Extended peptide receptor radionuclide therapy: evaluating nephrotoxicity and therapeutic effectiveness in neuroendocrine tumor patients receiving more than four treatment cycles.

purposeCurrently, the most used peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) regimen for neuroendocrine tumors comprises 4 treatment cycles, and there is not enough large-scale data to support the safety of more individualized extended PRRT. This study aims to evaluate the therapeutic effectiveness and potential nephrotoxicity related to PRRT using more than four treatment cycles.

methodsIn this retrospective analysis, we included patients who had received at least four PRRT cycles and had available follow-up data. We analyzed renal function indicators before and after multiple treatments, comparing nephrotoxicity in patients receiving four cycles ("standard") with those receiving more than four ("extended treatment"). Nephrotoxicity was assessed via creatinine levels and CTCAE creatinine grades. Treatment effectiveness was gauged using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, focusing on overall survival and disease-specific survival (DSS). Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 26 (IBM), R 4.2.3, and GraphPad Prism 9.0.0. Statistical significance was defined as a P-value of less than 0.05.

resultsOur study cohort consisted of 281 patients in the standard group and 356 in the extended treatment group. No significant differences in baseline characteristics or renal function were noted between the two groups pre-treatment. Mean post-treatment creatinine levels did not significantly differ between the standard (89.30 ± 51.19 μmol/L) and extended treatment groups (93.20 ± 55.98 μmol/L; P = 0.364). Similarly, there was no statistical significance between the CTCAE creatinine grades of the two groups (P = 0.448). Adverse renal events were observed in 0.4% of patients in the standard group and 1.1% in the extended treatment group. After a median follow-up time of 88.3 months, we found that median overall survival was significantly higher in the extended treatment group (72.8 months) compared to the standard treatment group (52.8 months). A Cox regression analysis further supported these findings, indicating a better prognosis for the extended treatment group in terms of overall survival (HR: 0.580, P < 0.001) and DSS (HR: 0.599, P < 0.001).

conclusionOur findings suggest that extending PRRT treatment beyond the standard four cycles may be a safe and effective therapeutic strategy for NET patients. This approach could be particularly beneficial for patients experiencing disease recurrence or progression following standard treatment.