Gastric Neuroendocrine Tumors in Our Institutions According to the WHO 2010 Classification

Endo, Shunji; Dousei, Tsutomu; Yoshikawa, Yukinobu; Hatanaka, Nobutaka; Taniyama, Kiyomi; Yamauchi, Amane; Kamiike, Wataru; Nishijima, Junichi

doi:10.9738/cc134.1

Cited by 17 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is a poorly differentiated, high-grade malignant neoplasm that is comprised small cells or large-to-intermediate cells with marked nuclear atypia, multifocal necrosis, and a high number of mitoses (>20 per 10 HPF) [11]. Previous studies have reported the neuroendocrine markers of synaptophysin and chromogranin A must be stained to make a definitive diagnosis of NEN.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…NEC, also previously known as ''small cell carcinoma, large cell (neuro) endocrine carcinoma, or poorly differentiated (neuro)endocrine carcinoma'' [11]. This is a poorly differentiated, high-grade malignant neoplasm that is comprised small cells or large-to-intermediate cells with marked nuclear atypia, multifocal necrosis, and a high number of mitoses (>20 per 10 HPF) [11].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Neuroendocrine carcinoma of the stomach: clinical features and CT findings

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Neuroendocrine carcinoma of the stomach: clinical features and CT findings

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Rindi et al [23] reported that information on neuroendocrine cancer as classified by the WHO 2010 was forthcoming, revealing the limits and advantages of the system. Endo et al [22] reported the prognosis of 22 patients with gastric NETs according to the 2010 WHO classification, concluding that the prognoses of G1 and G2 were good. In our study, though sample size is relatively small, there was no statistical survival difference between G1 and G2.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the prognostic values of the 2010 WHO classification, AJCC 7th edition, and ENETS classification of gastric neuroendocrine tumors

Kim

Park²,

Yook³

et al. 2016

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability of the European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) system, 2010 World Health Organization (WHO) grading system, and American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system to predict survival after gastric neuroendocrine tumor (NET) resection has not yet been validated.We retrospectively evaluated 175 gastric NETs from 1996 to 2014. WHO grade 3 (G3) patients (n = 66) had a lower survival rate than grade 1 (G1) (n = 39) or grade 2 (G2) (n = 13) patients, with similar high survival rates for G1 and G2 patients. G3 patients had a lower survival rate than mixed-type patients (n = 57). Using the AJCC classification, most of the G1/2 NETs (86.6%) were confined to T1/T2, N0 tumor, and stage I/IIa, but the survival rate was not well distributed. In contrast, G3/mixed tumors were well distributed in terms of T, N, stage, and survival. Using the ENETS classification, 64.6% of the tumors were T2 and only 8.6% were T3. In addition, 49.7% were stage IIIb and only 1.9% was IIa, with poor survival distribution.Our findings strongly suggested that the WHO and ENETS classification systems have shown a low prognostic value. The AJCC TNM system showed a low prognostic value for well-differentiated NETs (G1 or G2). In contrast, the AJCC TNM system had a high prognostic value for G3 or mixed tumors.

show abstract

“…In a study of Jernman et al (15) classification was found to be more beneficial in predicting the potential of metastasis of the neuroendocrine tumors compared to the WHO 2000 classification. In a study of Endo et al (16) in 22 gastric neuroendocrine tumors, 81 cases were G1, 5 were G2, and 16 were NEC. All NET G2 and NEC cases had metastases, and 3-year survival rates were 20% and 7%, respectively, whereas NET G1 showed a 3-year 100% survival.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of WHO 2000 and WHO 2010 classifications of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

Karakuş

Helvaci²,

Ekinci³

et al. 2014

Turk J Gastroenterol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Aims: Grading and staging are important in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors for directing treatment. In this study, we evaluated the histopathological parameters of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors and statistically analyzed the correlations of these parameters between the World Health Organization (WHO) 2000 and 2010 classifications. Materials and Methods: A total of 77 cases diagnosed as neuroendocrine tumors were included in the study. Cases were classified according to the WHO 2000 and WHO 2010 classification systems, and the differences and correlations between the two systems were discussed. Results: Among the 50 cases that were diagnosed as well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor according to WHO 2000, 45 were found to be Grade 1 and 5 were found to be Grade 2 according to the WHO 2010 classification. Among the 8 cases with well-differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma according to WHO 2000; 5 and 3 were Grade 1 and Grade 2, respectively, according to the WHO 2010 classification. All of the 19 cases with poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma according to WHO 2000 were found to be Grade 3 according to the WHO 2010 classification. No differences were found between the classifications in the poorly differentiated group with a full correlation between the two classifications. Conclusion: Although WHO 2000 seems to be a better classification to predict prognosis, since it is based on various parameters, such as depth of invasion, angiolymphatic invasion, and presence of metastasis, it was concluded that there was no difference between the WHO 2000 and WHO 2010 classification, which is based on only the number of mitoses and Ki-67 proliferation index.

show abstract

Gastric Neuroendocrine Tumors in Our Institutions According to the WHO 2010 Classification

Cited by 17 publications

References 5 publications

Neuroendocrine carcinoma of the stomach: clinical features and CT findings

Neuroendocrine carcinoma of the stomach: clinical features and CT findings

Comparison of the prognostic values of the 2010 WHO classification, AJCC 7th edition, and ENETS classification of gastric neuroendocrine tumors

Comparison of WHO 2000 and WHO 2010 classifications of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About