described as poorly differentiated tumors. This classification met the demand noted for different prognoses between these subgroups, prompting the need for treatment recommendations for well-differentiated G3 tumors. Methods: We systematically searched medical literature databases and oncology conferences for studies on G3 GEP NET to describe epidemiology, diagnosis, molecular features, and treatments used. We excluded studies that did not discriminate G3 NET data. Data were tabulated and described, and a quality analysis of the reports was performed. Results: We found 23 published studies and six abstracts; 89.7% of studies were retrospective, six were composed exclusively of G3 NETs. Among 761 patients, the median number of patients per study was 15, most were male and older than 60 years, and functional imaging tests were positive in more than 80% of cases. Overall, the scientific evidence supporting the treatment of G3 GEP NETs is limited. For localized disease, resection remains the standard treatment but there is no evidence to support neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy. For advanced disease, capecitabine and temozolomide seems to be the most effective option, with a response rate, median progression-free survival, and median overall survival up to 37.9%, 20.6 months, and 41.2 months, respectively. Conclusion: The latest available data on the epidemiology, diagnosis, molecular changes, and treatment of G3 GEP NET are described. Yet, the level of evidence for treatment recommendations is low, as most studies are retrospective. A treatment algorithm for G3 GEP NET is proposed.

Chemotherapy or radiotherapy before surgery compared with surgery first in pancreatic cancer: results from a review of clinical trials People with pancreatic cancer that can be removed by surgery usually receive chemotherapy after the operation to reduce the risk of the cancer coming back. However, many patients still experience disease relapse. Giving chemotherapy before surgery - the so called neoadjuvant therapy - might help by treating the cancer earlier and selecting patients who are more likely to benefit from surgery. To understand whether this approach works better than the traditional surgery-first method, we combined results from 13 randomized clinical trials that compared these two strategies. We looked at how long patients lived overall, how long they stayed free from cancer, how often surgeons achieved complete tumor removal (called R0 resection), and whether there were more surgical complications. The analyses showed that giving treatment before surgery did not clearly make people live longer overall. However, it did help patients stay free from cancer for a longer time and increased the chances of a complete tumor removal. The risk of serious surgical complications was similar between groups. Patients whose cancers were harder to remove (called borderline resectable) seemed to benefit the most from getting treatment before surgery. In summary, giving chemotherapy before surgery improves some important results and may be especially helpful for people whose tumors are harder to remove. However, it is still not clear whether this approach actually helps patients live longer. So far, the available studies have not shown a clear increase in overall survival, and more large, carefully conducted studies are needed to know for sure whether it truly extends life.

Pancreatic cancer has traditionally been associated with a dismal prognosis, even in early stages of the disease. In recent years, the introduction of newer generation chemotherapy regimens in the adjuvant setting has improved the survival of patients treated with upfront resection. However, there are multiple theoretical advantages to deliver early systemic therapy in patients with localized pancreatic cancer. So far, the evidence supports the use of neoadjuvant therapy for patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. The benefit of this treatment sequence for patients with resectable disease remains elusive. In this review, we summarize the data on adjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer and describe which evidence backs the use of neoadjuvant therapy. Additionally, we address important issues faced in clinical practice when treating patients with localized pancreatic cancer.

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (PanNET) represent the most chemosensitive subtype of NET, with alkylating agents being the mainstay treatment for advanced-stage disease. However, disease progression remains inevitable and presents significant clinical challenges. Advances in tumour molecular profiling have facilitated a deeper understanding of the genomic landscape of PanNET, with the aim of guiding therapeutic strategies. Although actionable mutations and elevated tumour mutational burden (TMB) are exceedingly rare in PanNET, they may offer novel therapeutic opportunities. Emerging evidence suggests that treatment with alkylating agents can induce a hypermutator phenotype in a subset of PanNET, characterised by a marked increase in TMB. This genomic evolution may enhance neoantigen load and thereby potentiate responsiveness to immune checkpoint inhibition. This mini review explores hypermutation in PanNET, with a focus on alkylating-induced changes, and considers the potential of immunotherapy in this context.

Background: Several tyrosine kinase receptors inhibitors (TKIs) have demonstrated antiproliferative effects in well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (NETs). We aimed to summarize and appraise the current evidence of the efficacy of TKIs in patients with different types of NETs. Methods: We performed a systematic review of clinical trials of TKIs in patients with advanced gastroenteropancreatic or lung NETs (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024507379). Population characteristics, efficacy, and safety results were summarized by type of NET. Results: Twenty-eight studies were eligible, totaling 2284 patients. While sunitinib remains the only Food and Drug Administration-approved TKI in patients with NETs (for patients with pancreatic well-differentiated NETs), recent placebo-controlled randomized trials have demonstrated improved response rates and progression-free survival for patients with progressive and pre-treated well-differentiated pancreatic (cabozantinib or surufatinib) or gastrointestinal (GI) NETs (pazopanib, cabozantinib, or surufatinib). There is limited evidence to support the use of a TKI in patients with lung or grade 3 NETs. The toxicity associated with TKIs follows a class effect, with a significant proportion of patients experiencing fatigue, hypertension, and hand–foot skin reactions. Conclusion: TKIs are effective therapies in patients with pancreatic or GI well-differentiated NETs and should be part of the therapeutical sequencing of these patients.

Introduction The role of primary prophylaxis (PP) with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) for patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (MPA) treated with FOLFIRINOX is unknown. We aimed to compare the frequencies of grades 3 or 4 neutropenia (G3/4N) and febrile neutropenia (FN) and survival outcomes according to the use of PP. Methods This is a retrospective study. We included patients with pathologically confirmed MPA treated with FOLFIRINOX in first-line. Patients who received primary prophylaxis (PP group) were compared to patients who received secondary or no G-CSF (no-PP group). Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated using the standard Cox proportional hazard model. To account for potential biases, we performed sensitivity analyses excluding patients who received secondary prophilaxis and treating G-CSF as a time-dependent covariate in extended Cox proportional hazard models. Results The study population consisted of 123 patients. PP was used by 75 patients (61.0%). G3/4 N occurred more frequently among patients without PP (10.7 vs 41.7%; P < .001). There was no difference in the frequency of FN between groups (5.3 vs 8.3%; P = .710). In multivariate analysis, PP was associated with a trend toward improved OS (HR = .66; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] .41 - 1.07; P = .094). In the multivariate model excluding patients with secondary prophylaxis (HR = .54; 95% CI 0.32 - .91; P = .022) and in the time-dependent model (HR = .47; 95% CI 0.28 - .80; P = .005), PP was associated with statistically superior OS. Conclusions Despite the reduction in the frequency of G3/4N, the risk of FN among patients treated with FOLFIRINOX without G-CSF is too low to justify its use in a routine basis. However, given the potential of G-CSF to improve survival in this setting, further studies are warranted to assess its role during treatment with FOLFIRINOX for patients with MPA.

In this Journal Club, Taboada and Riechelmann discuss the importance of a study outlining a novel neuroendocrine neoplasm classification system.

Little is known about the features and outcomes of Brazilian patients with pancreatic cancer. We sought to describe the socio-economic characteristics, patterns of health care access, and survival of patients diagnosed with malignant pancreatic tumors from 2000 to 2014 in São Paulo, Brazil. We included patients with malignant exocrine and non-classified pancreatic tumors according to the International Classifications of Disease (ICD)-O-2 and -O-3, diagnosed from 2000 to 2014, who were registered in the FOSP database. Prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) in the subgroup of patients with ductal or non-specified (adeno)carcinoma were evaluated using Cox proportional hazard model. The study population consists of 6855 patients. Median time from the first visit to diagnosis and treatment were 13 (Interquartile range [IQR] 4–30) and 24 (IQR 8–55) days, respectively. Both intervals were longer for patients treated in the public setting. Median OS was 4.9 months (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 4.7–5.2). Increasing age, male gender, lower educational level, treatment in the public setting, absence of treatment, advanced stage, and treatment from 2000 to 2004 were associated with inferior OS. From 2000–2004 to 2010–2014, no improvement in OS was seen for patients treated in the public setting. Survival of patients with malignant pancreatic tumors remains dismal. Socioeconomical variables, especially health care funding, are major determinants of survival. Further work is necessary to decrease inequalities in access to medical care for patients with pancreatic cancer in Brazil.

Carcinoid syndrome (CSy) is a constellation of symptoms that may commonly present in patients with well differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), with somatostatin analogs (SSAs) being the first-line option for symptom management. However, symptomatic progression eventually occurs and in this scenario of a refractory CSy; several treatment options have been studied such as dose escalation of SSA, interferon and liver-directed therapies. Nevertheless, recent phase III trials have contributed to the understanding and management of this condition. We performed a comprehensive review of interventional studies examining refractory CSy to provide the evidence for current treatment options and propose a treatment sequence.

Background: There are no randomized data to guide treatment decisions for patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma following first-line FOLFIRINOX. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies using gemcitabine-based chemotherapy after FOLFIRINOX to assess treatment efficacy and toxicity. Methods: We included studies published between 2011 and 2018 that evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of gemcitabine-based chemotherapy after FOLFIRINOX in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science. Primary outcomes were objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), any grade 3/4 toxicity rate, and progression-free survival (PFS). We used the random-effects model to generate pooled estimates for proportions. Results: Sixteen studies met the eligibility criteria. Overall, ORR was 10.8%, DCR was 41.1%, and any grade 3/4 toxicity rate was 28.6%. In subgroup analyses, gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel was associated with superior ORR (14.4 versus 8.4%; p = 0.038) and DCR (53.5 versus 30.5%; p < 0.001) compared with single-agent gemcitabine. Median PFS ranged from 1.9 to 6.4 months and numerically favored gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel. Conclusions: Our study suggests gemcitabine-based chemotherapy likely outperforms best supportive care after FOLFIRINOX in advanced pancreatic cancer. Also, gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel seems to be more active than single-agent gemcitabine (CRD42018100421).