This article aims to validate and compare the performance of 6 prognostication systems—the World Health Organization 2010 grading criteria, the European Neuroendocrine Tumour Society and the American Joint Committee for Cancer staging systems, the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center staging and grading systems, as well as the Bilimoria criteria in a cohort of patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms at a single institution.
A retrospective review of 176 patients with histologically proven pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm was performed. The prognostic ability of the various prognostication systems for pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm was assessed by analyzing the homogeneity, discriminatory ability, monotonicity of gradient, and Akaike information criteria.
The 5-year overall survival for the 176 patients was 69% and 5-year recurrence-free survival in 119 patients who underwent curative resection was 78%. Comparison between the 6 prognostication systems demonstrated that the World Health Organization 2010 system had the lowest Akaike information criteria score and was hence the best prognostication system in predicting overall survival and recurrence-free survival rates in our cohort of patients. The European Neuroendocrine Tumour Society was superior to the American Joint Committee for Cancer in prognosticating overall survival rates for pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms, as there was a statistically significant difference in overall survival across the different stages when stratified by the European Neuroendocrine Tumour Society, while the use of the American Joint Committee for Cancer was limited to distinguishing between patients in stages I and II versus stages III and IV only.
All 6 prognostication systems were useful in the prognostication of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm. The World Health Organization 2010 grading system was the best prognostication system in predicting both overall survival in our entire cohort of patients and recurrence-free survival in the subset of patients who underwent curative resection.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
One-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:Subscribe to Surgery
Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
- Non-functional neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas: advances in diagnosis and management.World J Gastroenterol. 2015; 21: 9512-9525
- Advances in diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.Endocr Pract. 2014; 20: 1222-1230
- A single institution's 26-year experience with nonfunctional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a validation of current staging systems and a new prognostic nomogram.Ann Surg. 2014; 259: 204-212
- Validation of five contemporary prognostication systems for primary pancreatic endocrine neoplasms: results from a single institution experience with 61 surgically treated cases.ANZ J Surg. 2011; 81: 79-85
- Comparison of WHO classifications (2004, 2010), the Hochwald grading system, and AJCC and ENETS staging systems in predicting prognosis in locoregional well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.Am J Surg Pathol. 2013; 37: 853-859
- Determining prognosis in patients with pancreatic endocrine neoplasms: can the WHO classification system be simplified?.J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25: 5609-5615
- TNM staging of foregut (neuro)endocrine tumors: a consensus proposal including a grading system.Virchows Arch. 2006; 449: 395-401
- Pancreatic endocrine tumors: improved TNM staging and histopathological grading permit a clinically efficient prognostic stratification of patients.Mod Pathol. 2010; 23: 824-833
- Analysis of risk factors for recurrence after curative resection of well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors based on the new grading classification.J Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Sci. 2014; 21: 418-425
- Evaluation of the World Health Organization 2010 grading system in surgical outcome and prognosis of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.Pancreas. 2014; 43: 1003-1008
- Discrepancies between two alternative staging systems (European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society 2006 and American Joint Committee on Cancer/Union for International Cancer Control 2010) of neuroendocrine neoplasms of the pancreas. A study of 50 cases.Pathol Res Pract. 2011; 207: 220-224
- Pancreatic neoplasm in 2011: an update.JOP. 2011; 12: 316-321
- Neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas: current concepts and controversies.Endocr Pathol. 2014; 25: 65-79
- Prognostic factors in pancreatic endocrine neoplasms: an analysis of 136 cases with a proposal for low-grade and intermediate-grade groups.J Clin Oncol. 2002; 20: 2633-2642
- Prognostic score predicting survival after resection of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: analysis of 3,851 patients.Ann Surg. 2008; 247: 490-500
- Pathology reporting of neuroendocrine tumors: application of the Delphic consensus process to the development of a minimum pathology data set.Am J Surg Pathol. 2010; 34: 300-313
- Which is the optimal risk stratification system for surgically treated localized primary GIST? Comparison of three contemporary prognostic criteria in 171 tumors and a proposal for a modified Armed Forces Institute of Pathology risk criteria.Ann Surg Oncol. 2008; 15: 2153-2163
- Tumor size correlates with malignancy in nonfunctioning pancreatic endocrine tumor.Surgery. 2011; 150: 75-82
- Neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas: a retrospective single-center analysis using the ENETS TNM-classification and immunohistochemical markers for risk stratification.BMC Surg. 2015; 15: 49
- Prognostic factors and survival in 324 patients with pancreatic endocrine tumor treated at a single institution.Clin Cancer Res. 2008; 14: 7798-7803
- Clinical outcome and long-term survival in 118 consecutive patients with neuroendocrine tumours of the pancreas.Br J Surg. 2008; 95: 627-635
- Improved histologic and clinicopathologic criteria for prognostic evaluation of pancreatic endocrine tumors.Hum Pathol. 2009; 40: 30-40
- TNM staging of neoplasms of the endocrine pancreas: Results from a large international cohort study.J Natl Cancer Inst. 2012; 104: 764-777
- Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: the impact of surgical resection on survival.Cancer. 2009; 115: 741-751
- Relapse-free survival in patients with nonmetastatic, surgically resected pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: an analysis of the AJCC and ENETS staging classifications.Ann Surg. 2012; 256: 321-325
- TNM staging of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors an observational analysis and comparison by both AJCC and ENETS systems from 1 single institution.Medicine. 2015; 94: e660
- Prognostic validity of the American Joint Committee on Cancer and the European Neuroendocrine Tumors Staging Classifications for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a retrospective nationwide multicenter study in South Korea.Pancreas. 2016; 45: 941-946
- Hormone profiling, WHO 2010 grading, and AJCC/UICC staging in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor behavior.Cancer Med. 2013; 2: 701-711
Published online: January 19, 2017
Accepted: December 2, 2016
© 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.