Embolotherapy for Neuroendocrine Tumor Liver Metastases: Prognostic Factors for Hepatic Progression-Free Survival and Overall Survival
- 937 Downloads
The purpose of the study was to evaluate prognostic factors for survival outcomes following embolotherapy for neuroendocrine tumor (NET) liver metastases.
Materials and Methods
This was a multicenter retrospective study of 155 patients (60 years mean age, 57 % male) with NET liver metastases from pancreas (n = 71), gut (n = 68), lung (n = 8), or other/unknown (n = 8) primary sites treated with conventional transarterial chemoembolization (TACE, n = 50), transarterial radioembolization (TARE, n = 64), or transarterial embolization (TAE, n = 41) between 2004 and 2015. Patient-, tumor-, and treatment-related factors were evaluated for prognostic effect on hepatic progression-free survival (HPFS) and overall survival (OS) using unadjusted and propensity score-weighted univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models.
Median HPFS and OS were 18.5 and 125.1 months for G1 (n = 75), 12.2 and 33.9 months for G2 (n = 60), and 4.9 and 9.3 months for G3 tumors (n = 20), respectively (p < 0.05). Tumor burden >50 % hepatic volume demonstrated 5.5- and 26.8-month shorter median HPFS and OS, respectively, versus burden ≤50 % (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in HPFS or OS between gut or pancreas primaries. In multivariate HPFS analysis, there were no significant differences among embolotherapy modalities. In multivariate OS analysis, TARE had a higher hazard ratio than TACE (unadjusted Cox model: HR 2.1, p = 0.02; propensity score adjusted model: HR 1.8, p = 0.11), while TAE did not differ significantly from TACE.
Higher tumor grade and tumor burden prognosticated shorter HPFS and OS. TARE had a higher hazard ratio for OS than TACE. There were no significant differences in HPFS among embolotherapy modalities.
KeywordsNeuroendocrine tumor Liver metastases Embolization
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
Steven C. Rose: consultant—SIRTeX; scientific advisory board—Surefire Medical. Sarah B. White: consultant—Guerbet, IO-rad, Grants—RSNA, SIR foundation, research support—Siemens. Nicholas Fidelman: Grants: BTG, GE Healthcare, Nordion. Daniel Y. Sze: consultant—Amgen, BTG, SirTeX Medical, W.L. Gore & Associates, Covidien, Guerbet, Cook, Codman; scientific advisory board—SureFire Medical, KoliMedical, Northwind Medical, TreusMedical, RadiAction Medical, EmboIX, Lunar Design, Jennerex Biotherapeutics. Riad Salem: consultant: BTG. David C. Metz MD: grants—Ipsen, Lexicon, AAA; consultant—Novartis, Takeda. Michael C. Soulen: grants—BTG, Guerbet; consultant—Guerbet, Merit. James X. Chen, Ghassan El-Haddad, Hooman Yarmohammadi, Winifred Hwang, Nishita Kothary, Kristen Stashek, E. Paul Wileyto, No disclosures.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study formal consent is not required.
- 20.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. 2009;27(28):4656–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 29.National Cancer Institute NIoH. Common terminology criteria for adverse events v4.03. 2010.Google Scholar