Clin Endosc > Volume 46(5); 2013 > Article
Park: Endoscopic Treatment for Early Foregut Neuroendocrine Tumors

Abstract

Foregut neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) include those arising in the esophagus, stomach, pancreas, and duodenum and seem to have a broad range of clinical behavior from benign to metastatic. Several factors including the advent of screening endoscopy may be related to increased incidence of gastrointestinal NETs; thus, many foregut NETs are diagnosed at an early stage. Early foregut NETs, such as those of the stomach and duodenum, can be managed with endoscopic treatment because of a low frequency of lymph node and distant metastases. However, controversy continues concerning the optimal management of early foregut NETs due to a lack of controlled prospective studies. Several issues such as indications, technical issues, and outcomes of endoscopic treatment for early foregut NETs are reviewed based on some published studies.

INTRODUCTION

Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are defined as epithelial neoplasms with predominant neuroendocrine differentiation, arising throughout the body. Gastrointestinal NETs can be classified into foregut, midgut, or hindgut depending on the point of origin in the disseminated endocrine system.1 Foregut NETs include those arising in the esophagus, stomach, pancreas, and duodenum. The new histologic grading system of 2010 World Health Organization classification for digestive system NETs that could be applied to all stages of neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) separates well-differentiated tumors into low grade (G1) and intermediate grade (G2) categories. All poorly differentiated NETs are high grade (G3) neuroendocrine carcinomas according to this classification scheme (Table 1).2-4
Foregut NETs seem to have a broad range of clinical behavior from benign to metastatic. The treatment of choice for a localized NET is usually surgery. Many foregut NETs are diagnosed at an early stage because of the advent of screening endoscopy and, thus, can be managed with endoscopic treatment because of a low frequency of lymph node and distant metastases. However, controversy continues concerning the optimal management of early foregut NETs due to a lack of controlled prospective studies. These debatable issues on endoscopic treatment for early foregut NETs are discussed based on some published data.

EPIDEMIOLOGY OF FOREGUT NETs

The incidence of NETs is reported to be rising in Western countries and Asia.5-8 In the United States, a significant increase in reported annual age-adjusted incidence of NETs from 1973 (1.09/100,000) to 2004 (5.25/100,000) was reported.5 Also, the incidence of NETs in Taiwan increased steadily from 1996 (0.30/100,000) to 2008 (1.51/100,000).6 Despite such increase, the incidence rate of NETs in Taiwan is lower than that of Norway and the United States.5-7 Many factors may contribute to increase the incidence of NETs around the world. These factors can be a better awareness, improved diagnostic strategies, and increased and more widespread use of gastrointestinal endoscopy.7,9-14 The distribution of gastrointestinal NETs seemed to be different between Japan and Western countries.8 The distribution of gastrointestinal NETs in the United States is reported to be 19.4% in the foregut, 38.7% in the midgut, and 41.9% in the hindgut.5 In contrast, in Japanese population, 30.4% were in the foregut, 9.6% in the midgut, and 60.0% in the hindgut.8

NENs OF THE ESOPHAGUS

Esophageal NENs are extremely rare. Most cases of esophageal NENs are poorly differentiated endocrine carcinoma (PDEC) and mixed adenoneuroendocrine carcinoma. The few reported cases have been mostly treated by esophagogastrectomy.1

NENs OF THE STOMACH

The stomach is the most common foregut location for NETs. Gastric NETs comprise 7% of all gastrointestinal NETs and 2% of all removed gastric polyps.15,16 Four types of gastric NENs have been proposed and recognition of the type is important for defining the diagnostic approach and treatment. Gastric NENs are subdivided into four categories, with differing biologic behaviors and prognoses: type 1, arising on atrophic body gastritis; type 2, a manifestation of type I multiple endocrine neoplasia (MEN-I); type 3, with no specific background disease; type 4, poorly differentiated NENs (Table 2).17
Type 1 gastric NET is the most common type and tends to be nearly all benign lesions, with a low risk for progression or metastasis. The type 1 is mostly diagnosed at an early stage, with 80% to 90% of them being ≤1 cm in diameter.12

Diagnosis of early NETs of the stomach

Endoscopy is the only method to detect early gastric NETs that are usually asymptomatic. Widespread use of gastrointestinal endoscopy and endoscopic screening may lead to increased detection of small sized gastric NETs.12 Well-differentiated NETs of the stomach (gastric carcinoid tumors) are observed more often, with a 10-fold increase in the United States in the last 35 years, and the prognosis has improved greatly in that time.5 Small, less than 1 cm, well-differentiated (G1) NETs of the stomach that do not infiltrate the muscularis propria and do not show angioinvasion have a very low risk of metastatic spread, that are considered early NETs of the stomach.17
Type 1 gastric NETs are usually detected during endoscopy as lesions greater than 5 mm in diameter. It is important to perform additional sampling biopsies of the surrounding mucosa of the stomach to assess microcarcinoids and to identify the condition of the background gastric mucosa.18
Several serum markers can be valuable in diagnosis and surveillance of type 1 gastric NETs. Chromogranin A (CgA) level is increased in 80% to 90% of patients with type 1 gastric NETs.19-21 However, serum CgA level may be increased in hypergastrinemia, enterochromaffin-like cells hyperplasia, nonfunctioning tumors of the endocrine pancreas and medulllary thyroid cancers;22 thus, increased CgA level may not indicate the presence of gastric NETs. CgA level can be useful as a surveillance marker for progression of NETs. Several studies have demonstrated significant decrease in CgA level after both medical therapy and surgical treatment of NETs.23-25 Possible other markers for identifying gastric NETs are synaptophysin, vesicular monoamine transporter and VMAT-2.26-28
Endoscopic ultrasound is very useful for determining exact tumor size and depth of invasion. However, endoscopic ultrasound is not essential for type 1 gastric NETs measuring less than 1 cm, because those generally do not infiltrate the muscular layer.17 Abdominal ultrasound and computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging are not useful for early type 1 or 2 gastric NETs. Somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (Octreoscan) has been used since the early 1990s as a methods of localizing both primary and metastatic tumors expressing somatostatin receptors.29 However, Octreoscan is often negative in early type 1 and 2 gastric NETs. Also, standard 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography is also of limited value when assessing gastric NETs.29

Prognosis of early NETs of the stomach

Type 1 gastric NETs is the most common type of the gastric NENs which is usually detected at early stage. Most of them are less than 1 cm in diameter.12 Type 2 gastric NETs, similar to type 1 are usually diagnosed at an early stage, thus having an excellent long term prognosis.17 A retrospective study from Italy showed that there was no tumor-related death at an overall mean follow-up of 53 months in 152 patients with type 1 gastric NETs and only one tumor-related death 49 months after diagnosis at an overall mean survival of 84 months in 12 patients with type 2 gastric NETs.30 Ravizza et al.31 observed 11 patients with type 1 gastric NETs each less than 1 cm in diameter. No patients had any evidence of local or distant metastases at a median follow-up of 54 months. However, four of the 11 patients (36%) had an increased number of lesions. This uncontrolled small study may indicate that small type 1 gastric NETs can be followed without any surgical or medical treatments.
Merola et al.32 recently investigated clinical outcome and recurrence of type 1 gastric NETs treated by endoscopic approach in 33 patients. At diagnosis, seven tumors were intramucosal carcinoids and 26 were polyps (median diameter 5 mm, range 2 to 20), multiple in 17 patients. After removal of tumors by endoscopic methods, patients were managed by endoscopic follow-up every 6 to 12 months. During a 46-month median follow-up, survival was 100% and no metastases occurred. Twenty-one patients (63.6%) had recurrence after a median of 8 months, 14 of these (66.6%) had a second recurrence after a median of 8 months following the previous carcinoid removal. Median recurrence-free survival was 24 months. These results indicate that endoscopic management for early type 1 gastric NETs may be considered safe and effective.

Treatment of early NETs of the stomach

Endoscopic resection is the treatment of choice for early NETs of the stomach.17 Small, less than 1 cm in diameter, well-differentiated (G1) NETs of the stomach that do not infiltrate the muscularis propria and do not show angioinvasion have a very low risk of metastatic spread. Thus, early, G1-differentiated NETs of the stomach should be removed by endoscopic methods.17 However, a large retrospective study using Niigata Registry from Japan showed that even in minute (≤5 mm in diameter) and small (5.1 to 10 mm in diameter) gastric NETs at a depth of invasion restricted to the mucosa and submucosa (sm carcinoids), metastases rate were 4.6% and 9.6%, respectively. These metastatic rates are compatible with those of gastric sm adenocarcinoma.33 This result suggest that when treating patients with early gastric NETs, possibility of metastases should be considered. However, the 5-year survival rates of patients with gastric sm carcinoids after endoscopic resection was 89.6%.
In the European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society Consensus Guidelines for managements of gastroenteropancreatic NETs (including carcinoid)34 management of type 3 gastric carcinoids is fairly clear and includes partial or total gastrectomy with extended lymph node dissection. Management of type 1 and type 2 gastric carcinoids is more controversial. In patients with type 1 gastric carcinoids less than 10 mm in diameter, annual surveillance is appropriate. Endoscopic resection is recommended in cases of tumors >10 mm in diameter and in the presence of up to six polyps not involving the muscularis propria at EUS examination (Fig. 1).29,34
The management of G1 NETs sized 1 to 2 cm is a matter of debate. There are no controlled studies that compared endoscopic treatment with surgical approach. In case of type 1 or 2 gastric NETs of 1 to 2 cm in diameter, the endoscopic treatment should be preferred to surgery in patients with significant comorbidities and in elderly patients with a high surgical risk (Table 3).17
Another issue we should consider is a method of endoscopic treatments. Endoscopic submucosal dissection technique can increase complete resection rate compare with other techniques, such as endoscopic polypectomy, strip biopsy, aspiration resection, and band snare resection.32,35-41
Rescue surgery after endoscopic resection should be considered in certain properties of foregut NETs. The indication for additional surgery is usually based on the location, type, grade, and stage of the foregut NETs. In the case of type 1 or type 2 gastric NETs with positive margins, size >20 mm, G2-G3 histologic grading, invasion into the muscularis propria or vessel infiltration of tumor cells, additional surgery is recommended.12 In the case of type 3 gastric NETs with a size >10 mm, irrespective of other risk factors, and localized type 4, rescue surgery is necessary.12

NENs OF THE DUODENUM

Primary duodenal NETs account for less than 2% of all gastrointestinal NETs.42 Five major types of NETs can be seen in the duodenum: 1) gastrinomas (type I) are most common and are usually seen in the proximal duodenum. One third is associated with ZES and MEN1; 2) second in frequency are somatostatinomas (type II), which often have a periampullary location. They may be associated with von Recklinghausen disease; 3) gangliocytic paragangliomas (type III) are benign tumors found at the ampulla or in the periampullary region; 4) type IV is rare and contains tumors that produce serotonin and calcitonin; and 5) PDECs (type V) is extremely rare and highly malignant and is usually located at the ampulla of Vater.43

Diagnosis of early NETs of the duodenum

Most duodenal NETs are asymptomatic and generally diagnosed during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for unrelated symptoms. In addition, duodenal NETs are usually hormonally silent. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy is the only method of choice to detect early duodenal NETs.17
In a retrospective analysis of duodenal carcinoid tumors, Burke et al.44 identified three pathologic features of the primary tumor as independent risk factors for metastasis: invasion of the muscularis propria, tumor size greater than 2 cm, and the presence of mitotic figures. A retrospective study from Mayo Clinic showed that 18 of 19 patients with tumors smaller than 2 cm remained disease free after local (endoscopic or transduodenal) excision.38
Early duodenal NETs can be considered if tumors are ≤10 mm in size, G1, show neither angioinvasion nor infiltration of the muscular layer, have no associated hormonal secretion and have a very low metastatic potential.17

Treatment of early NETs of the duodenum

No consensus guidelines exist for the endoscopic management of duodenal NETs. Multiple factors must be taken into account when considering treatment options. Well-differentiated, nonfunctioning duodenal NETs with no evidence of invasion to the muscularis layer and 1 cm or less in size can be endoscopically removed (Table 4).17 These tumors carry a low risk for lymphatic or distant metastasis. In case of duodenal carcinoids more than 1 cm in size, the option of management is a matter of debate. A recent case series from Japan showed complete and safe results of endoscopic resection for duodenal bulb NETs more than 10 mm in size.41

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic treatment may be one of therapeutic options for eligible foregut NETs. However, the appropriate selection criteria of foregut NETs for endoscopic resection is still controversial and further studies are needed.

NOTES

The author has no financial conflicts of interest.

References

1. Li QL, Zhang YQ, Chen WF, et al. Endoscopic submucosal dissection for foregut neuroendocrine tumors: an initial study. World J Gastroenterol 2012;18:5799-5806. 23155323.
crossref pmid pmc
2. Klimstra DS, Modlin IR, Coppola D, Lloyd RV, Suster S. The pathologic classification of neuroendocrine tumors: a review of nomenclature, grading, and staging systems. Pancreas 2010;39:707-712. 20664470.
crossref pmid
3. Rindi G, Arnold R, Bosman FT, et al. Nomenclature and classification of neuroendocrine neoplasms of the digestive system. The International Agency for Research on Cancer. In: Bosman TF, Carneiro F, Hruban RH, Theise ND, eds. WHO Classification of Tumours of the Digestive System. 4th ed. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2010. p. 13.

4. Hruban RH, Pitman MB, Klimstra DS. American Registry of Pathology. Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (U.S.). Tumors of the Pancreas. Washington DC: American Registry of Pathology in collaboration with the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology; 2007. p. 422.

5. 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 2008;26:3063-3072. 18565894.
crossref pmid
6. Tsai HJ, Wu CC, Tsai CR, Lin SF, Chen LT, Chang JS. The epidemiology of neuroendocrine tumors in taiwan: a nation-wide cancer registry-based study. PLoS One 2013;8:e62487. 23614051.
crossref pmid pmc
7. Hauso O, Gustafsson BI, Kidd M, et al. Neuroendocrine tumor epidemiology: contrasting Norway and North America. Cancer 2008;113:2655-2664. 18853416.
crossref pmid
8. Ito T, Sasano H, Tanaka M, et al. Epidemiological study of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors in Japan. J Gastroenterol 2010;45:234-243. 20058030.
crossref pmid
9. Ellis L, Shale MJ, Coleman MP. Carcinoid tumors of the gastrointestinal tract: trends in incidence in England since 1971. Am J Gastroenterol 2010;105:2563-2569. 20823835.
crossref pmid pdf
10. Scherübl H. Options for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours. Lancet Oncol 2008;9:203. 18308249.
crossref pmid
11. Hosokawa O, Miyanaga T, Kaizaki Y, et al. Decreased death from gastric cancer by endoscopic screening: association with a population-based cancer registry. Scand J Gastroenterol 2008;43:1112-1115. 18609154.
crossref pmid
12. Scherübl H, Cadiot G, Jensen RT, Rösch T, Stölzel U, Klöppel G. Neuroendocrine tumors of the stomach (gastric carcinoids) are on the rise: small tumors, small problems? Endoscopy 2010;42:664-671. 20669078.
crossref pmid
13. Scherübl H. Rectal carcinoids are on the rise: early detection by screening endoscopy. Endoscopy 2009;41:162-165. 19214898.
crossref pmid
14. Scherübl H, Jensen RT, Cadiot G, Stölzel U, Klöppel G. Neuroendocrine tumors of the small bowels are on the rise: early aspects and management. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2010;2:325-334. 21160582.
crossref pmid pmc
15. Modlin IM, Lye KD, Kidd M. A 50-year analysis of 562 gastric carcinoids: small tumor or larger problem? Am J Gastroenterol 2004;99:23-32. 14687136.
crossref pmid
16. Gencosmanoglu R, Sen-Oran E, Kurtkaya-Yapicier O, Avsar E, Sav A, Tozun N. Gastric polypoid lesions: analysis of 150 endoscopic polypectomy specimens from 91 patients. World J Gastroenterol 2003;9:2236-2239. 14562385.
crossref pmid pmc
17. Scherübl H, Jensen RT, Cadiot G, Stölzel U, Klöppel G. Management of early gastrointestinal neuroendocrine neoplasms. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2011;3:133-139. 21860682.
crossref pmid pmc
18. Zhang L, Ozao J, Warner R, Divino C. Review of the pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management of type I gastric carcinoid tumor. World J Surg 2011;35:1879-1886. 21559999.
crossref pmid
19. Borch K, Ahrén B, Ahlman H, Falkmer S, Granérus G, Grimelius L. Gastric carcinoids: biologic behavior and prognosis after differentiated treatment in relation to type. Ann Surg 2005;242:64-73. 15973103.
crossref pmid pmc
20. Oberg K. Neuroendocrine gastrointestinal tumours. Ann Oncol 1996;7:453-463. 8839899.
crossref pmid pdf
21. Granberg D, Wilander E, Stridsberg M, Granerus G, Skogseid B, Oberg K. Clinical symptoms, hormone profiles, treatment, and prognosis in patients with gastric carcinoids. Gut 1998;43:223-228. 10189848.
crossref pmid pmc
22. Nobels FR, Kwekkeboom DJ, Coopmans W, et al. Chromogranin A as serum marker for neuroendocrine neoplasia: comparison with neuronspecific enolase and the alpha-subunit of glycoprotein hormones. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1997;82:2622-2628. 9253344.
crossref pmid
23. Campana D, Nori F, Pezzilli R, et al. Gastric endocrine tumors type I: treatment with long-acting somatostatin analogs. Endocr Relat Cancer 2008;15:337-342. 18310299.
crossref pmid
24. Fykse V, Sandvik AK, Qvigstad G, Falkmer SE, Syversen U, Waldum HL. Treatment of ECL cell carcinoids with octreotide LAR. Scand J Gastroenterol 2004;39:621-628. 15370681.
crossref pmid
25. Shi W, Johnston CF, Buchanan KD, et al. Localization of neuroendocrine tumours with [111In] DTPA-octreotide scintigraphy (Octreoscan): a comparative study with CT and MR imaging. QJM 1998;91:295-301. 9666953.
crossref pmid pdf
26. Rehm H, Wiedenmann B, Betz H. Molecular characterization of synaptophysin, a major calcium-binding protein of the synaptic vesicle membrane. EMBO J 1986;5:535-541. 3086086.
crossref pmid pmc
27. Erickson JD, Schafer MK, Bonner TI, Eiden LE, Weihe E. Distinct pharmacological properties and distribution in neurons and endocrine cells of two isoforms of the human vesicular monoamine transporter. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1996;93:5166-5171. 8643547.
crossref pmid pmc
28. Rindi G, Paolotti D, Fiocca R, Wiedenmann B, Henry JP, Solcia E. Vesicular monoamine transporter 2 as a marker of gastric enterochromaffin-like cell tumors. Virchows Arch 2000;436:217-223. 10782879.
crossref pmid
29. Nikou GC, Angelopoulos TP. Current concepts on gastric carcinoid tumors. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2012;2012:287825. 23316222.
crossref pmid pmc pdf
30. Rindi G, Bordi C, Rappel S, La Rosa S, Stolte M, Solcia E. Gastric carcinoids and neuroendocrine carcinomas: pathogenesis, pathology, and behavior. World J Surg 1996;20:168-172. 8661813.
crossref pmid
31. Ravizza D, Fiori G, Trovato C, et al. Long-term endoscopic and clinical follow-up of untreated type 1 gastric neuroendocrine tumours. Dig Liver Dis 2007;39:537-543. 17433795.
crossref pmid
32. Merola E, Sbrozzi-Vanni A, Panzuto F, et al. Type I gastric carcinoids: a prospective study on endoscopic management and recurrence rate. Neuroendocrinology 2012;95:207-213. 21811050.
crossref pmid
33. Soga J. Early-stage carcinoids of the gastrointestinal tract: an analysis of 1914 reported cases. Cancer 2005;103:1587-1595. 15742328.
crossref pmid
34. Ramage JK, Ahmed A, Ardill J, et al. Guidelines for the management of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine (including carcinoid) tumours (NETs). Gut 2012;61:6-32. 22052063.
crossref pmid pmc
35. Yamamoto C, Aoyagi K, Suekane H, et al. Carcinoid tumors of the duodenum: report of three cases treated by endoscopic resection. Endoscopy 1997;29:218-221. 9201476.
crossref pmid pdf
36. Nishimori I, Morita M, Sano S, et al. Endosonography-guided endoscopic resection of duodenal carcinoid tumor. Endoscopy 1997;29:214-217. 9201475.
crossref pmid pdf
37. Yoshikane H, Goto H, Niwa Y, et al. Endoscopic resection of small duodenal carcinoid tumors with strip biopsy technique. Gastrointest Endosc 1998;47:466-470. 9647370.
crossref pmid
38. Zyromski NJ, Kendrick ML, Nagorney DM, et al. Duodenal carcinoid tumors: how aggressive should we be? J Gastrointest Surg 2001;5:588-593. 12086896.
crossref pmid
39. Ichikawa J, Tanabe S, Koizumi W, et al. Endoscopic mucosal resection in the management of gastric carcinoid tumors. Endoscopy 2003;35:203-206. 12584637.
crossref pmid pdf
40. Hopper AD, Bourke MJ, Hourigan LF, Tran K, Moss A, Swan MP. Enbloc resection of multiple type 1 gastric carcinoid tumors by endoscopic multi-band mucosectomy. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009;24:1516-1521. 19743997.
crossref pmid
41. Yokoyama S, Takifuji K, Tani M, et al. Endoscopic resection of duodenal bulb neuroendocrine tumor larger than 10 mm in diameter. BMC Gastroenterol 2011;11:67. 21658277.
crossref pmid pmc pdf
42. Nikou GC, Toubanakis C, Moulakakis KG, et al. Carcinoid tumors of the duodenum and the ampulla of Vater: current diagnostic and therapeutic approach in a series of 8 patients. Case series. Int J Surg 2011;9:248-253. 21215338.
crossref pmid
43. Kolby L, Nilsson O, Ahlman H. Gastroduodenal endocrine tumours. Scand J Surg 2004;93:317-323. 15658674.
crossref pmid
44. Burke AP, Sobin LH, Federspiel BH, Shekitka KM, Helwig EB. Carcinoid tumors of the duodenum. A clinicopathologic study of 99 cases. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1990;114:700-704. 1694655.
pmid
Fig. 1
Management of gastric carcinoids according to European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) guidelines. Adapted from Nikou et al. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2012;2012:287825.29
ce-46-450-g001.jpg
Table 1
World Health Organization 2010 Classification and Suggested Grading of Neuroendocrine Neoplasms of the Digestive System
ce-46-450-i001.jpg

Adapted from Rindi et al. WHO Classification of Tumours of the Digestive System. 4th ed. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2010. p. 13. with the permission of the publisher.3

HPF, high power field; NET, neuroendocrine tumor; NEC, neuroendocrine carcinoma.

a)G1, low-grade tumors; b)G2, intermediate-grade tumors; c)G3, high-grade tumors.

Table 2
Therapy of Gastric Neuroendocrine Neoplasms
ce-46-450-i002.jpg

Adapted from Scherübl et al. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2011;3:133-139.17

EMR, endoscopic mucosal resection.

a)Risk factors for metastatic disease are angioinvasion or G2-G3 histological grading or infiltration of the muscularis propria or tumor size > 2 cm; b)Somatostatin analogs are being tested in ongoing clinical trials, they should not be used except in clinical trials; c)Followed by endoscopic surveillance of the gastric remnant. Adjuvant (medical) therapy is not established in NET/carcinoid disease; d)Surgery in localized type 4 gastric/d neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) disease (or systemic cytoreductive chemotherapy in advanced type 4 gastric NEC disease). Type 4 gastric NECs are never benign, they areneuroendocrine carcinomas.

Table 3
Clinicopathological Characteristics of Gastric Neuroendocrine Neoplasms
ce-46-450-i003.jpg

G1-3, histological differentiation. Adapted from Modlin et al. Am J Gastroenterol 2004;99:23-32, with permission from Nature Publishing Group.15

NET, neuroendocrine tumor; NEC, neuroendocrine carcinoma; NEN, neuroendocrine neoplasm; CAG, chronic atrophic gastritis, due to pernicious anemia or Helicobacter pylori infection; MEN1, multiple endocrine neoplasia type1; ZES, Zollinger-Ellison syndrome.

a)MEN1/ZES, ZES associated with MEN1; b)G1, well differentiated; c)G3, poorly differentiated.

Table 4
Therapy of Duodenal Neuroendocrine Neoplasms
ce-46-450-i004.jpg

Adapted from Scherübl et al. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2011;3:133-139.17

NET, well differentiated neuroendocrine tumor; MEN1, multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1; EMR, endoscopic mucosal resection; PPI, proton pump inhibitor; GI, gastrointestinal.

a)Without risk factors (for metastatic disease) such as G2-G3, angioinvasion, infiltration of the muscularis propria or tumor size >2 cm; b)In the presence of risk factors for metastatic disease, surgery is generally indicated, regardless of tumor size; c)Surgery is the therapy of choice for sporadic gastrinoma (without distant metastases). In (very) elderly patients conservative management may, however, be preferred to surgery. Adjuvant (medical) therapy is not established in NET/carcinoid disease.

TOOLS
PDF Links  PDF Links
PubReader  PubReader
ePub Link  ePub Link
XML Download  XML Download
Full text via DOI  Full text via DOI
Download Citation  Download Citation
CrossRef TDM  CrossRef TDM
  E-Mail
  Print
Share:      
METRICS
8
Crossref
12
Scopus
6,761
View
146
Download
Related articles
The Role of Endoscopy in Small Bowel Neuroendocrine Tumors  
Endoscopic Treatment for Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors in the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract  2020 July;53(4)
The Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Ki67 in the Management of Non-Functioning Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors   2020 March;53(2)
Endoscopic Treatment of Subepithelial Tumors  2018 January;51(1)
Diagnosis of Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors  2017 November;50(6)
Editorial Office
Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
#817, 156 Yanghwa-ro(LG Palace, Donggyo-dong), Mapo-gu, Seoul, 04050, Korea
TEL: +82-2-335-1552   FAX: +82-2-335-2690    E-mail: ce@kams.or.kr
Copyright © Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.                 Developed in M2PI
Close layer