Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35362798›Full record

ReviewCurrent treatment options in oncology2022

Surgery in Patients with Gastro-Entero-Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Carcinomas, Neuroendocrine Tumors G3 and High Grade Mixed Neuroendocrine-Non-Neuroendocrine Neoplasms.

Pernille Holmager, Seppo W Langer, Andreas Kjaer, Lene Ringholm, Rajendra Singh Garbyal, Hans-Christian Pommergaard, Carsten Palnæs Hansen, Birgitte Federspiel, Mikkel Andreassen, Ulrich Knigge

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current treatment options in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Pernille HolmagerENETS Neuroendocrine Tumor Centre of Excellence, Copenhagen University Hospital-Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark. Holmager@dadlnet.dk.ORCID 0000-0002-2133-5980
Seppo W LangerENETS Neuroendocrine Tumor Centre of Excellence, Copenhagen University Hospital-Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Andreas KjaerENETS Neuroendocrine Tumor Centre of Excellence, Copenhagen University Hospital-Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Lene RingholmENETS Neuroendocrine Tumor Centre of Excellence, Copenhagen University Hospital-Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Rajendra Singh GarbyalENETS Neuroendocrine Tumor Centre of Excellence, Copenhagen University Hospital-Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Hans-Christian PommergaardENETS Neuroendocrine Tumor Centre of Excellence, Copenhagen University Hospital-Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Carsten Palnæs HansenENETS Neuroendocrine Tumor Centre of Excellence, Copenhagen University Hospital-Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Birgitte FederspielENETS Neuroendocrine Tumor Centre of Excellence, Copenhagen University Hospital-Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Mikkel AndreassenENETS Neuroendocrine Tumor Centre of Excellence, Copenhagen University Hospital-Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Ulrich KniggeENETS Neuroendocrine Tumor Centre of Excellence, Copenhagen University Hospital-Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Copenhagen University Hospital · DKUniversity of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

opinion statementIn the 2019 WHO guidelines, the classification of gastro-entero-pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP NEN) has changed from one being based on Ki-67 proliferation index alone to one that also includes tumor differentiation. Consequently, GEP NENs are now classified as well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor (NET), NET G1 (Ki-67 <3%), NET G2 (Ki-67 3-20%) and NET G3 (Ki-67 >20%), and poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) (Ki-67 >20%). It has been suggested that NET G3 should be treated as NET G2 with respect to surgery, while surgical management of NEC should be expanded from local disease to also include patients with advanced disease where curative surgery is possible. High grade mixed neuroendocrine-non-neuroendocrine neoplasms (MiNEN) have a neuroendocrine and a non-neuroendocrine component mostly with a poor prognosis. All studies evaluating the effect of surgery in NEC and MiNEN are observational and hold a risk of selection bias, which may overestimate the beneficial effect of surgery. Further, only a few studies on the effect of surgery in MiNEN exist. This review aims to summarize the data on the outcome of surgery in patients with GEP NET G3, GEP NEC and high grade MiNEN. The current evidence suggests that patients with NEN G3 and localized disease and NEN G3 patients with metastatic disease where curative surgery can be achieved may benefit from surgery. In patients with MiNEN, it is currently not possible to evaluate on the potential beneficial effect of surgery due to the low number of studies.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, NeuroendocrineIntestinal NeoplasmsNeuroendocrine TumorsPancreatic NeoplasmsHumansKi-67 AntigenKi-67 AntigenMixed neuroendocrine-non-neuroendocrine neoplasmsNeuroendocrine neoplasmsPrognosisSurgery

Identifiers

PMID35362798
OpenAlexW4220764220

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.