DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000533
,
,
PMID: 24398923
Issn Print: 0003-4932
Publication Date: 2014/02/01
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Email
 |
Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid | |
Excerpt
Ellison and colleagues5 compared a staging system entirely based on the grade (as measured by Ki67 index) with the 2 existing staging systems: AJCC (2010 American Joint Committee on Cancer) and ENETS (2006 European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society). This novel staging system uses grade to predict overall survival (OS). Tumor size, lymph node involvement, and distant metastases did not improve the model's prognostic ability. In contrast to the work by Ellison and colleagues, where lymph node status is not a prognostic factor, Hashim and colleagues6 report that a lymphadenectomy is essential when treating PNETs. By retrospectively examining the data of 136 patients who underwent pancreatic resection and lymphadenectomy, both lymph node metastases and Ki67 more than 20% were predictors of recurrence-free survival. Predictors of OS were an R1 resection and Ki67 more than 20%.
On the basis of these 2 studies and the results reported by others, the role of lymphadenectomy in the treatment of PNETs remains unclear. Many physicians looking for guidance use the NCCN (National Comprehensive Cancer Network) guidelines, which recommend a lymph node dissection for lesions larger than 2 cm in size. Although no one would debate that knowing the lymph node status improves the staging of the patient, it is not clear whether a lymphadenectomy has any effect on OS.7–9 Would leaving positive lymph nodes behind decrease a patient's survival? Doubtful, because we have no evidence to support an improved survival with a lymph node dissection in any other gastrointestinal cancer, including gastric cancer.10 Without a lymphadenectomy, a more limited operation can be performed. As expected, a more limited operation has been associated with decreased operative time, blood loss, serious postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and risk of postoperative diabetes/pancreatic insufficiency.11 For operations in which 44% of patients have 1 or more complications,12 can we justify a lymphadenectomy that may increase the morbidity and mortality further? If the prognostic information is deemed essential, we may want to consider sentinel lymph node biopsies, similar to other cancers, as one method of potentially reducing morbidity.
Because the “oncological” resection including the draining lymph node basins seems to be prognostic, rather than therapeutic, can we justify the morbidity? Yes, if surveillance or survival could be improved. Accurate staging has several advantages—it sets expectations for patients and identifies recurrent disease via optimal surveillance strategies. Currently, postresection surveillance has not been standardized. If surveillance schedules were improved and standardized, the expense and morbidity of blood work and imaging could be reduced. The NCCN guidelines recommend surveillance at 3 to 12 months in the first year and then every 6 to 12 months for a maximum of 10 years. These are very broad time frames, with patients potentially being subject to anywhere from 11 to 24 imaging studies over the course of 11 years. More imaging studies may lead to earlier detection of metastases.
