ArticleOncology2022
Comparing Somatostatin Analogs in the Treatment of Advanced Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.
Article in Oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: From Benchside to Surgical Treatment.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Long-term experience with octreotide and lanreotide for the treatment of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025Article
- Article
- Small Bowel Neuroendocrine Tumors-10-Year Experience of the Ottawa Hospital (TOH).Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Synthesis, Antiproliferative Effect and In Silico LogP Prediction of BIM-23052 Analogs Containing Tyr Instead of Phe.Pharmaceutics · 2023Article
- Long-Term Complications of Radioligand Therapy with Lutetium-177 and Yttrium-90 in Patients with Neuroendocrine Neoplasms.Nutrients · 2022Article
- A prognostic nomogram based on log odds of positive lymph nodes to predict the overall survival in biliary neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) patients after surgery.Journal of endocrinological investigation · 2022Article
- Comparison of Lanreotide and Octreotide LAR Use and Outcomes for Gastrointestinal Neuroendocrine Tumors in British Columbia, Canada.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe 2 approved somatostatin analogs (SSAs) in the first-line treatment of advanced, well-differentiated gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) are octreotide long-acting release (Sandostatin LAR) and somatuline depot (Lanreotide). The study's objective was to compare progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients (pts) with GEP-NETs treated with somatuline or octreotide LAR. Pts and Methods: Pts with advanced well-differentiated GEP-NET who received either SSA at Emory University between 1995 and 2019 were included after institutional review board approval. The primary end point was PFS, defined as time to disease progression (according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1, or clinical progression) or death. The secondary end point was OS. Kaplan-Meier curves were generated, and log-rank tests were conducted to compare the survival outcomes.
resultsA total of 105 pts were identified. The mean age was 62.1 years (SD ± 11.8). The male-to-female ratio was 51:54. The majority (N = 69, 65.7%) were white. Most pts had grade 2 (G2) disease (N = 44, 41.9%). Primary location was small bowel in 58 (55.2%), pancreas in 27 (25.7%), and other in 20 (19.0%). Functional tumors were defined in 32 pts distributed equally between the 2 groups. Distribution of treatment was similar in the 2 groups, with 54 receiving octreotide LAR and 51 receiving somatuline depot. The median PFS for the octreotide LAR and somatuline depot groups was 12 months (95% CI, 6-18 months) and 10.8 months (95% CI, 6-15.6 months), respectively, and the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.2665). For pts with G1 disease, the median PFS for the octreotide LAR and somatuline depot was 8.4 versus 32.4 months, respectively, and the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.159). For G2 disease, the difference in median PFS between octreotide LAR and somutaline depot groups was statistically significant (12 vs. 7.2 months, respectively; p = 0.0372). The mean follow-up time for octreotide LAR was 21.6 months versus 11.3 months for somatuline depot.
conclusionsOverall, there was no difference in PFS between octreotide LAR and somatuline depot for pts with well-differentiated, metastatic GEP-NETs. A prospective study is worth designing selecting for G.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.