Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Problématique des marqueurs histopronostiques dans les tumeurs neuroendocrines digestives

Histoprognostic factors in digestive neuroendocrine tumors

  • Review Article
  • Synthèse
  • Published:
Oncologie

Abstract

The evaluation of prognosis is essential for the management of a patient with a neuroendocrine tumor, especially digestive, in which the risk of malignancy is significant. Three validated histoprognostic factors are available from the pathological examination: morphological differentiation status, histological grade, and pTNM stage. Numerous prognostic biomarkers have been proposed in the literature but none has been transposed to clinical practice. In the sameway, among the candidate predictive biomarkers, only MGMT is an emerging biomarker, which may be useful for the prediction of the response to temozolomide.

Résumé

L’évaluation du pronostic est un élément essentiel pour la prise en charge d’un patient atteint de tumeur neuroendocrine, notamment digestive, où le risque de malignité est important. Les trois facteurs histopronostiques validés susceptibles d’être fournis par l’examen anatomopathologique sont: le degré de différenciation morphologique, le grade histologique et le stade pTNM. De nombreux biomarqueurs pronostiques ont été proposés, mais aucun n’a été validé en pratique clinique. C’est aussi le cas pour les marqueurs prédictifs, parmi lesquels seule la MGMT fait figure de marqueur émergent pour la prédiction de la réponse au témozolomide.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Références

  1. Andersson E, Sward C, Stenman G, et al. (2009) High-resolution genomic profiling reveals gain of chromosome 14 as a predictor of poor outcome in ileal carcinoids. Endocr Relat Cancer 16: 953–966

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Couvelard A, Deschamps L, Ravaud P, et al. (2009) Heterogeneity of tumor prognostic markers: a reproducibility study applied to liver metastases of pancreatic endocrine tumors. Mod Pathol 22: 273–281

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Dhall D, Mertens R, Bresee C, et al. (2012) Ki67 proliferative index predicts progression-free survival of patients with well-differentiated ileal neuroendocrine tumors. Hum Pathol 43: 489–495

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ekeblad S, Skogseid B, Dunder K, et al. (2008) Prognostic factors and survival in 324 patients with pancreatic endocrine tumor treated at a single institution. Clin Cancer Res 14: 7798–7803

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Jann H, Roll S, Couvelard A, et al. (2011) Neuroendocrine tumors of midgut and hindgut origin: tumor-node-metastasis classification determines clinical outcome. Cancer 117: 3332–3341

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Jiao Y, Shi C, Edil BH, et al. (2011) DAXX/ ATRX, MEN1, and mTOR pathway genes are frequently altered in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Science 331: 1199–1203

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kloppel G, Couvelard A, Perren A, et al. (2009) ENETS Consensus Guidelines for the Standards of Care in Neuroendocrine Tumors: towards a standardized approach to the diagnosis of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors and their prognostic stratification. Neuroendocrinology 90: 162–166

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kulke MH, Hornick JL, Frauenhoffer C, et al. (2009) O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase deficiency and response to temozolomide-based therapy in patients with neuroendocrine tumors. Clin Cancer Res 15: 338–345

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Marion-Audibert AM, Barel C, Gouysse G, et al. (2003) Low microvessel density is an unfavorable histoprognostic factor in pancreatic endocrine tumors. Gastroenterology 125: 1094–1104

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Mitry E, Baudin E, Ducreux M, et al. (1999) Treatment of poorly differentiated neuroendocrine tumours with etoposide and cisplatin. Br J Cancer 81: 1351–1355

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Modlin IM, Oberg K, Chung DC, et al. (2008) Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours. Lancet Oncol 9: 61–72

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Panzuto F, Boninsegna L, Fazio N, et al. (2011) Metastatic and locally advanced pancreatic endocrine carcinomas: analysis of factors associated with disease progression. J Clin Oncol 29: 2372–2377

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Pizzi S, D’Adda T, Azzoni C, et al. (2002) Malignancy-associated allelic losses on the X-chromosome in foregut but not in midgut endocrine tumours. J Pathol 196: 401–407

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Rindi G, Falconi M, Klersy C, et al. (2012) TNM staging of neoplasms of the endocrine pancreas: results from a large international cohort study. J Natl Cancer Inst 104: 764–777

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Rindi G, Klimstra DS, Arnold R, et al. (2010) Nomenclature and classification of neuroendocrine neoplasms of the digestive system. In: Bosman FT, Carneiro F, Hruban RH, Theise ND (eds) WHO classification of Tumours of the Digestive System. IARC, Lyon, pp. 13–14

    Google Scholar 

  16. Rindi G, Kloppel G, Alhman H, et al. (2006) TNM staging of foregut (neuro)endocrine tumors: a consensus proposal including a grading system. Virchows Arch 449: 395–401

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Rindi G, Kloppel G, Couvelard A, et al. (2007) TNM staging of midgut and hindgut (neuro) endocrine tumors: a consensus proposal including a grading system. Virchows Arch 451: 757–762

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Scarpa A, Mantovani W, Capelli P, et al. (2010) Pancreatic endocrine tumors: improved TNM staging and histopathological grading permit a clinically efficient prognostic stratification of patients. Mod Pathol 23: 824–833

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Sobin LH, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C (2009) TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours, 7th Edition. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  20. Strosberg JR, Cheema A, Weber J, et al. (2011) Prognostic validity of a novel American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Classification for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. J Clin Oncol 29: 3044–3049

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Strosberg JR, Weber JM, Feldman M, et al. (2013) Prognostic validity of the American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Classification for midgut neuroendocrine tumors. J Clin Oncol 31: 420–425

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Tang LH, Gonen M, Hedvat C, et al. (2012) Objective quantification of the Ki67 proliferative index in neuroendocrine tumors of the gastroenteropancreatic system: a comparison of digital image analysis with manual methods. Am J Surg Pathol 36: 1761–1770

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Yachida S, Vakiani E, White CM, et al. (2012) Small cell and large cell neuroendocrine carcinomas of the pancreas are genetically similar and distinct from welldifferentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Am J Surg Pathol 36: 173–184

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Yang Z, Tang LH, Klimstra DS (2011) Effect of tumor heterogeneity on the assessment of Ki67 labeling index in well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors metastatic to the liver: implications for prognostic stratification. Am J Surg Pathol 35: 853–860

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Zhang L, Smyrk TC, Oliveira AM, et al. (2009) Kit is an independent prognostic marker for pancreatic endocrine tumors: a finding derived from analysis of islet cell differentiation markers. Am J Surg Pathol 33: 1562–1569

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Service d’anatomie et cytologie pathologiques, hôpital Édouard-Herriot, hospices civils de Lyon, F-69437, Lyon cedex 03, France

    J. -Y. Scoazec

Authors
  1. J. -Y. Scoazec
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. -Y. Scoazec.

About this article

Cite this article

Scoazec, J.Y. Problématique des marqueurs histopronostiques dans les tumeurs neuroendocrines digestives. Oncologie 15, 510–514 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10269-013-2332-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10269-013-2332-4

Keywords

Mots clés

Search

Navigation