The prognostic role of diabetes mellitus (DM) in advanced enteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) is unclear. Progression free survival (PFS) was assessed in post-hoc analyses of the 96-week, phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled CLARINET study of lanreotide 120 mg in patients with advanced non-functional enteropancreatic NETs with DM (with/without metformin) and without DM. Of 204 patients, there were 79 with DM (lanreotide, n = 42 {metformin, n = 14}; placebo, n = 37 {metformin, n = 10}) and 125 without DM (lanreotide, n = 59; placebo, n = 66). Median PFS was 96.0 and 98.0 weeks with and without DM, respectively (hazard ratio 1.20 {95% confidence interval 0.79 to 1.82}; p = 0.380). No difference in PFS was observed in lanreotide-treated patients with/without DM (p = 0.8476). In the placebo group, median PFS was numerically shorter with versus without DM (p = 0.052) and was significantly longer in patients with DM and metformin (85.7 weeks) versus without metformin (38.7 weeks; p = 0.009). Multivariable Cox analyses showed that DM at baseline was not associated with PFS (p = 0.079); lanreotide was significantly associated with lower disease progression risk (p = 0.017). Lanreotide efficacy was confirmed in patients with advanced enteropancreatic NETs, regardless of diabetic status; DM was not a negative prognostic factor. A potential antitumor effect of metformin was observed in patients receiving placebo.

OBJECTIVE:The aim of the study was to assess the impact of systemic markers of inflammation on the outcomes in patients with neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) treated with everolimus or placebo (as measured by baseline neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio [NLR] and lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio [LMR]).METHODS:Patient data (gastrointestinal, pancreatic, and lung NETs) from 2 large phase 3 studies, RADIANT-3 (n = 410) and RADIANT-4 (n = 302), were pooled and analyzed. The primary end point was centrally assessed progression-free survival (PFS) as estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method.RESULTS:In the pooled population, elevated LMR (median PFS, 11.1 months; 95% confidence interval, 9.3-13.7; hazard ratio, 0.69; P < 0.001) and reduced NLR (median PFS, 10.8 months; 95% confidence interval, 9.2-11.7; hazard ratio, 0.75; P = 0.0060) correlated with longer PFS among all patients. These markers were also found to be prognostic in the everolimus- and placebo-treated subgroups.CONCLUSIONS:Data from this study suggest that LMR and NLR are robust prognostic markers for NETs and could potentially be used to identify patients who may receive or are receiving the most benefit from targeted therapies. As both are derived from a complete blood count, they can be routinely used in clinical practice, providing valuable information to clinicians and patients alike.

BACKGROUND Hyperglycemia and hypercholesterolemia are class effects of mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors such as everolimus. This post hoc pooled analysis assessed the potential impact of these events on the efficacy of everolimus. METHODS Patients with advanced, low‐ or intermediate‐grade pancreatic, gastrointestinal, or lung neuroendocrine tumors received either oral everolimus at 10 mg/d or a placebo in the RAD001 in Advanced Neuroendocrine Tumors 3 (RADIANT‐3) and RAD001 in Advanced Neuroendocrine Tumors 4 (RADIANT‐4) trials. A landmark progression‐free survival (PFS) analysis by central review was performed for patients treated for at least 16 weeks (n = 308) and according to the occurrence of any‐grade adverse events (AEs) within this treatment period. RESULTS The overall PFS with everolimus from the pooled analysis was 11.4 months (95% confidence interval, 11.01‐13.93 months), which was consistent with the findings of RADIANT‐3 and RADIANT‐4. Overall, 19.1% and 9.8% of patients in RADIANT‐3 and 11.9% and 6.4% of patients in RADIANT‐4 developed any‐grade hyperglycemia and hypercholesterolemia, respectively (regardless of the study drug). The duration of everolimus exposure was longer in patients who developed these AEs versus patients without these AEs. Overall, 308 patients were exposed to treatment for at least 16 weeks (hyperglycemia, 39 of 269 patients; hypercholesterolemia, 20 of 288 patients). No association was observed between the development of these AEs and PFS (18.8 and 14.1 months with and without hyperglycemia, respectively, and 14.1 and 14.8 months with and without hypercholesterolemia, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Although limitations apply because of the small number of AEs observed, there was no significant impact of these AEs on PFS; this suggests similar efficacy in the presence or absence of these events.

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are a relatively rare group of heterogeneous neoplasms. The most significant advance in therapy of NETs has been the advent of the somatostatin analog octreotide, which represents a cornerstone in their management and dramatically changed the therapeutic landscape. Octreotide long-acting release (LAR) was developed to overcome some of the limitations of octreotide. Several clinical studies, including PROMID and RADIANT-2, have validated the clinical benefits of octreotide LAR in NETs, with tumor shrinkage in about 10% of patients and tumor stabilization in roughly half of cases. While the use of octreotide LAR is well-consolidated in NETs, some open questions remain. These include the use of high-dose octreotide LAR, as there is evidence that higher dose may provide longer disease control, and nonstandard treatment schedules, with administration every 21 days instead of 28 days, as well as their use in combination with targeted agents or peptide receptor radiotherapy in clinical practice. After 3 decades of clinical experience with octreotide LAR, the drug has a well-established safety profile. It is well-tolerated and treatment discontinuations due to adverse events are uncommon. One exception is cholelithiasis, which may increase with longer duration of treatment. According to the literature data, octreotide LAR is currently recommended in both functioning and nonfunctioning advanced NETs. This review summarizes the available clinical data with octreotide LAR and also provides future perspectives on its possible uses in patients with NETs.

BACKGROUND & AIMS:Metformin seems to have anticancer effects. However, it is not clear whether use of glycemia and metformin affect outcomes of patients with advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs). We investigated the association between glycemia and progression-free survival (PFS) of patients with pNETs treated with everolimus and/or somatostatin analogues, as well as the association between metformin use and PFS time.METHODS:We performed a retrospective analysis of 445 patients with advanced pNET treated at 24 medical centers in Italy from 1999 through 2015. Data on levels of glycemia were collected at time of diagnosis of pNET, before treatment initiation, and during treatment with everolimus (with or without somatostatin analogues), octreotide, or lanreotide. Diabetes was defined as prior or current use of glycemia control medication and/or fasting plasma glucose level ≥ 126 mg/dL, hemoglobin A1c ≥ 6.5% (48 mmol/L), or a random sample of plasma glucose ≥ 200 mg/dL (11.1 mmol/L), with reported classic symptoms of hyperglycemia or hyperglycemic crisis. Patients were assigned to groups based on diagnosis of diabetes before or during antitumor therapy. PFS was compared between patients with vs without diabetes. Among patients with diabetes, the association between metformin use and PFS was assessed. We performed sensitivity and landmark analyses to exclude patients who developed diabetes while receiving cancer treatment and to exclude a potential immortal time bias related to metformin intake.RESULTS:PFS was significantly longer in patients with diabetes (median, 32.0 months) than without diabetes (median, 15.1 months) (hazard ratio for patients with vs without diabetes, 0.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-0.80; P = .0002). PFS of patients treated with metformin was significantly longer (median PFS, 44.2 months) than for patients without diabetes (hazard ratio for survival of patients with diabetes receiving metformin vs without diabetes, 0.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.32-0.62; P < .00001) and longer than for patients with diabetes receiving other treatments (median PFS, 20.8 months; hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-0.69; P < .0001). In multivariable analysis, adjusted for other factors associated with outcomes, metformin was associated with longer PFS but level of glycemia was not. Metformin was associated with increased PFS of patients receiving somatostatin analogues and in those receiving everolimus, with or without somatostatin analogues. Sensitivity and landmark analyses produced similar results.CONCLUSIONS:In a retrospective study of patients with pNETs, we found a significant association between metformin use and longer PFS.

No validated prognostic tool is available for predicting overall survival (OS) of patients with well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (WDNETs). This study, conducted in three independent cohorts of patients from five different European countries, aimed to develop and validate a classification prognostic score for OS in patients with stage IV WDNETs. We retrospectively collected data on 1387 patients: (i) patients treated at the Istituto Nazionale Tumori (Milan, Italy; n = 515); (ii) European cohort of rare NET patients included in the European RARECAREnet database (n = 457); (iii) Italian multicentric cohort of pancreatic NET (pNETs) patients treated at 24 Italian institutions (n = 415). The score was developed using data from patients included in cohort (i) (training set); external validation was performed by applying the score to the data of the two independent cohorts (ii) and (iii) evaluating both calibration and discriminative ability (Harrell C statistic). We used data on age, primary tumor site, metastasis (synchronous vs metachronous), Ki-67, functional status and primary surgery to build the score, which was developed for classifying patients into three groups with differential 10-year OS: (I) favorable risk group: 10-year OS ≥70%; (II) intermediate risk group: 30% ≤ 10-year OS < 70%; (III) poor risk group: 10-year OS <30%. The Harrell C statistic was 0.661 in the training set, and 0.626 and 0.601 in the RARECAREnet and Italian multicentric validation sets, respectively. In conclusion, based on the analysis of three 'field-practice' cohorts collected in different settings, we defined and validated a prognostic score to classify patients into three groups with different long-term prognoses.

Background: Recently, everolimus was shown to improve median progression-free survival (PFS) by 7.1 months in patients with advanced, progressive, well-differentiated, nonfunctional neuroendocrine tumors (NET) of lung or gastrointestinal (GI) tract compared with placebo (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.35-0.67; P<0.00001) in the Phase III, RADIANT-4 study. This post hocanalysis evaluates the impact of prior therapies (somatostatin analogs [SSA], chemotherapy, and radiotherapy) on everolimus activity. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01524783. Patients and methods: Patients were randomized (2: 1) to everolimus 10 mg/day or placebo, both with best supportive care. Subgroups of patients who received prior SSA, chemotherapy, or radiotherapy (including peptide receptor radionuclide therapy) were analyzed and reported. Results: A total of 302 patients were enrolled, of whom, 163 (54%) had any prior SSA use (mostly for tumor control), 77 (25%) received chemotherapy, and 63 (21%) were previously exposed to radiotherapy. Patients who received everolimus had longer median PFS compared with placebo, regardless of previous SSA (with SSA: 11.1 vs 4.5 months [HR, 0.56 {95% CI, 0.37-0.85}]; without SSA: 9.5 vs 3.7 months [0.57 {0.36-0.89}]), chemotherapy (with chemotherapy: 9.2 vs 2.1 months [0.35 {0.19-0.64}]; without chemotherapy: 11.2 vs 5.4 months [0.60 {0.42-0.86}]), or radiotherapy (with radiotherapy: 9.2 vs 3.0 months [0.47 {0.24-0.94}]; without radiotherapy: 11 vs 5.1 months [0.59 {0.42-0.83}]) exposure. The most frequent drug-related adverse events included stomatitis (59%-65%), fatigue (27%-35%), and diarrhea (24%-34%) among the subgroups. Conclusion: These results suggest that everolimus improves PFS in patients with advanced, progressive lung or GI NET, regardless of prior therapies. Safety findings were consistent with the known safety profile of everolimus in NET.

Purpose: The RADIANT-4 randomized phase 3 study demonstrated significant prolongation of median progression-free survival (PFS) with everolimus compared to placebo (11.0 [95% CI 9.2-13.3] vs. 3.9 [95% CI 3.6-7.4] months) in patients with advanced, progressive, nonfunctional gastrointestinal (GI) and lung neuroendocrine tumors (NET). This analysis specifically evaluated NET patients with GI and unknown primary origin. Methods: Patients in the RADIANT-4 trial were randomized 2:1 to everolimus 10 mg/day or placebo. The effect of everolimus on PFS was evaluated in patients with NET of the GI tract or unknown primary site. Results: Of the 302 patients enrolled, 175 had GI NET (everolimus, 118; placebo, 57) and 36 had unknown primary (everolimus, 23; placebo, 13). In the GI subset, the median PFS by central review was 13.1 months (95% CI 9.2-17.3) in the everolimus arm versus 5.4 months (95% CI 3.6-9.3) in the placebo arm; the hazard ratio (HR) was 0.56 (95% CI 0.37-0.84). In the unknown primary patients, the median PFS was 13.6 months (95% CI 4.1-not evaluable) for everolimus versus 7.5 months (95% CI 1.9-18.5) for placebo; the HR was 0.60 (95% CI 0.24-1.51). Everolimus efficacy was also demonstrated in both midgut and non-midgut populations; a 40-46% reduction in the risk of progression or death was reported for patients in the combined GI and unknown primary subgroup. Everolimus had a benefit regardless of prior somatostatin analog therapy. Conclusions: Everolimus showed a clinically meaningful PFS benefit in patients with advanced progressive nonfunctional NET of GI and unknown primary, consistent with the overall RADIANT-4 results, providing an effective new standard treatment option in this patient population and filling an unmet treatment need for these patients.

Abstract Introduction: Several studies have correlated the diabetic status with increased cancer risk and worse cancer prognosis, while metformin (MET) use is associated with a better prognosis. MET could display antitumor effects by modifying systemic metabolism, e.g. by decreasing of blood glucose, insulin and IGF1 levels, or by affecting cancer cell metabolism and proliferation, e.g. through AMPK activation and inhibition of protein/lipid synthesis. Preliminary findings of the PRIME-net retrospective study, conducted on 445 Italian pts, suggested that the addition of MET to EVE and/or SSAs provides clinical benefit in diabetic patient with advanced pancreatic NETs. Methods: To exclude the possibility that the “time-on-treatment bias” could affect our results, with the risk that an early interruption of EVE or SSA-therapy due to early disease progression may result in lower pt exposure to these drugs and a consequently lower incidence of diabetes in poor responders, a sensitivity analysis on the PRIME-net study population was performed. The analysis considered only diabetics at baseline (BD), thus excluding pts who developed on-treatment diabetes as an adverse event (AE). All statistical tests were two-tailed and p-values<0·05 were considered significant. Results: Out of 445 pts, 237 were diabetics. Of them, 179 had baseline diabetes (BD) while 57 developed on-treatment diabetes as an adverse event. Among pts with BD, 80 (44.7%) received MET, while 99 (55.3%) were not treated with MET, but received other treatments including insulin. mPFS was 24.7 mo in pts with BD and 15.1 mo in normoglycemic ones (HR 0.70, 95%CI 0.55-0.91; p=0.007). In pts on MET therapy, mPFS was 43.7 mo (HR vs normoglycemic pts 0.52, 95%CI 0.36-0.76, p=0.0006), while it was 20.8 mo in pts not receiving MET (HR vs normoglycemic pts 0.87, 95%CI 0.65-1.17, p=0.37). Conclusions: This sensitivity analysis confirms results emerged from the main analysis, thus demonstrating a mPFS advantage in diabetic patients with advanced pNETs patients receiving MET in combination with EVE and/or SSAs. Prospective investigations are ongoing to test the antitumor activity of MET in combination with everolimus and SSAs in normoglycaemic pts with advanced pNETs. Protocol number INT 85/15, approved by Ethical committee of fondazione IRCCS Istituto Tumori Milano on 15 June 2015. Citation Format: Sara Pusceddu, Claudio Vernieri, Massimo Di Maio, Femia Daniela, Natalie Prinzi, Riccardo Marconcini, Francesca Spada, Sara Massironi, Alberto Bongiovanni, Maria Pia Brizzi, Davide Campana, Antongiulio Faggiano, Dario Giuffrida, Gianfranco Delle Fave, Sara Cingarlini, Francesca Aroldi, Lorenzo Antonuzzo, Rossana Berardi, Laura Catena, Roberto Buzzoni, Filippo de Braud. Impact of metformin on progression-free survival in diabetic patients with advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) receiving everolimus and/or somatostatin analogues: A sensitivity analysis of the PRIME-NET (pancreatic multicentric, retrospective, italian metformin) study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2017; 2017 Apr 1-5; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(13 Suppl):Abstract nr LB-256. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2017-LB-256

Metformin (MET) has recently emerged as a potentially active agent in cancer prevention and treatment. MET is thought to exert its antitumor effects either via modification of systemic metabolism or through cell-autonomous effects (e.g., activation of AMPK and inhibition of the mTOR pathway). Preliminary findings of the PRIME-NET study suggest that the addition of MET to treatment with everolimus (EVE) and/or somatostatin analogs (SSAs) can provide clinical benefit in diabetic neuroendocrine tumor (NET) patients. In light of this and other retrospective evidence of MET's anticancer activity in NETs, prospective studies are needed. A pilot, single-arm, open-label, prospective study (MetNET-2 trial, NCT02823691) was designed to evaluate the safety of MET in combination with lanreotide in well-differentiated gastrointestinal (WD GI) and lung NETs.

BACKGROUND:In the phase 3 RADIANT-4 trial, everolimus increased progression-free survival compared with placebo in patients with advanced, progressive, non-functional, well-differentiated gastrointestinal or lung neuroendocrine tumours (NETs). We now report the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) secondary endpoint. METHODS:RADIANT-4 is a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial done in 97 centres in 25 countries worldwide. Adults (aged ≥18 years) were eligible for the study if they had pathologically confirmed, advanced (unresectable or metastatic), non-functional, well-differentiated (grade 1 or 2) NETs of lung or gastrointestinal origin. Patients were randomly allocated (2:1) using block randomisation (block size of three) by an interactive voice response system to receive oral everolimus (10 mg per day) or placebo, both with best supportive care, with stratification by tumour origin, WHO performance status, and previous somatostatin analogue treatment. HRQOL was assessed with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) questionnaire at baseline (visit 2, day 1), every 8 weeks (± 1 week) during the study for the first 12 months after randomisation, and every 12 weeks thereafter until study drug discontinuation. The primary endpoint, reported previously, was progression-free survival assessed by central review; HRQOL was a prespecified secondary endpoint. The prespecified secondary outcome measure was time to definitive deterioration (≥7 points) in FACT-G total score. Analyses were done on the full analysis set, consisting of all randomised patients, by intention to treat. Only data obtained while receiving the randomly allocated treatment were included in this analysis. Enrolment for RADIANT-4 was completed on Aug 23, 2013, but the trial is ongoing pending final analysis of the key secondary endpoint of overall survival. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01524783. FINDINGS:Between April 3, 2012, and Aug 23, 2013, 302 patients were enrolled; 205 were randomly allocated everolimus and 97 were assigned placebo. At baseline, 193 (94%) of 205 patients assigned everolimus and 95 (98%) of 97 allocated placebo had completed either fully or partly the FACT-G questionnaire; at week 48, 70 (83%) of 84 patients assigned everolimus and 22 (85%) of 26 allocated placebo completed FACT-G. Median time to definitive deterioration in FACT-G total score was 11·27 months (95% CI 9·27-19·35) with everolimus and 9·23 months (5·52-not estimable) with placebo (adjusted hazard ratio 0·81, 95% CI 0·55-1·21; log-rank p=0·31). INTERPRETATION:HRQOL was maintained for patients with advanced, non-functional, gastrointestinal or lung NETs, with no relevant differences noted between the everolimus and placebo groups. In view of the previous RADIANT-4 findings of longer progression-free survival with everolimus, our findings suggest that everolimus delays disease progression while preserving overall HRQOL, even with the usual toxic effects related to active targeted drug treatment for cancer. FUNDING:Novartis Pharmaceuticals.

Future OncologyVol. 13, No. 15 EditorialThe underestimated role of somatostatin analogs in the NETTER-1 trialSara Pusceddu, Roberto Buzzoni & Filippo de BraudSara Pusceddu*Author for correspondence: E-mail Address: sara.pusceddu@istitutotumori.mi.it University of Milan, Fondazione IRCCS "Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori", Via G. Venezian 1, 20133 Milan, Italy, Roberto Buzzoni University of Milan, Fondazione IRCCS "Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori", Via G. Venezian 1, 20133 Milan, Italy & Filippo de Braud Department of Medical Oncology Unit 1, GEP-ENETS Center of Excellence, "Istituto Nazionale Tumori", Milan, Italy University of Milan, Fondazione IRCCS "Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori", Via G. Venezian 1, 20133 Milan, ItalyPublished Online:11 May 2017https://doi.org/10.2217/fon-2017-0130AboutSectionsView ArticleView Full TextPDF/EPUB ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInReddit View articleKeywords: clinical trialslanreotideNETTER-1neuroendocrine tumorsoctreotidePRRTsomatostatin analogsReferences1 Fraenkel M, Kim MK, Faggiano A, Valk GD. Epidemiology of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Gastroenterol. 26(6), 691–703 (2012).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar2 Panzuto F, Merola E, Rinzivillo M et al. Advanced digestive neuroendocrine tumors: metastatic pattern is an independent factor affecting clinical outcome. Pancreas 43(2), 212–218 (2014).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar3 Yao JC, Hassan M, Phan A et al. One hundred years after "carcinoid": epidemiology of and prognostic factors for neuroendocrine tumors in 35,825 cases in the United States. J. Clin. Oncol. 26, 3063–3072 (2008).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar4 Rinke A, Muller HH, Schade-Brittinger C et al. Placebo-controlled, double-blind, prospective, randomized study on the effect of octreotide LAR in the control of tumor growth in patients with metastatic neuroendocrine midgut tumors: a report from the PROMID Study Group. J. Clin. Oncol. 27, 4656–4663 (2009).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar5 Caplin ME, Pavel M, Ćwikła JB et al. Lanreotide in metastatic enteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. N. Engl. J. Med. 371, 224–233 (2014).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar6 Pusceddu S, De Braud F, Lo Russo G et al. How do the results of the RADIANT trials impact on the management of NET patients? A systematic review of published studies. Oncotarget 7(28), 44841–44847 (2016).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar7 Yao JC, Fazio N, Singh S et al. Everolimus for the treatment of advanced, nonfunctional neuroendocrine tumours of the lung or gastrointestinal tract (RADIANT-4): a randomised, placebo-controlled, Phase III study. Lancet 387, 968–977 (2016).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar8 Strosberg J, El-Haddad G, Wolin E et al. Phase III trial of 177 Lu-Dotatate for midgut neuroendocrine tumors. N. Engl. J. Med. 376(2), 125–135 (2017).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar9 Kwekkeboom DJ, de Herder WW, Kam BL et al. Treatment with the radiolabeled somatostatin analog [177 Lu-DOTA 0, Tyr3] octreotate: toxicity, efficacy, and survival. J. Clin. Oncol. 26, 2124–2130 (2008).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google ScholarFiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited BySomatostatin and Its Receptor System in Colorectal Cancer22 November 2021 | Biomedicines, Vol. 9, No. 11Somatostatin analogs in association with peptide receptor radionucleotide therapy in advanced well-differentiated NETsNatalie Prinzi, Alessandra Raimondi, Marco Maccauro, Massimo Milione, Enrico Garanzini, Martina Torchio, Francesca Corti, Federico Nichetti, Giuseppe Lo Russo, Luca Giacomelli, Vincenzo Mazzaferro, Maria Di Bartolomeo, Ettore Seregni, Filippo de Braud & Sara Pusceddu19 August 2019 | Future Oncology, Vol. 15, No. 26Molecular imaging and therapy of somatostatin receptor positive tumorsClinical Imaging, Vol. 56Octreotide Does Not Inhibit Proliferation in Five Neuroendocrine Tumor Cell Lines6 April 2018 | Frontiers in Endocrinology, Vol. 9 Vol. 13, No. 15 eToC Sign up Follow us on social media for the latest updates Metrics Downloaded 295 times History Published online 11 May 2017 Published in print June 2017 Information© Future Medicine LtdKeywordsclinical trialslanreotideNETTER-1neuroendocrine tumorsoctreotidePRRTsomatostatin analogsFinancial & competing interests disclosureThe authors declared conflict of interest with Novartis, Ipsen, Italfarmaco, Advanced Accelerator Applicator (AAA). The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed.We thank Luca Giacomelli for useful discussion and editorial support, which was supported by internal funds.PDF download

In the phase III RADIANT ‐4 study, everolimus improved median progression‐free survival ( PFS ) by 7.1 months in patients with advanced, progressive, well‐differentiated (grade 1 or grade 2), non‐functional lung or gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors ( NET s) vs placebo (hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval [ CI ], 0.35‐0.67; P < .00001). This exploratory analysis reports the outcomes of the subgroup of patients with lung NET s. In RADIANT ‐4, patients were randomized (2:1) to everolimus 10 mg/d or placebo, both with best supportive care. This is a post hoc analysis of the lung subgroup with PFS , by central radiology review, as the primary endpoint; secondary endpoints included objective response rate and safety measures. Ninety of the 302 patients enrolled in the study had primary lung NET (everolimus, n = 63; placebo, n = 27). Median PFS (95% CI ) by central review was 9.2 (6.8‐10.9) months in the everolimus arm vs 3.6 (1.9‐5.1) months in the placebo arm (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% CI , 0.28‐0.88). More patients who received everolimus (58%) experienced tumor shrinkage compared with placebo (13%). Most frequently reported (≥5% incidence) grade 3‐4 drug‐related adverse events (everolimus vs. placebo) included stomatitis (11% vs. 0%), hyperglycemia (10% vs. 0%), and any infections (8% vs. 0%). In patients with advanced, progressive, well‐differentiated, non‐functional lung NET , treatment with everolimus was associated with a median PFS improvement of 5.6 months, with a safety profile similar to that of the overall RADIANT ‐4 cohort. These results support the use of everolimus in patients with advanced, non‐functional lung NET . The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (no. NCT 01524783).

Lung large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (L-LCNEC) is a rare, aggressive, and difficult-to-treat tumor. It is classified as a neuroendocrine subtype of large cell lung carcinoma (LCLC) belonging to the non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) group, but it is also included in the neuroendocrine tumor (NET) group. Most of the available data related to its treatment derive from retrospective analyses or small case series. For patients with L-LCNEC, prognosis is generally very poor. In early stages (I–II–III), surgery is recommended but does not seem to be sufficient. Platinum-based adjuvant chemotherapy may be useful while the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy is still not well defined. In patients with advanced L-LCNEC, the chemotherapy regimens used in SCLC still remain the standard of treatment, but results are not satisfactory. Due to their peculiar clinical and biological features and the lack of literature data, there is an emerging need for a consensus on the best treatment strategy for L-LCNEC and for the identification of new therapeutic options. In this review, we will discuss the key aspects of L-LCNEC management with the aim to clarify the most controversial issues.

Background: In the RADIANT-4 study, EVE reduced the risk of disease progression or death by 52% vs placebo (PBO; P< 0.00001) in patients (pts) with advanced, well-differentiated, progressive, nonfunctional NET of lung/GI tract. This subgroup analysis assessed the impact of prior SSA on PFS in the RADIANT-4 study.Methods: Pts were randomized (2: 1) to receive EVE 10 mg/d or PBO. This analysis reports baseline characteristics, PFS, and safety by prior SSA use.Results: Of 302 pts randomized, 163 (54%) had any prior SSA use (mostly for tumor control; EVE vs PBO: 53% vs 56%). Baseline characteristics were similar in pts with or without prior SSA. Primary tumor sites in prior SSA group: Lung (23%), GI (65%), and NET of unknown primary (12%). Pts received≥ 1 type of SSA, which included octreotide LAR (77%), octreotide SC (14%), lanreotide (14%). Median duration of exposure to prior SSA was 15 mo …

Abnormal expression of succinate dehydrogenase, (SDH), in particular of the B subunit (SDHB), is implicated in the pathogenesis of neuroendocrine tumors. This study evaluates the distribution of SDHB in WHO grading G1 and G2 intestinal, well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors and corresponding lymph node or liver metastases.