• Annals of surgery · Feb 2014

    Comparative Study

    A single institution's 26-year experience with nonfunctional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a validation of current staging systems and a new prognostic nomogram.

    • Trevor A Ellison, Christopher L Wolfgang, Chanjuan Shi, John L Cameron, Peter Murakami, Liew Jun Mun, Aatur D Singhi, Toby C Cornish, Kelly Olino, Zina Meriden, Michael Choti, Luis A Diaz, Timothy M Pawlik, Richard D Schulick, Ralph H Hruban, and Barish H Edil.
    • Departments of *Surgery †Pathology ‡Oncology, The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD §Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Department of Pathology, Microbiology and Immunology, Nashville, TN ¶The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of Biostatistics, Baltimore, MD; and ∥The University of Colorado, Department of Surgery, Aurora, CO.
    • Ann. Surg. 2014 Feb 1; 259 (2): 204-12.

    ObjectiveTo validate the 2010 American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) and 2006 European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) tumor staging systems for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNETs) using the largest, single-institution series of surgically resected patients in the literature.BackgroundThe natural history and prognosis of PanNETs have been poorly defined because of the rarity and heterogeneity of these neoplasms. Currently, there are 2 main staging systems for PanNETs, which can complicate comparisons of reports in the literature and thereby hinder progress against this disease.MethodsUnivariate and multivariate analyses were conducted on the prognostic factors of survival using 326 sporadic, nonfunctional, surgically resected PanNET patients who were cared for at our institution between 1984 and 2011. Current and proposed models were tested for survival prognostication validity as measured by discrimination (Harrel's c-index, HCI) and calibration.ResultsFive-year overall-survival rates for AJCC stages I, II, and IV are 93% (88%-99%), 74% (65%-83%), and 56% (42%-73%), respectively, whereas ENETS stages I, II, III, and IV are 97% (92%-100%), 87% (80%-95%), 73% (63%-84%), and 56% (42%-73%), respectively. Each model has an HCI of 0.68, and they are no different in their ability to predict survival. We developed a simple prognostic tool just using grade, as measured by continuous Ki-67 labeling, sex, and binary age that has an HCI of 0.74.ConclusionsBoth the AJCC and ENETS staging systems are valid and indistinguishable in their survival prognostication. A new, simpler prognostic tool can be used to predict survival and decrease interinstitutional mistakes and uncertainties regarding these neoplasms.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,694,794 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.