ReviewNeuroendocrinology2025
Prognosis of NETs: Has There Been Improvement over the Last 30 Years?
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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Epidemiology and Health Impacts of Neuroendocrine Tumours.Neuroendocrinology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
<p>Neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) are uncommon tumours, initially described as "Carzinoides" over hundred years ago and had since then multiple changes in terminology and difference in consideration of benign or malignant tumours. There have been multiple subclassifications and definitions made by the World Health Organisation (WHO). Multiple studies suggest an increase in incidence and prevalence. There are three types of sources of information for these studies; national databases, regional databases or single-centre studies. These different sources of data describe small or larger cohorts of patients with NETs, including risks of bias and concerns regarding accuracy of data. The studies aim to describe the prognosis of patients with NETs, using outcomes as overall survival (OS), progression-free survival and relative survival rate. There is a heterogeneity of studies including different patient populations, different study periods, different definitions, and different outcomes of prognosis it is difficult to compare studies.This review aims to describe how the prognosis changed in the past 30 years for patients with NETs taken into account changes in treatment. During the past 3 decades, new treatments including targeting somatostatin receptors with somatostatin analogues or peptide receptor radionucleide therapy, systemic anti-cancer treatments with Sunitinib, Everolimus, and Cabozantinib were developed. In this review, the treatments and prognosis between 1990 and 2000 are described. Subsequently per decade 2000-2010, 2010-2020, and 2020-currently, new treatments and up to date studies regarding the prognosis are reviewed. The aim of this study was to explain changes in prognosis of patients with NETs. </p>.
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.