Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40058355›Full record

ReviewNeuroendocrinology2025

Are Neuroendocrine Neoplasms No Longer a Rare Cancer?

Catherine Bouvier Ellis, Nicola Jervis

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neuroendocrinology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Catherine Bouvier EllisNeuroendocrine Cancer UK, Warwickshire, UK, catherine@nc-uk.org.
Nicola JervisNeuroendocrine Cancer UK, Warwickshire, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNeuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are consistently referred to as a "relatively" rare heterogenous group of "tumours" with variability in their disease course and outcomes. However, there is a lack of consensus on (a) the group membership, that is, a lack of consistency in which "subtypes" of NEN are included in the group; (b) whether they should continue to be seen as a "heterogenous group," or as separate entities; and (c) whether the term and current definitions of "rare" accurately reflects the true patient population and healthcare requirement. SUMMARY: This opinion article explores the concept of rare, as applied to NENs: the significance of a rare cancer label and what this means for awareness, healthcare provision and, tangentially, those diagnosed. It briefly explores rare cancer definitions, including incidence thresholds and interpretation of definition as demonstrated in the variability in what subtypes are included in databanks or registries, and it also asks whether the currently utilised rare cancer definitions reflect an accurate representation of the true disease burden and fully inform disease-appropriate healthcare planning and provision. KEY MESSAGES: The current definition of "rare cancer" based on incidence alone fails to reflect the true disease burden of NENs and is therefore inadequate, to fully inform healthcare policy, planning and provision for this patient population. This requires either a revision in definition or an alteration in how and what decision-makers utilise and include in their deliberations when assessing and planning service provision.

Indexed as

Neuroendocrine TumorsRare DiseasesHumansAwarenessConceptConsensusEpidemiologyIncidenceNeuroendocrine neoplasmsOpinionPrevalenceRare

Identifiers

PMID40058355
PMCPMC12705078

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.