The classification of neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) differs between organ systems and currently causes considerable confusion. A uniform classification framework for NENs at any anatomical location may reduce inconsistencies and contradictions among the various systems currently in use. The classification suggested here is intended to allow pathologists and clinicians to manage their patients with NENs consistently, while acknowledging organ-specific differences in classification criteria, tumor biology, and prognostic factors. The classification suggested is based on a consensus conference held at the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in November 2017 and subsequent discussion with additional experts. The key feature of the new classification is a distinction between differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), also designated carcinoid tumors in some systems, and poorly differentiated NECs, as they both share common expression of neuroendocrine markers. This dichotomous morphological subdivision into NETs and NECs is supported by genetic evidence at specific anatomic sites as well as clinical, epidemiologic, histologic, and prognostic differences. In many organ systems, NETs are graded as G1, G2, or G3 based on mitotic count and/or Ki-67 labeling index, and/or the presence of necrosis; NECs are considered high grade by definition. We believe this conceptual approach can form the basis for the next generation of NEN classifications and will allow more consistent taxonomy to understand how neoplasms from different organ systems inter-relate clinically and genetically.

Background: Pituitary tumours are common and easily treated by surgery or medical treatment in most cases. However, a small subset of pituitary tumours does not respond to standard medical treatment and presents with multiple local recurrences (aggressive pituitary tumours) and in rare occasion with metastases (pituitary carcinoma). The present European Society of Endocrinology (ESE) guideline aims to provide clinical guidance on diagnosis, treatment and follow-up in aggressive pituitary tumours and carcinomas. Methods: We decided upfront, while acknowledging that literature on aggressive pituitary tumours and carcinomas is scarce, to systematically review the literature according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system. The review focused primarily on first-and second-line treatment in aggressive pituitary tumours and carcinomas. We included 14 single-arm cohort studies (total number of patients = 116) most on temozolomide treatment (n = 11 studies, total number of patients = 106). A positive treatment effect was seen in 47% (95% CI: 36-58%) of temozolomide treated. Data from the recently performed ESE survey on aggressive pituitary tumours and carcinomas (165 patients) were also used as backbone for the guideline. In patients responding to first-line temozolomide, we suggest continuing treatment for at least 6 months in total. Furthermore, the guideline offers recommendations for patients who recurred after temozolomide treatment, for those who did not respond to temozolomide and for patients with systemic metastasis.

Pituitary adenomas are currently classified by histological, immunocytochemical and numerous ultrastructural characteristics lacking unequivocal prognostic correlations. We investigated the prognostic value of a new clinicopathological classification with grades based on invasion and proliferation. This retrospective multicentric case-control study comprised 410 patients who had surgery for a pituitary tumour with long-term follow-up. Using pituitary magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosis of cavernous or sphenoid sinus invasion, immunocytochemistry, markers of the cell cycle (Ki-67, mitoses) and p53, tumours were classified according to size (micro, macro and giant), type (PRL, GH, FSH/LH, ACTH and TSH) and grade (grade 1a: non-invasive, 1b: non-invasive and proliferative, 2a: invasive, 2b: invasive and proliferative, and 3: metastatic). The association between patient status at 8-year follow-up and age, sex, and classification was evaluated by two multivariate analyses assessing disease- or recurrence/progression-free status. At 8 years after surgery, 195 patients were disease-free (controls) and 215 patients were not (cases). In 125 of the cases the tumours had recurred or progressed. Analyses of disease-free and recurrence/progression-free status revealed the significant prognostic value (p < 0.001; p < 0.05) of age, tumour type, and grade across all tumour types and for each tumour type. Invasive and proliferative tumours (grade 2b) had a poor prognosis with an increased probability of tumour persistence or progression of 25- or 12-fold, respectively, as compared to non-invasive tumours (grade 1a). This new, easy to use clinicopathological classification of pituitary endocrine tumours has demonstrated its prognostic worth by strongly predicting the probability of post-operative complete remission or tumour progression and so could help clinicians choose the best post-operative therapy.