Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLamarca, Angela
dc.contributor.authorCives, M.
dc.contributor.authorde Mestier, L.
dc.contributor.authorCrona, J.
dc.contributor.authorSpada, F.
dc.contributor.authorOberg, K.
dc.contributor.authorPavel, M.
dc.contributor.authorAlonso-Gordoa, T.
dc.date.accessioned2021-04-06T15:07:11Z
dc.date.available2021-04-06T15:07:11Z
dc.date.issued2021en
dc.identifier.citationLamarca A, Cives M, de Mestier L, Crona J, Spada F, Oberg K, et al. Advanced small intestine well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (WD-SiNET): A survey of practice on 3rd line treatment. Journal of Neuroendocrinology. 2021;33:162-en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10541/623899
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: Selection of third-line treatment after somatostatin analogues (SSA) and Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy (PRRT) for WD-SiNETs remains challenging. Aim(s): Understand current practice and rationale for decision-making in the 3rd-line setting after SSA and PRRT. Materials and methods: An online survey (replies collected between 5/8/2020 and 21/9/2020) was built. Weighted average (WA) of likelihood of usage between responders (1 very unlikely; 4 very likely) was used to reflect the relevance of factors explored. Results: A total of 28 replies; medical oncologist (53.6%), gastroenterologist (17.9%); United Kingdom (21.4%), Spain (17.9%), Italy (14.3%). Majority from ENETS CoE (57.1%), who followed ENETS guidelines (82.1%). Overall, 3rd-line treatment for WD-SiNETs was: everolimus (EVE) (66.7%), PRRT (18.5%), liver embolization (LE) (7.4%) and interferon (IFN) (3.7%); chemotherapy (0%); decision was based on clinical trial data (59.3%) or personal experience (22.2%). EVE was likely used if Ki-67 < 10% (WA 3.27/4) or age < 70 years (WA 3.23/4), in the 3rd-line setting (WA 3.23/4); irrespective of presence/absence of carcinoid syndrome (CS), rate of progression or extent of disease. Chemotherapy was chosen if rapid progression (within 6 months) (WA 3.35/4), Ki-67 10-20% (WA 2.77/4), negative SSTR2 imaging (WA 2.65/4) or high tumor burden (WA 2.77/4); temozolomide or streptozocin was used with capecitabine or 5-FU (57.7%), FOLFOX (23.1%). LE was selected if presence of CS (WA 3.24/4) or Ki-67 < 10% (WA 2.8/4), after progression to other treatments (WA 2.8/4). IFN was rarely used (WA 1.3/4). Conclusion: Selection of 3rd line therapy is based on multiple factors mainly Ki-67, rate of progression, CS and tumor burden; decisions should be made within a multidisciplinary settingen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.titleAdvanced small intestine well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (WD-SiNET): A survey of practice on 3rd line treatmenten
dc.typeMeetings and Proceedingsen
dc.contributor.departmentThe Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester,en
dc.identifier.journalJournal of Neuroendocrinologyen
dc.description.noteen]


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record