The choice of first-line treatment for metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (mP-NET) is mainly based on prognostic factors. ENETS-2016 guidelines stratified treatment according to 3 groups: Group 1, patients in whom all lesions could be removed; Group 2, patients with Ki67 <10%, low tumor burden, no symptoms and stable disease, for whom a watch-and-wait strategy or somatostatin analogs are proposed; Group 3, symptomatic patients or with Ki67 >10% or significant tumor burden or progressive disease, for whom a systemic chemotherapy is proposed. This retrospective study aimed to determine patient distribution, characteristics and outcome among these 3 groups. Patients with mP-NET diagnosis from 2004 to 2016 were categorized into the three groups. Prognosis was calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method. All treatments were recorded, and consistency with ENETS guidelines was explored. 104 patients were analyzed: 64% synchronous mP-NET, 80% grade 2 tumors and median overall survival (OS) of 104 (95% CI: 65–143) months. There were 15 patients in ENETS Group 1, 16 in Group 2 and 73 in Group 3. Median OS was not reached in Groups 1 and 2 and was 64 months (35–93) in Group 3. High liver tumor volume, high-grade tumor and progressive disease were associated with worse OS in multivariate analysis. The first-line treatment was in accordance with guidelines in 82%. 77% percent of deceased patients received less than 4 lines of treatment. Most patients are in Group 3 and do not receive all available treatments. Thus, trials are warranted to improve first-line chemotherapy. Alternative treatments may be considered for less aggressive disease.

Neuropilin 2 (NRP2), a transmembrane non-tyrosine kinase receptor, has been described as a potential critical player in the tumourigenesis of several solid cancers and particularly in neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs). A soluble form of NRP2 (sNRP2) has been previously described and corresponds to a truncated splice isoform. Its prognostic value has never been studied in NEN. NRP2 expression was studied by immunochemistry on tissue microarrays (n = 437) and on circulating tumour cells (CTCs, n = 5 patients with neuroendocrine carcinoma, NEC). We described the levels of sNRP2 in 229 patients with NEN using the ELISA method to identify the factors associated with sNRP2 levels and to evaluate its prognostic role; 90 blood donors represented the healthy control group. NRP2 was found in 97% of neuroendocrine tumours (396/410) and in 74% of NEC (20/27). NRP2 was also expressed in CTC of all the studied patients. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis showed that sNRP2 had a weak capacity to discriminate between NEN patients and healthy controls (area under curve (AUC) = 0.601, P = 0.053). Abnormal sNRP2 levels were associated with inflammatory syndrome, bone and peritoneal metastases, and abnormal chromogranin A levels. Patients with high sNRP2 levels (sNRP2^Q3–Q4) had significantly poorer overall survival in multivariate analysis (HR 0.16, 95% CI (0.04–0.67), P = 0.015). In conclusion, the present study found that sNRP2 and NRP2 could represent a new prognostic biomarker and a therapeutic target, respectively, particularly in aggressive NEN.

Neuroendocrine carcinomas (NEC) are aggressive malignant diseases. Etoposide-based rechallenge (EBR) and the prognostic role of RB transcriptional corepressor 1 (RB1) status in second-line chemotherapy (2L) have not been studied. The objectives of this study were to report the results of 2L including EBR as well as prognostic factors in a national retrospective multicentre study. NEC patients treated with 2L and further, with tissue samples available, were included. RB1 status and morphological classification were reviewed centrally. Among the 121 NEC patients (40% female, median age 61 years) included, there were 73 small-cell NEC (60%), 34 large-cell NEC (28%) and 14 NEC (not otherwise specified, 12%). Primary sites were lung (39%), gastroenteropancreatic (36%), other (13%) and unknown (12%). Median Ki-67 index was 80%. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) under 2L were 2.1 and 6.2 months, respectively. No difference was observed between patients who received an ‘adenocarcinoma-like’ or a ‘neuroendocrine-like’ 2L or according to the RB1 status. Thoracic NEC primary was the only adverse prognostic factor for OS. EBR, administered to 31 patients, resulted in a 62% disease control rate with a median PFS and OS of 3.2 and 11.7 months, respectively. In the 94 patients with a relapse-free interval of ≥3 months after first-line platinum–etoposide chemotherapy, the median OS was 12 months in patients who received EBR as compared to 5.9 months in patients who did not (P = 0.043). EBR could be the best 2L option for patient with initial response to first-line platinum–etoposide lasting at least 3 months. RB1 status does not provide prognostic information in this setting.