Don’t worry, it’s benign!


One of the most controversial aspects of Neuroendocrine Tumours (NETs) is the ‘benign vs malignant’ question. It’s been widely debated and it frequently patrols the various patient forums and other social media platforms. It raises emotions and it triggers many responses ….. at least from those willing to engage in the conversation. At best, this issue can cause confusion, at worst, it might contradict what new patients have been told by their physicians (….or not been told). This post will not cover Neuroendocrine Carcinoma which by definition is malignant.

Any definition of the word ‘tumour’ will confirm it can either be benign or malignant. However, and while I’m sure there are benign NETs, the key statement to explain any slow growing or indolent NET is that they all have malignant potential – thus why surveillance and follow up is really important. This is the key factor in the changes found in the 2010 Digestive System World Health Organisation (WHO) classification system from the previous ‘flaky’ version. This reinforcement of the malignant potential of all NETs was duplicated in the recent 2017 Endocrine System equivalent, which is now proposed as a classification scheme for all NETs (see below).

Of course we are not helped by the continued use of the term Carcinoid which decodes to ‘Cancer Like’ – that is potentially regressing the work of those specialists who are trying to undo the last 100 years of complacency in the medical world (and not really the type of awareness we need). The word is gradually being erased from NET nomenclature and the recent 2018 proposal by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and WHO NET expert consensus panel to ditch it from the remaining versions of out of date WHO classifications (e.g. Pulmonary/Lung, Pituitary, Head & Neck, Genito-urinary, Adrenal and Paraganglia, Skin), is the final nail in the coffin for Carcinoid. RIP Carcinoid. This also supports our awareness issues with the media reporting the wrong cancer types based on anatomy of the primary tumour. Dear Doctors, Patient Advocates and Patients ….. please stop using the word!

I have lost count of the stories from Neuroendocrine Cancer patients who have been told their tumour was benign but then returned with incurable and metastatic cancer sometime downstream. Clearly there are doctors who do not understand NETs and/or are not aware of the changes in WHO classification schemes since 2010. Sure, some will prove to be ‘benign’ in nature and may not cause many issues but any Ki-67 below 3% is a formal grade of Neuroendocrine Neoplasm. I accept that it’s currently difficult to work out which cases will turn more aggressive and when, thus why surveillance and follow up are really important and also why patients should be seeing doctors who understand NETs. Worth also noting that many slow growing and indolent tumors can still often produce troublesome NET syndromes.

I’ve even heard one patient story where it was claimed a doctor called a metastatic NET case benign! Any definition of ‘benign’ will include the statement that they do not spread to other parts of the body. The NET Patient world is full of slow growing Grade 1 Stage 4 patients – by definition, they’re all malignant.

Read up on more detail in my article ‘benign vs malignant’. Also read my ‘Carcinoid vs Neuroendocrine’ discussion as this is inextricably linked.

If a Doctor says you have NETs and not to worry because it’s benign, ask questions.

Thanks for reading

Ronny

I’m also active on Facebook. Like my page for even more news. I’m also building up this site here: Ronny Allan

Disclaimer

My Diagnosis and Treatment History

Most Popular Posts

Sign up for my twitter newsletter

Read my Cure Magazine contributions

Remember ….. in the war on Neuroendocrine Cancer, let’s not forget to win the battle for better quality of life!

Living with Neuroendocrine Cancer – the 7 Year Itch

7 year itch

I quite like the Facebook memory thing. This morning I got a reminder of a post I made from 7 years ago whilst I was in hospital recovering from my 9 Nov surgery.  It had taken 12 days for me to feel strong enough to venture onto social media with a simple message “I’m feeling perkier”.  For those not familiar with English localisms, it just means lively, spirited, bright, sunny, cheerful, animated, upbeat, buoyant, bubbly, cheery, bouncy, genial, jaunty, chirpy, sprightly, vivacious, in fine fettle, full of beans, bright-eyed and bushy-tailed.  I guess I met some of these descriptors most of the time! I had gotten through the worst and the light at the end of the tunnel was now a faint glimmer.

I’ve recently had a ton of ‘7 years ago cancerversaries’ and there’s still a few to go! I’m currently being reminded of an issue that started just after my initial treatment and by coincidence (perhaps?) the commencement of my Lanreotide (Somatuline Autogel).  Itching!  However, for me, it’s mainly the right leg below the knee (go figure!). Much less frequently on my arms and sides.  I know many people have the same issue but no-one ever seems to find out why – I guess it’s that Neuroendocrine jigsaw thing again?

Initially, I put the issue down to Lanreotide, as this is mentioned in the side effect list on the drug instructions.  The initial connection was made because it seemed to be happening immediately after my monthly ‘dart’.  A really annoying itch mostly around my ankles and which had to be scratched!  An application of a general emollient cream for a few days seemed to do the trick and after a week it was gone (until the next injection …..). However, after a few years, I sensed the issue was drifting away from the injection cycle and adopting a different and more random pattern.  I’m also suspicious of a nutritional connection and checking my article Nutrition for NETs -Vitamins and Mineral Challenges, I can see Vit B3 (Niacin) and Vit E are mentioned in regards skin issues.  I’d be confused if this was an issue today as I now take plenty supplements to offset GI malabsorption.  However, I probably wasn’t taking sufficient between surgery and 2013 as I lacked the knowledge to do so at the time.  So nutritional deficiency remains a possibility or at least an added complication.  The most recent outbreak has unusually gone on for the last 4 weeks.  Maybe I just currently have what many people have – dry flaky skin and the onset of winter probably isn’t helping!

I also seem to have had an eczema type issue in my right ear and mild rosacea for more than 7 years (pre diagnosis).  As you can imagine my ‘inner detective’ is working overtime!  One thing is clear – this itchy leg issue has plagued me for 7 years.

I know that many people have real issues with rashes and skin itching, I’ve seen this so many times with some people describing it as severe.  Clearly when this is the case, a doctor’s intervention is generally required.  I’ve seen the following connections to NETs and skin issues:

Thanks for reading – please feel free to share

Ronny

I’m also active on Facebook. Like my page for even more news. I’m also building up this site here: Ronny Allan

Disclaimer

My Diagnosis and Treatment History

Most Popular Posts

Sign up for my twitter newsletter

Remember ….. in the war on Neuroendocrine Cancer, let’s not forget to win the battle for better quality of life

Genetics and Neuroendocrine Tumors


In my article ‘Ever wonder what caused your NET’, I concluded that currently, the only known scientifically explained causes for NETs were heredity/genetic in nature.  This is mostly associated with those who have MEN syndromes (yes, they are a syndrome not a type of tumour) and a few other less common types of NET including Pheochomocytoma/Paraganglioma (Pheo/Para) and Medullary Thyroid Carcinoma (MTC) (the familial version of MTC is often referred to as FMTC). However, please note this does not mean that all those diagnosed with pancreatic, parathyroid, pituarity, Pheo/Para and MTC tumours, will have any heredity or genetic conditions, many will simply be sporadic tumors.

In recent years, it has become increasingly apparent that a number of Neuroendocrine tumours arise as a result of germline genetic mutations and are inherited in an autosomal dominant pattern. The number of genes implicated is increasing.

Apparently, 5-10% of Gastroenteropancreatic NETs (GEP NETs) are estimated to have a hereditary background. Syndromes associated with these include Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia (MEN), Von Hippel Lindau (VHL), Neurofibromatosis Type 1 (NF1), Tuberous Sclerosis (TS) and others. People who have a genetic condition may present with the tumors (perhaps along with an associated syndrome) and so the genetic condition if there is one, may not be known at this point.  Thus why I was interested in a paper published in Springer Link last week – titled When should genetic testing be performed in patients with neuroendocrine tumours.  It’s actually much more than that! Check it out here:

Crossref DOI link: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11154-017-9430-3

In this review, the authors examined the features which may lead a clinician to suspect that a patient may have an inherited cause of a NET and they outlined which underlying conditions should be suspected. They also discussed what type of screening may be appropriate in a variety of situations. If there is a way to identify which patients are likely to have a germline mutation, this would enable clinicians to counsel patients adequately about their future disease risk, and allows for earlier detection of at-risk patients through family screening. There’s a couple of minor errors in the text but I’ve contacted the authors.

The authors focused on presentations of NETs of the gastrointestinal system, chromaffin cell tumours (Pheochromocytoma and Paraganglioma) and Medullary Thyroid Carcinoma. Pituitary tumors (normally associated with MEN1), were not considered in scope for the review.  Interesting, the review includes news of a move by endocrinologists to reclassify ‘Pituitary Adenomas’ as Pituitary NETs (PitNETs). Read the abstract here.  This would appear to be in line with a gradual shift from the benign nomenclature associated with certain NETs to the ‘malignant’ potential of these type of tumors.  The abbreviation is also in line with others, e.g. pNET, SiNET, etc.  A useful reminder that we must stop using the term ‘Carcinoid‘ as this is regressing this extremely useful initiative to highlight the malignant potential of all NETs.

There also appears to be some linkage to the study looking at the possibility of familial Small Intestine NETs (SiNETs).  You can read more about a US registered trial here (with apologies for use of the now defunct term ‘Carcinoid‘).

This is a complex subject and the text above is very basic. If you wish to dig further, the quoted reference is a good read.  Just to emphasise, it’s aim is to provide advice about when to recommend genetic testing for NETs, and in doing so provides some useful reference information.  It’s broken down into 4 distinct tumor groupings:

1.  Gastroenteropancreatic (GEP NETs)

2.  Bronchial/Thymic NETs

3.  Pheochromocytoma/Paraganglioma (however, since this study, there has been an update to Pheochromocytoma/Paraganglioma genes – see here please.

4.  Medullary Thyroid Carcinoma

You may also find this article from the National Cancer Institute very useful.  It has a wider scope but a different aim. Genetics of Endocrine and Neuroendocrine Neoplasias (PDQ®)–Health Professional Version”

I also noted the UKINETS Guidelines for NETs has a section on genetics and includes something called Carney Complex.

 

Thanks for reading

Ronny

I’m also active on Facebook. Like my page for even more news. I’m also building up this site here: Ronny Allan

Disclaimer

My Diagnosis and Treatment History

Most Popular Posts

Sign up for my twitter newsletter

Read my Cure Magazine contributions

Remember ….. in the war on Neuroendocrine Cancer, let’s not forget to win the battle for better quality of life!

Lanreotide for Lung NETs – SPINET Trial

Somatuline (Lanreotide)

There’s been a lot of action in the area of what is termed Gastro-Entero-Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors (GEP-NETs).  It can therefore sometimes appear that Lung NETs are the poor relation.  There are certainly some unmet needs in this area of the anatomy including a lack of research.  Thus far, no prospective trials specifically for patients with lung NETs appear to have been reported.

However, there has been some recent movement. Last year, the use of Afinitor (Everolimus) was approved for progressive, non-functional NET of GI or Lung origin.

SPINET Trial for Lung NETs

In late 2016, I tipped you off about an Ipsen sponsored trial for Lung NETs involving Lanreotide (Somatuline) SPINET is a Phase 3, prospective, multi-center, randomized, double-blind, study evaluating the efficacy and safety of Lanreotide plus “Best Supportive Care” (BSC) versus placebo plus BSC for the treatment of well-differentiated, metastatic and/or unresectable, typical or atypical lung NETs.   The aim of the SPINET study is to evaluate the safety and antitumor efficacy of Lanreotide 120 mg in patients with advanced lung NETs.  I suspect that many Lung NET patients are already receiving somatostatin analogues (Octreotide/Lanreotide) but prescribed only for syndrome/symptom control.

SPINET is now recruiting in many locations (see below).

The countries involved in the SPINET trial are as follows (see the location details here in the trials document). Please also check the inclusion and exclusion criteria.

USA (21 locations)

Austria (1 location)

Canada (3 locations)

Denmark (2 locations – none recruiting yet)

France (7 locations)

Germany (4 locations)

Italy (5 locations – only one recruiting so far)

Netherlands (2 locations – none recruiting yet)

Poland (6 locations – none recruiting yet)

Spain (4 locations – only 2 recruiting so far)

UK (6 locations – only one recruiting so far)

In addition to the trial document linked above, you can read more about the SPINET trial here with commentary from a well-known NET Specialist – Dr Diane Reidy-Lagunes, who is the principal investigator for the trial.

How do I get on the trial?

You may be interested in this organisation – Trialbee.  They are a company helping Ipsen to raise awareness of the SPINET trial using a cloud based platform to connect patients, investigators and sponsors (I’ve authenticated their participation with Ipsen).  There is no fee for using their services.  There’s a useful questionnaire which can help you decide if this trial is for you – here.

Please note, if you are concerned about participating in clinical trials, you should always consult your specialist for advice.  

Thanks for reading

 

If you are a patient advocate or an advocate organisation, please share with your communities in order that Lung NET patients are at least made aware of the trial.

 

Ronny

Don’t forget to VOTE FOR ME in the 2017 WEGO Health Awards – click here

Hey, I’m also active on Facebook.  Like my page for even more news.

Disclaimer

My Diagnosis and Treatment History

Most Popular Posts

Sign up for my twitter newsletter

Check out my Podcast (click and press play)

Remember ….. in the war on Neuroendocrine Cancer, let’s not forget to win the battle for better quality of life!

community_titled_transparent_2013-10-22

NETwork with Ronny © – Newsletter March 2017

 

Hi NETworkers!

Welcome to my fifth ‘community’ newsletter, the monthly summary of NET news, views and ICYMI (in case you missed it!).

The highlight of the month was my attendance at the first ever Joint Patient-Physician symposium at ENETS Barcelona.  I remain thankful to INCA for the honour of attending and for the experience that came with it. It was also great to finally meet other NET advocates face to face for the first time.  Some of them have been great supporters since the inception of my blog and community.

with Grace Goldstein from Carcinoid Cancer Foundation

March was a slower month in blogging terms due to a number of external projects and a continuing flow of private messages. I don’t have an issue with private contact but please note my disclaimer. My winter cold extended into March including during the ENETS/INCA symposium and although I had no voice, I still managed a question to the panel.

Despite a low number of blogs, I still managed to accumulate the second biggest monthly blog views ever. Thank you all so much 

New Blogs Published

Due to the vagaries of Facebook inner workings, some of these may not have even shown on your Facebook timeline.  So, ICYMI …….here’s a summary with links:

Other News in Mar 2017

New Audiences for NET Cancer.  From Day 1, I said it was my aim to find new audiences for NETS rather than just share stuff within our own community.

  • I’m ‘extremely’ active on twitter and I find a lot of my research stuff there. I also use it to support other conditions and it’s mostly returned (i.e. others help with NET awareness). There is so much on twitter that I could swamp the community Facebook site so I started a twitter newsletter via an app called Nuzzel which seeks out stuff I normally like. Click this link and sign up if you think this is something you’d be interested in receiving.  I almost doubled the amount of subscribers in March! Currently 168.
  • I’m making new friends in the interventional radiologist community and am waiting on a video featuring a NET Patient (will bring you details in due course) and I’m learning more about these technologies from reading their tweets – I had no idea how many different jobs these guys do! I’m also seeing an increase from the Pathology community.
  • I’m proud to have been asked to become a ‘Community Champion’ on the Macmillan Cancer Support Forum helping outliers from the NET community there. I’ll be reporting more on this in the coming weeks.

Patients Included.  A new campaign for 2017. I was excited to have been invited to the first ever joint Patient-Physician symposium at the annual ENETS conference in Barcelona 8 – 11 March. I have really good information which will feed into my blogs, either as updates or new blogs. This new blog is a result of attending this symposium but it’s from an existing campaign run along the ‘Consequences’ campaign run by Macmillan Cancer Support for all cancers. In the war on Neuroendocrine Cancer, let’s not forget to win the battle for better quality of life

the first question to the first ever joint patient-physician symposium. Hardly any voice due to a winter cold

Blog Milestone.  In March, I tipped over the quarter of a million views! Thank you all so much Keep sharing!

Facebook Milestone.  I’m aiming for 5000 by year-end and this is on track. The Facebook page is now my biggest outlet for awareness and education so please please please recommend this page to anyone you think would be interested.  The picture of the invite button shown here is an example from a windows computer, it may differ on other platforms.

capture-invite-friends

Instagram

I’m expanding into Instagram to see how that goes. I’ve amassed over 200 followers to date. Initially, I’ll just be posting pictures of things that inspire me, mostly scenic photos of places I’ve been or want to go!  You can follow me here:  Click here to go to my Instagram page

Figures

Where did March Blog views come from? – Top 11 countries:  Denmark is a new entry.

 

 

For interest. the 10 Ten Facebook followers by Country – Spain overtakes France 🙂

Thanks for your great support in March.

Ronny

Hey Guys, I’m also active on Facebook.  Like my page for even more news.

Disclaimer

My Diagnosis and Treatment History

Most Popular Posts

community_titled_transparent_2013-10-22

NETwork with Ronny © – Newsletter February 2017

network-with-ronny

Hi NETworkers!

Welcome to my fourth ‘community’ newsletter, the monthly summary of NET news, views and ICYMI (in case you missed it!).

February was a slower month in blogging terms due to a major increase in contact from people privately asking for advice and others asking me to support external projects. I don’t have an issue with private contact but please note my disclaimer. I also had a winter cold for a few days, so I relaxed a bit. Only a short month but I managed to accumulate the second biggest monthly blog views ever (January 2017 will be difficult to beat).  Thank you all so much 

January’s success also led to increased Facebook followers and I broke through the 4000 milestone with a plan to reach 5000 by the end of the year or before.  If I grew at January’s rate, it could easily be 6000 but that’s probably wishful thinking!

The month ended with a bang!  The long-awaited FDA approval of ‘XERMELO’ (Telotristat Ethyl) was announced yesterday. Check out my blog which has all the links you need in one area.  Click here to read

New Blogs Published

Due to the vagaries of Facebook inner workings, some of these may not have even shown on your Facebook timeline.  So, ICYMI …….here’s a summary with links:

Other News in Feb 2017

New Audiences for NET Cancer.  From Day 1, I said it was my aim to find new audiences for NETS rather than just share stuff within our own community.

  • I’m ‘extremely’ active on twitter and I find a lot of my research stuff there.  I also use it to support other conditions and it’s mostly returned (i.e. others help with NET awareness).   There is so much on twitter that I could swamp the community Facebook site so I started a twitter newsletter via an app called Nuzzel which seeks out stuff I normally like.  Click this link and sign up if you think this is something you’d be interested in receiving.  I reached 100 email subscribers today!
  • I’m making new friends in the interventional radiologist community having been invited to join their twitter chat.  That turned out to be profitable as I won $40 of Starbucks e-gifts for being a quick tweeter!  I now have some new friends who are producing a video featuring a NET Patient (will bring you details in due course) and I’m learning more about these technologies from reading their tweets – I had no idea how many different jobs these guys do!
  • I’m proud to have been asked to become a ‘Community Champion’ on the Macmillan Cancer Support Forum.  I’ll be reporting more on this in the coming weeks.

Patients Included.  A new campaign for 2017.  I’m very excited to have been invited to the first ever joint Patient-Physician symposium at the annual ENETS conference in Barcelona 8 – 11 March.  I’m being sponsored by the International Neuroendocrine Cancer Alliance (INCA). I’ll be tweeting and posting stuff live from the conference, look out for this.

Blog Milestone.  Accelerated viewing figures should put me into a quarter of a million blog views by the end of this month! Thank you all so much Keep sharing!

Facebook Milestone.  My Facebook page is now my biggest outlet for awareness and education so please please please recommend this page to anyone you think would be interested.  The picture of the invite button shown here is an example from a windows computer, it may differ on other platforms.

capture-invite-friends

Instagram

I’m expanding into Instagram to see how that goes.  Initially I’ll just be posting pictures of things that inspire me, mostly scenic photos of places I’ve been or want to go!   You can follow me here:  Click here to go to my Instagram page

Figures

Where did February Blog views come from? – Top 10 countries:

capture-10-ten-country-feb-17

For interest the 10 Ten Facebook followers by Country:

capture

Thanks for your great support in February.

Ronny

Hey Guys, I’m also active on Facebook.  Like my page for even more news.

Disclaimer

My Diagnosis and Treatment History

Most Popular Posts

community_titled_transparent_2013-10-22

Recent Progress in NET Management – Positive presentation from Jonathan R Strosberg MD

jonathan-strosbergI recently wrote a blog called Neuroendocrine Cancer – Exciting Times Ahead! I wrote that on a day I was feeling particularly positive and at the time, I wanted to share that positivity with you. I genuinely believe there’s a lot of great things happening. Don’t get me wrong, there’s a lot still to be done, particularly in the area of diagnosis and quality of life after being diagnosed. However, this is a really great message from a well-known NET expert.

In an interview with OncLive, Jonathan R. Strosberg, MD, associate professor at the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center in Florida, discussed his presentation on NETs at a recent 2016 Symposium, and shed light on the progress that has been made in this treatment landscape.

OncLive: Please highlight some of the main points from your presentation.

Strosberg: The question I was asked to address is whether we’re making progress in the management of NETs, and I think the answer is unequivocally yes. Prior to 2009, there were no positive published phase III trials.

Since then, there have been 8 trials, 7 of which have reached their primary endpoints. So it’s been a decade of significant improvement. And even though none of these studies were powered to look at overall survival as an endpoint, we’re certainly seeing evidence of improvement in outcomes.

OncLive: What are some of the pivotal agents that you feel have impacted the paradigm in the past several years?

Strosberg: The first group is the somatostatin analogs. We use them to control hormonal symptoms like carcinoid syndrome, but with the CLARINET study, we now know that they substantially inhibit tumor growth.

The next significant drug we use in this disease is everolimus (Afinitor), an oral mTOR inhibitor, which is now approved in several indications based on positive phase III studies. The first was in pancreatic NETs and subsequently, based on the RADIANT-4 trial, it was also approved in lung and gastrointestinal NETs. So that was an important advance.

The next important category of treatment is radiolabeled somatostatin analogs, otherwise known as peptide receptor radiotherapy. The one that’s been tested in a phase III trial is lutetium dotatate, also known as Lutathera. It was tested in patients with progressive midgut NETs and showed a very substantial 79% improvement in progression-free survival, and a very strong trend toward improvement in overall survival, which we hope will be confirmed upon final analysis.

OncLive: Are we getting better at diagnosing and managing the treatment of NETs?

Strosberg: Certainly. I think pathologists are better at making the diagnosis of a NET, rather than just calling a cancer pancreatic cancer or colorectal cancer. They’re recognizing the neuroendocrine aspects of the disease, and doing the appropriate immunohistochemical staining.

We also have better diagnostic tools. We used to rely primarily on octreoscan, and in many cases we still do, but there is a new diagnostic scan called Gallium-68 dotatate scan, also known as Netspot, which has substantially improved sensitivity and specificity. It’s not yet widely available, but it is FDA approved and hopefully will enable better diagnosis as well as staging in the coming years.

And, with the increase in number of phase III studies, we’re developing evidence-based guidelines, which will hopefully lead to more standardization, although knowing how to sequence these new drugs is still quite challenging.

OncLive: With sequencing, what are the main questions that we’re still trying to answer?

Strosberg: If we take, for example, NETs of the midgut, beyond first-line somatostatin analogs, physicians and patients often face decisions regarding where to proceed next, and for some patients with liver-dominant disease, liver-directed therapies are still an option.

For others, everolimus is a systemic option, and then hopefully lutetium dotatate will be an option based on approval of the drug, which is currently pending. Knowing how to choose among those 3 options is going to be a challenge, and I think there will be debates. Hopefully, clinical trials that compare one agent to another can help doctors make that choice. It’s even more complicated for pancreatic NETs. Beyond somatostatin analogs, we have about 5 choices—we have everolimus, sunitinib (Sutent), cytotoxic chemotherapy, liver-directed therapy, and peptide receptor radiotherapy. It’s even more challenging in that area.

OncLive: Are there any other ongoing clinical trials with some of these agents that you’re particularly excited about?

Strosberg: There’s a trial that is slated to take place in Europe which will compare lutetium dotatate with everolimus in advanced pancreatic NETs, and I think that’s going to be a very important trial that will help us get some information on both sequencing of these drugs, as well as the efficacy of Lutathera in the pancreatic NET population, based on well-run prospective clinical trials. I’m particularly looking forward to that trial.

OncLive: Looking to the future, what are some of the immediate challenges you hope to tackle with NETs?

Strosberg: One area of particular need is poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas. That’s a field that’s traditionally been understudied. There have been very few prospective clinical trials looking at this particular population, and we’re hoping that will change in the near future. There are a number of trials taking place looking at immunotherapy drugs. If these agents work anywhere in the neuroendocrine sphere, they are more likely to work in poorly differentiated or high-grade tumors, in my opinion, given the mutational profile of these cancers. So that’s something I’m particularly looking forward to being able to offer these patients something other than the cisplatin/etoposide combination that goes back decades, and is of short-lasting duration.

See more at: http://www.onclive.com/publications/oncology-live/2016/vol-17-no-24/expert-discusses-recent-progress-in-net-management#sthash.ypkilX2A.dpuf

Thanks for reading

Ronny

Hey Guys, I’m also active on Facebook.  Like my page for even more news.

Disclaimer

My Diagnosis and Treatment History

Most Popular Posts

Sign up for my twitter newsletter

community_titled_transparent_2013-10-22

NETwork with Ronny © – Newsletter January 2017

network-with-ronny

Hi NETworkers!

Welcome to my third ‘community’ newsletter, the monthly summary of NET news, views and ICYMI (in case you missed it!).

January was a month for breaking records.  I recorded the biggest ever amount of views in any one day, any one week and now any one month and it will probably be a long time before they’re broken again! This was mainly due to the fantastic support you showed for one particular blog post The Anatomy Of Neuroendocrine Cancer.  Thank you all so much 

January was also a month for making new friends after being invited to speak to an audience of 30 pharma managers at Ipsen’s Germany HQ near Karlsruhe.  I was made very welcome by the Ipsen staff and I think it’s great they want to hear the patient voice.  Bad weather was coming in fast and I only just escaped in time from Frankfurt Airport, suffering a 2 hour delay while the plane was ‘de-iced’.  Nonetheless, I really enjoyed a flying visit to a country where I had lived for 12 years in the 70s/80s.  See my Facebook post about this visit: https://goo.gl/hyJ0Si

New Blogs Published

A busy month for new blogs. Due to the vagaries of Facebook inner workings, some of these may not have even shown on your timeline.  So, ICYMI …….here’s a summary with links:

Other News in Jan 2017

New Audiences for NET Cancer.  From Day 1, I said it was my aim to find new audiences for NETS rather than just share stuff within our own community.  Two new openings in Dec to report:

  • Ipsen isn’t really a new audience but the individual employees at their German HQ are now more aware of life with Neuroendocrine Cancer.  See my Facebook post about this visit: https://goo.gl/hyJ0Si
  • I’m ‘extremely’ active on twitter and I find a lot of my research stuff there.  I also use it to support other conditions and it’s mostly returned (i.e. others help with NET awareness).   There is so much on twitter that I could swamp the community Facebook site so I started a twitter newsletter via an app called Nuzzel which seeks out stuff I normally like.  You can sign up for this newsletter here as I won’t be posting it every day.  Click this link and sign up if you think this is something you’d be interested in receiving.
  • I’m making new friends in the interventional radiologist community having been invited to join their twitter chat.  Many of us will know an Interventional Radiologist (some are known as Interventional Oncologists) following treatment (e.g. a liver embolization). I’m hoping to soon have access to some great videos about their work with NETs.
  • I’m proud to have been asked to become a ‘Community Champion’ on the Macmillan Cancer Support Forum.  I’ll be reporting on this in the coming weeks.

Patients Included.  A new campaign for 2017 and I’ll shortly be bringing you news of an opportunity in Mar 2017.  We want to be included right?

Blog Milestone.  My blog tipped over 220,000 views in Jan and I’m half way from the 1 Jan position to reaching a quarter of a million.  Thanks – keep sharing!

Facebook Milestone.  My Facebook page is now my biggest outlet for awareness and education so please please please recommend this page to anyone you think would be interested.  The picture of the invite button shown here is an example from a windows computer, it may differ on other platforms.

capture-invite-friends

Figures

Where did January Blog views come from – Top 10 countries:

capture-blog-jan-17

For interest the 10 Ten Facebook followers by City:

capture-cities

Thanks for your great support in January – a great start to 2017.

 

Ronny

Hey Guys, I’m also active on Facebook.  Like my page for even more news.

Disclaimer

My Diagnosis and Treatment History

Most Popular Posts

community_titled_transparent_2013-10-22

NETwork with Ronny © – Newsletter December 2016

 

Hi NETworkers!

Welcome to my second ‘community’ newsletter, the monthly summary of NET news in Dec 2016, views and ICYMI (in case you missed it!).

December was a particularly special month.  For the previous 3 months, I had been busily working behind the scenes and on my various social media presences to put on a good show for the 2016 WEGO Health Activist Awards.  This paid off and I won the Best in Show ‘Community’ category in addition to being shortlisted as one of 5 finalists in the blog category.  The community award was special because it means we all won the award as a part of this ‘Community’.  I’ve picked up a whole new bunch of friends outside the NET world bringing much-needed exposure to NET Cancer. I had a quiet week resting before I resumed normal activity and then a sprint finish at the end of the month took me over the magic 10,000 blog hits figure (and even more on Facebook).  Stick with me because I really need your help and support and anyone else you know who can assist.  The WEGO awards brought a significant increase in twitter followers.

Blogging

A quiet month in terms of numbers of blogs. Due to the vagaries of Facebook inner workings, some of these may not have even shown on your timeline.  So, ICYMI …….here’s a summary with links:

  • My Nov Newsletter!
  • A blog all about Carcinoid Crisis – potentially one of the most important pieces of information you need to know.  Read here.
  • My award announcement!
  • First in a series of ‘spotlight on ……’ posts – this one on Pheochromocytomas and Paragangliomas.  Read here.
  • I shared an inspiration message with you – one that I received from an old friend. Read ‘Keep your light burning’ which had a great response.
  • Confused about the difference between Lanreotide and Octreotide?  This blog will help – it got a really good response and you can read it here.  I also received lots of questions about the individual drugs which was great and shows the importance of this subject to patients out there.

Other News in Dec

New Audiences for NET Cancer.  From Day 1, I said it was my aim to find new audiences for NETS rather than just share stuff within our own community.  Two new openings in Dec to report:

  • The exposure during the build up to the 2016 WEGO Health Activist Awards where I made the final in two categories continued into Dec culminating in the award win (you can listen to the announcement live here).  I also featured in a radio show just before the announcement and you can listen to it here (start at 40.30).
  • I’m ‘extremely’ active on twitter and I find a lot of my research stuff there.  I also use it to support other conditions and it’s mostly returned (i.e. others help with NET awareness).   There is so much on twitter that I could swamp the community Facebook site so I started a twitter newsletter via an app called Nuzzel which seeks out stuff I normally like.  You can sign up for this newsletter here as I wont be posting it every day.  Click this link and sign up if you think this is something  you’d be interested in receiving.

Blog Milestone.  My blog tipped over 200,000 views in Dec and it’s already accelerating toward a quarter of a million.  Thanks – keep sharing!

Facebook Milestone.  My Facebook page was 2 years old in Dec 🙂  Please recommend this page to anyone you think would be interested.

capture
Invite or recommend my page please – let’s grow awareness!

Figures

Where did December Blog views come from – Top 10 countries (Dominican Republic seems to be a new source of interest):

capture

For interest the 10 Ten Facebook followers by Country.

capture1

Thanks for your great support in December.  Looking forward to serving you in 2017!

Ronny

Hey Guys, I’m also active on Facebook.  Like my page for even more news.

Disclaimer

My Diagnosis and Treatment History

Most Popular Posts

community_titled_transparent_2013-10-22

NETwork with Ronny © – Newsletter November 2016

 

network-with-ronny
Please share me!

 

Hi,

welcome to my first newsletter, a pilot for a monthly summary of NET news, views and ICYMI (in case you missed it!).

What a month November has been – we had NET Cancer Day build up and I’ve been working hard to put on a good show for the 2016 WEGO Health Activist Awards (results expected around 6/7 Dec) whilst at the same time maintain my other campaigning activity across a wide range of social media platforms.  Due to increased activity, I recorded the second highest monthly viewing figures ever – over 13,000 hits on my blog site in one month (and even more on Facebook).  Not bad for a little backstreet disease – but my intention is to take it to the high street (main street).  Stick with me because I really need your help and support and anyone else you know who can assist.

Blogging

I seem to have produced an above average amount of blogs this month. Due to the vagaries of Facebook inner workings, some of these may not have even shown on your timeline.  So, ICYMI …….here’s a summary with links:

Other News in Nov

New Audiences for NET Cancer.  From Day 1, I said it was my aim to find new audiences for NETS rather than just share stuff within our own community.  Two new openings in Nov to report:

  • Cancer Knowledge Network.  An article published in what is said to be North America’s most widely read cancer education resource.  Read it by clicking here.
  • Mentioned by Macmillan Cancer, one of the world’s biggest Cancer support organisations.  See here.  You could increase the impact of this opening by clicking on the black star here to increase my likes number.
  • And ….. there has been masses of exposure during the build up to the 2016 WEGO Health Activist Awards where I made the final in two categories:  Blog and Community.

Lutathera (PRRT) Delay. Not the best news from USA where it was announced the approval of Lutathera (PRRT) would be delayed beyond the projected date of 28 Dec 16. A delay of several months seems to be forming on the airwaves but the expanded access program (EAP) will be extended until this issue has been resolved.  CCF has great info on EAP – click here

Living with NETs Website. A new website sponsored by Ipsen (Lanreotide manufacturers) was launched on NET Cancer Day.  This is a special site for me as I was involved with other patients in advising and featuring on the site.  Take a look by clicking here.  Check out my patient video here.

More treatment options for Lung NETs?  Lung NETs lack many of the treatments available for other types of NET but a new trial of Lanreotide could help.  Read here.

Figures

For interest the 10 Ten Facebook followers by Country.

capture

 

Thanks for your great support in November.  Looking forward to serving you in December!

Ronny

Hey Guys, I’m also active on Facebook.  Like my page for even more news.

Disclaimer

My Diagnosis and Treatment History

Most Popular Posts

Neuroendocrine Cancer – Exciting Times Ahead!  

exciting-times-ahead_edited

In the last 12-24 months, there seems to have been announcement after announcement of new and/or upgraded/enhanced diagnostics and treatment types for Neuroendocrine Cancer.  Scans, radionuclide therapies, combination therapies, somatostatin analogues, biological therapies, etc.  Some of the announcements are just expansions of existing therapies having been approved in new (but significant) regions. Compared to some other cancers, even those which hit the headlines often, we appear to be doing not too badly.  However, the pressure needs to stay on, all patients need access to the best diagnostics and treatments for them; and at the requisite time.  There’s even more in the pipeline and I’m hoping to continue to bring you news of new stuff as I have been doing for the last year.

Some of these new diagnostics and treatments will benefit eligible patients who are in diagnosis/newly diagnosed and also those living with the disease. As we’re now in our awareness month, let’s recap:

Scans

Many NET Patients will undergo a nuclear scan to confirm CT results and/or to detect further neuroendocrine activity.  Basically, a nuclear substance is mixed with a somatostatin analogue, injected into the patient who is then scanned using a 360-degree gamma camera.  As gamma cameras are designed to show up radioactive activity; and as Neuroendocrine Tumour cells will bind to the somatostatin analogue, it follows that the pictures provided will show where Neuroendocrine tumours are located.  Many people will have had an ‘Octreotide’ Scan (or more formally – Somatostatin Receptor Scintigraphy) which is still the gold standard in many areas. The latest generation of nuclear scans is based on the platform of the Gallium (Ga) 68 PET Scan. The principles of how the scan works is essentially as described above except that the more efficient radioactive/peptide mix and better scan definition, means a much better picture providing more detail (see example below). It’s important to note that positive somatostatin receptors are necessary for both scans to be effective. Europe and a few other areas have been using the Ga-68 PET scans for some time (although they are still limited in availability by sparse deployment). The latest excitement surrounding this new scan is because they are currently being rolled out in USA.  Read about the US FDA approval here.  You may hear this scan being labelled as ‘NETSPOT’ in USA but this is technically the name for the preparation radiopharmaceutical kit for the scan which includes a single-dose injection of the organic peptide and the radionuclide material. Take a look at a comparison of both scans here:

octreo-vs-g68
Octreoscan output vs Gallium 68 PET output

This slide from a recent NET Research Foundation conference confirms the power of more detailed scanning.

Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy (PRRT)

Similar to above, this treatment has been in use in Europe and other places for some time but is also to be formally deployed in USA if, as is expected, the US FDA approval is positive at the end of this year (Read here).  In the most basic terms, this is a treatment whereby a peptide is mixed with a radionuclide and is drip fed over a number of treatments (normally up to 4 spaced out over a year). The concept of delivery of the ‘payload’ to the tumours is actually very similar to the preparation for a radionuclide scan as described above, the key difference is the dosage and length of exposure whilst the tumours are attacked. Once again, receptors are important. The NETTER series of trials showed good results and this is an excellent addition to the portfolio for those patients who are eligible for this treatment. Fingers crossed for the US FDA announcement due by the end of this year.  Also fingers crossed that PRRT returns to the NHS England & Wales portfolio of available treatments next year.  The Carcinoid Cancer Foundation has an excellent summary of PRRT here.

PRRT and Chemo Combo

Whilst on this subject, I also want to highlight the innovative use of combo therapies in Australia where they are combining PRRT and Chemo (PRCRT).  I blogged about this here:

PRRT CAPTEM

Somatostatin Analogues and their Delivery Systems

Somatostatin analogues are a mainstay treatment for many NET Patients.  These drugs target NET cell receptors which has the effect of inhibiting release of certain hormones which are responsible for some of the ‘syndromic’ effects of the disease.  Again, receptors are important for the efficacy of this treatment.  You can read the ‘geeky’ stuff on how they work here.  These drugs mainly comprise Octreotide (provided by Novartis) and Lanreotide (provided by Ipsen). The latter has been around in Europe for 10 years and was introduced to North America earlier this year.  Octreotide has been around for much longer, almost 17 years.  When you consider these peptides have also been used to support nuclear scans that can detect the presence of tumours; and that studies have shown they also have an anti-tumour effect, they really are an important treatment for many NET Patients.  I’ve blogged about new somatostatin analogues in the pipeline and you can read this here.  This blog also contains information about new delivery systems including the use of oral capsules and nasal sprays (…….. very early days though).

Treatment for Carcinoid Syndrome

telotristat-etiprate-clinical-trial-serotonin-as-a-key-driver-of-carcinoid-syndrome

For maintenance and quality of life, the release of a Telotristat Ethyl for Carcinoid Syndrome is an exciting development as is the first new treatment for Carcinoid Syndrome in 17 years.  This is a drug which is taken orally and inhibits the secretion of serotonin which causes some of the symptoms of the syndrome including diarrhea.  It must be emphasised it’s only for treating diarrhea caused by syndrome and might not be effective for diarrhea caused by other factors including surgery.  Read about how it works and its target patient group in my blog here.

Oncolytic Virus

oncolytic

The announcement of a clinical trial for the Oncolytic Virus (an Immunotherapy treatment) specifically for Neuroendocrine Tumours is also very exciting and offers a lot of hope. Click the photo for the last progress update.  

Everolimus (Afinitor)

013490_PNETUS_iPad_pg2v2

Earlier this year, AFINITOR became the first treatment approved for progressive, non-functional NETs of lung origin, and one of very few options available for progressive, non-functional GI NET, representing a shift in the treatment paradigm for these cancers.  It’s been around for some time in trials (the RADIANT series) and is also used to treat breast and kidney cancer.  It’s manufactured by Novartis (of Octreotide fame).  It has some varying side effects but these appear to be tolerable for most and as with any cancer drug, they need to weighed against the benefits they bring.

In technical terms, AFINITOR is a type of drug known as an ‘mTOR’ inhibitor (it’s not a chemo as frequently stated on NET patient forums).  Taken in tablet form, it works by blocking the mTOR protein. In doing so, AFINITOR helps to slow blood vessels from feeding oxygen and nutrients to the tumour.

Check out Novartis Afinitor website for more detailed information.  There’s an excellent update about AFINITOR rom NET expert Dr James Yao here.  The US FDA approval can be found here.

Summary

………. and relax!   Wow, I’ve surprised myself by collating and revising the last 12-24 months.  Dr James Yao also agrees – check out his upbeat message in the attached 2 page summary.  You may also like another upbeat message from Dr Jonathan Strosberg by clicking here.

Neuroendocrine Cancer – who’d have thought it?  ….. a bit of a dark horse.

Thanks for reading

Ronny

Hey, I’m also active on Facebook.  Like my page for even more news.

Disclaimer

My Diagnosis and Treatment History

Most Popular Posts

Sign up for my twitter newsletter

Check out my Podcast (click and press play)

Remember ….. in the war on Neuroendocrine Cancer, let’s not forget to win the battle for better quality of life!

community_titled_transparent_2013-10-22

 

NET Cancer – unexpected detours

getty_rm_cancer_diceI’ve mentioned ‘luck’ a few times in the past month following some more ‘cancerversary’ milestones – these tend to make me reflect on my experience.  Even though I was metastatic at diagnosis, I think of myself as lucky on the basis that my tumours were found by ‘chance’ or to be more accurate, found following an innocuous set of circumstances.  As we know, Neuroendocrine Cancer (NET Cancer) can sometimes be very difficult to discover and diagnose. However, sometimes with a bit of luck or a chance event, it can be intercepted leading to a much better outlook for the person concerned.  But sometimes there is also a cost and I don’t mean financial (although that is also a very real problem).  Despite me thinking I had been lucky, the ‘little suckers’ had burrowed their way into many places and I now deal with those consequences following significant treatment to get rid of as many as possible.

With my blogging activity, I get to hear other people’s stories, some of which have tweaked my emotions from ‘man style leaky eyes’ to wide-eyed surprise and astonishment, but very occasionally with smiles.  I had one such exchange with Mary who subsequently agreed to let me use her story in a blog.  Mary’s story immediately caught my eye because it not only triggered a wide range of emotions but it made me reflect on the cost aspect I described above.

Mary’s is a lung NET Cancer patient and her tumour was caught early.  Although it was a totally chance discovery, it was in really unfortunate circumstances. Her brother Dan was fighting leukaemia and needed a life saving stem cell transplant. During the checks for her suitability as a donor, the lung tumour was discovered.  Clearly a very worrying time for Mary as she had gone to the hospital to try to save her brother’s life and ended up being admitted with her own cancer diagnosis.  I cannot begin to imagine how that felt for the whole family.  Fortunately Mary’s sister was found suitable and was able to donate,  Their brother later had a successful transplant but unfortunately the cancer recurred and he passed away a short while later.

That’s an amazing story but it invokes a wide range of emotions.  It’s also a very inspiring story about a family coming together in time of crisis.  Mary went to hospital that day to try to save Dan’s life and despite her own diagnosis, she still felt guilty that she was unable to fulfil that task.  However, before his passing, Dan let it be known that he must have gotten sick to save her life.  That’s a heart-warming thought – RIP Dan <3

I’m very thankful to Mary who agreed to let me publish her story here.  It was actually featured a couple of years ago in their local newspaper – you can read it here – <Click here>

I’d love to hear from others who had a lucky or chance tumour find.

Thanks for reading

Ronny Allan

I’m also active on Facebook.  Like my page for even more news.

Disclaimer
My Diagnosis and Treatment History
Most Popular Posts

 

 

Innovation at Royal Free – Lung Biopsy and Radio Frequency Ablation Service

1dcadb_9787c83ed76f4a9ab8c364cec0bc070d
Image with permission from Dr Sam Hare (www.lungdiagnosis.com)

A team of radiologists and respiratory consultants who introduced a new and more efficient lung biopsy method at Barnet Hospital London, has been named the winner of the NHS Innovation Challenge Prize in the ‘cancer care’ category.  Barnet Hospital is run by the Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust which is well known for its Neuroendocrine Cancer Centre of Excellence.

Not happy with this, they’ve now gone on to introduce a new service combining this innovative biopsy system with Radio Frequency Ablation (RFA) of tumours in the same procedure.

Combined Biopsy with Radio Frequency Ablation (RFA)

This new service has significant advantages for those who have localised tumours less than 3cm and can’t for whatever reason have surgery.  I’ve checked with Dr Hare and he confirms this includes Neuroendocrine Tumours of the Lung. There are a number of advantages for having this procedure:

1. Biopsy and RFA at same time to prevent patient having to have 2 procedures.  Those who meet this criteria with an existing biopsy can go straight to RFA.

2. It’s a low risk, minimally invasive procedure.

3. As its under mild sedation rather than General Anaesthetic (GA)  – patients go home later the same day – makes recovery time so much quicker.

4. RFAs can be repeated as many times as you want if tumour ever grows.

5. Lungs are preserved.

It’s also worth noting that RFA as a standalone treatment can be used on lung metastases. You can read more about this new service here.

Award winning ambulatory lung biopsy service

The team’s innovative ambulatory lung biopsy service enables the vast majority of patients to be discharged just 30 minutes after their biopsy. Dr Hare is a pioneer in UK lung biopsy technique and has improved patient experience using a shorter, less painful biopsy process with a higher diagnostic accuracy and less time spent in hospital. Dr Hare specialises in image-guided lung biopsy techniques having gained expertise in the procedure working in North America.  Dr Hare’s innovative use of a Heimlich Valve Chest Drain (HVCD) allows more successful biopsy of small lung nodules which can potentially lead to earlier cancer diagnosis.

1dcadb_41bcd15dffd2438a8c401106896d0a94
Heimlich Valve Chest Drain (HVCD) (permission from Dr Hare (www.lungdiagnosis.com)

I spoke to Dr Hare via twitter and he confirmed this novel service is for any tumour in the lung (primary or metastasis) and he indicated they were “finding more and more are coming back as Neuroendocrine Tumours”.

You can read more about Dr Hare and his work here (www.lungdiagnosis) and this video explains it in excellent detail including the difference between conventional methods and this new ‘award winning’ way!  Read more about the award on the Royal Free site here.

Congratulations to Dr Hare and the rest of the team for winning this award!

Thanks for reading

Ronny Allan

I’m also active on Facebook.  Like my page for even more news.

Disclaimer
My Diagnosis and Treatment History
Most Popular Posts

 

Lanreotide – it’s calling the shots!

Lanreotide calling the shots

When I was discharged from hospital following major surgery in Nov 2010, I knew I would shortly be commencing long-term monthly ‘somatostatin analogue’ treatment and had assumed Octreotide (Sandostatin LAR) would be the drug of choice. However, my Oncologist prescribed Lanreotide (known in the UK as Somatuline Autogel and elsewhere as Somatuline Depot).  Technically this is a hormone therapy (it’s not chemo).

Somatostatin Analogues (Octreotide/Lanreotide) are mainstay treatments for many Neuroendocrine Cancer patients and their introduction is a very significant factor in the improvement of both prognostic outcomes and quality of life.  Both drugs are designed to control Carcinoid Syndrome (but can be used selectively in other NET syndromes) and both have anti-tumour effects.  Check out my Lanreotide vs Octreotide comparison blog.

butt dart with words

Although I didn’t relish the thought of any injection in the ‘rear end’ every 28 days for the rest of my life, I admit to being slightly relieved with his choice.  I had been reading about patient experiences with the alternative, mainly the needle length and the occasional problems mixing the drug prior to injection.  Although Lanreotide has a similar gauge (thickness), the needle is a good bit shorter and is deep subcutaneous rather than Octreotide LAR’s intramuscular (IM) route. No mixing is required as Lanreotide comes prefilled.

If you’re interested in the science, please be aware that a somatostatin analogue is a synthetic (manufactured) version of a naturally occurring hormone which inhibits the peptides and amines that can be dangerously hypersecreted by certain neuroendocrine tumours.  If you are after a more technical explanation of this process, you should check out my blog Neuroendocrine Tumours – not an exact Science – inside you will also find a link to a fantastic paper by Dr Eugene Woltering, one of the world’s top NET Cancer experts.

Following an Octreotide Scan, various areas lit up confirming the output from previous CT scans.  It also confirmed new ‘hotspots’ for further investigation.  This specialist scan confirmed I probably had working receptors to receive something known as a Somatostatin Analogue to help with combatting the effects of Carcinoid Syndrome (please note that not having working receptors does not mean there is no benefit of receiving somatostatin analogues). I was therefore prescribed daily Octreotide (self-injecting) whilst I was waiting for my first major ‘debulking’ surgery, This treatment did eventually lessen the main effect of the carcinoid syndrome, facial flushing.  It wasn’t until after my first surgery that the facial flushing was dramatically reduced.  I commenced Lanreotide on 9 Dec 2010 and I haven’t had a facial flush since. It’s worth adding that my Chromogranin A (CgA) blood test (correlated to tumour mass) did not return to normal until after a liver resection 3 months later.  My 5HIAA urine test results (mainly correlated to serotonin levels) returned to normal prior to liver surgery in Apr 2011 indicating the Lanreotide was doing its job! Somatostatin Analogue side effects are to be expected and most people seem to have different and/or greater or lesser effects than others. The daily Octreotide did not bother me too much other than some discolouring of the stomach at the injection sites (i.e. black and blue!) ….I’m more observant nowadays, so it’s possible I may not have recorded this experience properly.

If you read the UK patient leaflet which comes with each injection, you can see a list of potential side effects as long as your arm.  Neuroendocrine Cancer comes with many signs, syndromes, symptoms and suspicions, so I always advise caution and some analysis when assigning reasons for problems encountered.  For North America, the equivalent instructions can be found here (Somatuline Depot). I don’t know precisely why (……. I do have my suspicions), but I’m always very sceptical about the criteria used to compile the list of side effects for any medicine. In my own mind, I’m fairly certain that people have existing symptoms or new symptoms as a result of coincidental treatment that are erroneously labelled under drugs during trials.

You can also self-inject Lanreotide but I’m not ready for that yet!  If you do self inject, please note it the site is “the upper outer part of your thigh”.  Check out the Ipsen leaflet here.

I think the injection site is very important and getting this wrong will worsen the side effects. For the Healthcare Professional or trained family member administration, the site should be the superior external quadrant but not of the whole ‘butt’, it means of the left or right buttock that is being used on an alternative basis.  If nurses think the whole ‘butt’, they might be tempted to stick it quite close to the ‘intergluteal cleft’ – not advisable!

Although the patient leaflets are very clear on how to administer the drug, once the location is established, I always discuss the following with the Nurse before I receive the ‘dart’:

1.  The injection should have been removed from the fridge at least 30 minutes before treatment.

2.  Don’t pinch the skin, stretch it.

3.  Put the needle in fast at 90 degrees, inject the drug slow – 20 seconds is recommended. As the drug is viscous, in any case, there is normally some resistance to a fast release.

4. Do not rub the area after as this action can interfere with the formulation of the drug.

My experience with side effects.  People have different experiences with side effects and just because a particular side effect is mentioned, does not mean to say that everyone will be troubled – many patients experience little or none.  For me, over 7 years, I think I can attribute the following to Lanreotide:

  • itching but only on the legs below the knees centred on the ankles – and nearly always the right leg.  Occasionally, the injection site will itch but only for a day or two.  I have a tub of emollient cream (almond oil) on standby which seems to calm it down.  Note …… a little bit of me thinks there could be a connection with vitamin/mineral deficiency and perhaps a coincidental occurrence and this problem seems much less of an issue over 7 years later. EDIT- could have been Hypothyroidism – click here.
  • minor pain at the injection site but this only lasts for an hour or two and I believe this to be associated with the administration of the injection, i.e. if the injection is done properly, I don’t really have this problem except for a second or two as it enters.  Once, I had pain for 10 days.  In my own experience, the best and least painful injections are those done by trained personnel who are confident.
  • small lumps form at the injection site which is alternating superior external quadrant of the each buttock. You may occasionally hear these being called ‘granulomas‘ or ‘injection site granulomas’. The issue of ‘injection site granulomas’ seems to figure in both Lanreotide and Octreotide. Gluteal injection site granulomas are a very common finding on CT and plain radiographs. They occur as a result of subcutaneous (i.e. intra-lipomatous) rather than intramuscular injection of drugs, which cause localised fat necrosis, scar formation and dystrophic calcification. But no-one seems to know why they occur with somatostatin analogues.
    I find that they are more conspicuous if the injection is done slightly too high which was my initial experience and they took months to fade.  I opted to stand up for the first two injections and I attribute this decision for a slightly too high injection site.  I now lie down which is actually recommended for the smaller and thinner patient. Although the lumps have reduced in size, I have not seen a new lump for some time indicating location might have been the cause. They sometimes show up on scans.  This is not a new problem and has been highlighted for the last 10 years in academic papers.  This particular paper is useful and the conclusion confirms this is not something that should worry patients too much. Read more here
  • fatigue normally within 24-48 hours of the injection but this is not consistent. Not even sure it can be classed as proper fatigue but it’s a ‘you need to sit down and fall asleep‘ feeling! When this occurs, it normally only lasts for 1 day before the normal energy levels return.  Again, like the itching, this appears to be less of an issue today.
  • malabsorption. although the side effects of gastro-intestinal (GI) surgery and gallbladder removal can cause malabsorption issues leading to steatorrhea (basically the inability to digest fat properly); somatostatin analogues can cause or exacerbate existing steatorrhea, as they inhibit the production of digestive/pancreatic enzymes which aid fat digestion.  Most months, I notice a marked but short-term increase in this problem normally within 48-72 hours of the injection.
  • elevated blood glucose.  This is a new issue in 2018 but has been brewing for a year or two. The patient information leaflet for Lanreotide (and for Octreotide) clearly states that this is a potential side effect and also asks those who are already diabetic, to consult their doctor about monitoring doses of diabetic medicine.  I’m working with my doctors to keep my blood glucose down to avoid becoming diabetic.

Watch a useful injection demonstration video here (for administration by a healthcare professional or family member) (click here)

A few years ago, there was some ‘talk’ that somatostatin analogues were also able to stunt or reverse the growth of certain neuroendocrine tumours.  Has this been the case for me?  Possibly.  I’ve had regular CT scans every 3-6 months and since two bouts of major surgery in 2010/2011, I’ve also had 3 x Octreoscans over the same period.  I did once spend a day analysing 5 years of scan results looking for variations in size and concluded that there was a stable trend and potentially a fading of one or two of my largest liver tumours. I was reminded these two types of scans were not really precise enough to detect small millimetre increases or decreases and as there were other factors at play, there was little commitment to make this declaration.  However, I did note in the summary of the CLARINET study, Lanreotide was associated with prolonged progression-free survival among patients with advanced, grade 1 or 2 (Ki-67 <10%) enteropancreatic, somatostatin receptor–positive neuroendocrine tumours with prior stable disease, irrespective of the hepatic tumour volume.  In terms of its anti-proliferative effects, an interim report from the CLARINET extension study suggested longer-term Lanreotide treatment is well tolerated with ‘anti-tumour’ effects in patients with progressive disease.  The final CLARINET open label extension study report additionally provided evidence for long-term PFS benefits of Lanreotide Autogel 120 mg in patients with indolent pancreatic and intestinal NETs.

There’s currently a trial ongoing in relation to Lanreotide and Lung NETs – read by clicking here.

I have my ups and downs and I do feel quite well most of the time.  Most people tell me I look quite well too – lucky they can’t see my insides!  Over the last 7 years, I’ve made some fairly significant adjustments to cope with my condition and maintain a reasonable quality of life – my monthly injection of Lanreotide is no doubt playing a big part.

Finally, please spend 5 minutes watching this fascinating video from Ipsen.  It explains in easy terms how Lanreotide works.  It also has a useful summary of the side effects at the end.  Click here to watch the video.

I’ve just been enrolled onto a new service called HomeZone whereby the injection is now administered at my home via an Ipsen provided and funded nurse.  Read here to see if you can also take advantage of this service.

THE SOMATULINE ‘RESERVOIR’ FORMING IN THE DEEP SUBCUTANEOUS TISSUE

In July 2018, I received my 100th injection of Somatuline Autogel (Lanreotide).  I was very grateful to still be here so I thought it was worth a celebratory cake – injection themed!

Cake with Needle

CAKE PHOTO1 WITH NURSE2

Thanks for reading

Ronny

I’m also active on Facebook.  Like my page for even more news.  I’m also building up this site here: Ronny Allan

Disclaimer

My Diagnosis and Treatment History

Most Popular Posts

Sign up for my twitter newsletter

Remember ….. in the war on Neuroendocrine Cancer, let’s not forget to win the battle for better quality of life!


Please Share this post

For those on twitter – please consider retweeting the post below:

https://twitter.com/RonnyAllan1/status/705391786328510464

 

Neuroendocrine Cancer – the devil is in the detail

Nick Robinson BBC
Nick Robinson BBC

Nick Robinson, well-known and ex-BBC Political Editor starts his new job today (16 Nov 15) on BBC Radio 4. He was until earlier this year, the most recognised political reporter face on UK TV, frequently stood outside 10 Downing St reporting on anything politics and at any time of the day.

Like a lot of people, Nick’s life changed when he was diagnosed with Cancer in Feb 2015. A self-confessed workaholic, he is now hoping to live a more balanced life after surviving lung cancer according to an article in the Sunday Times this weekend.

He assumes the post vacated by James Naughtie, an extremely hard act to follow – a man who would frequently sink his teeth into a politician’s leg and not let go until he got an answer – or at the very least he would paint them into an embarrassing corner. It’s a tough job as most politicians are extremely wily characters, masters of ‘double speak‘ and expert in answering a question without getting into the detail the questioner wants.  As we all know, the devil is in the detail.

Although the article introduces some new facts about his cancer experience, I was really looking for more detail.  That said, even without the ‘devil’, the latest article is inspiring for most (….man goes back to work after a tough fight with Cancer).

So why am I so interested in the detail of Nick’s Cancer? Simple – because he does not have Lung Cancer as frequently and widely reported in the media. Lung Cancer is the ‘politician’s answer‘ or the ‘double speak answer’ to avoid going into complicated detail. The correct answer is he has Neuroendocrine Cancer with a Lung Primary.

I’d really like to turn the tables and interview Nick, we seem to have so much in common. We are both self-confessed workaholics, we both went to an annual Asthma clinic, we both told our Asthma nurses we had lost weight and we both were sent for a scan as a result. Following our scans, we were both diagnosed with Neuroendocrine Cancer.  Like Nick, I also have an interest in politics but wouldn’t make a good one due to my love of detail and hate of ‘double speak‘.

This is not a new problem for Neuroendocrine Cancer.  The most famous of patients is the Apple founder and now deceased Steve Jobs.  He is frequently (even to this day) reported to have had Pancreatic Cancer rather than Neuroendocrine Cancer of the Pancreas (an Insulinoma to be precise).  Although not as famous as Jobs, UK musician Wilko Johnson (of Dr Feelgood fame) is a similar story. I touched on this dilemma in my article The Human Anatomy of Neuroendocrine Cancer.

Nick – good luck with the new job.  By the way, it’s really OK to say you have Neuroendocrine Cancer!

 

You can read the full article here if you have a Times subscription.

Thanks for reading

Ronny

I’m also active on Facebook. Like my page for even more news. I’m also building up this site here: Ronny Allan

Disclaimer

My Diagnosis and Treatment History

Most Popular Posts

Sign up for my twitter newsletter

Read my Cure Magazine contributions

Remember ….. in the war on Neuroendocrine Cancer, let’s not forget to win the battle for better quality of life!

Neuroendocrine Cancer – not as rare as you think

NEUROENDOCRINE NEOPLASMS - NOT RARE

Background

Although initially considered rare tumours up until 10 years ago, the most recent data indicates the incidence of NETs has increased exponentially over the last 4 decades and they are as common as Myeloma, Testicular Cancer, and Hodgkin’s Lymphoma. In terms of prevalence, NETs represent the second most common gastrointestinal malignancy after colorectal cancer. Consequently, many experts are now claiming NETs are not rare (see below)

In fact, the graph of the SEER database figures for NETs in both 2004 and 2012 indicates the rate of incidence increase is faster than any other cancer on the planet, particularly attributed to lung, small intestine, and rectal NETs.  The World Health Organisation’s revised classification of Neuroendocrine Neoplasms in 2010, abandoned the division between benign and malignant NET as all NETs have malignant potential and should be graded accordingly.  The 2004 SEER data compiled did not take into account what might have been considered to be benign NETs.

However, the most recent USA study up to 2012 has confirmed the incidence beyond 2004 has continued to rise (and rise, and rise, and rise) and this is covered below in the section entitled “Meanwhile in USA”. One of the principal authors of both database studies has now gone public and said NETs are no longer rare. 

Incidence and Prevalence

Before I continue, it’s important to understand the difference between incidence and prevalence.  In the crudest of terms, incidence is the number of new cases of a disease being diagnosed (normally aligned to a specific quota of the population per year, generally 100,000). Prevalence normally indicates an amount of people living at any one time with a disease. It’s also important to note that different nations or groups of nations classify ‘rare’ in different ways – not really helpful when looking at worldwide statistics.

So why the increase?  I suspect the reasons include (but are not limited to), more awareness (population and medical staff), better detection techniques and probably more accurate reporting systems, at least in USA, Norway, Canada and now in the UK i.e. a mixture of underdiagnoses and misreporting.  The Canadian study is important as it also noted the proportion of metastases at presentation decreased from 29% to 13%. This is the first study that suggests an increased incidence of NETs may be due to an increased (and earlier?) detection. This has the knock on effect of increasing prevalence as most NET Cancer patients will normally live for longer periods.  Add to this the plethora of better treatments available today, you have a highly prevalent cancer. Most of that is good news.

However, their true incidence may be higher owing to the lack of diagnosis until after death.  For example, in USA, a respected NET specialist stated that the autopsy find for (excuse the outdated terminology) ‘carcinoid‘ is 4 times the recorded diagnosis rate. In Australia, one study claimed that 0.05% of all autopsies found a Pheochromocytoma or Paraganglioma.  A very interesting slideshow from a well respected NET expert claimed there are 200,000 undiagnosed NET patients in USA. Slide below:  You may also wish to check out my article “The Invisible NET Patient Population” where this is explored further.

dana-farber-200000

US SEER 2004 – The Trigger and Turning Point

In the largest study of its kind up to that point, well-known Neuroendocrine Cancer expert James C. Yao researched the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. His team studied 35,825 cases of Neuroendocrine Cancers in the United States covering data between 1973 and 2004. The report concluded that in 2004 there were 5.25 new cases of NETs per 100,000 people, compared with 1.09 per 100,000 in 1973 [1]. This is in contrast to the overall incidence of malignancies, which has remained relatively constant since 1992 (see the yellow line on the graph). The study also pointed out that due to increased survival durations over time, NETs are more prevalent than previously reported. If you analyse the NET data for 1994 (10 years before the end of the study period), you will see an incidence rate of approx 3.25/100,000. In 2004, the incidence rate had risen to 5.25/100,000. Although not an exact science, it does suggest the potential incidence rate at 2014 (10 years after the study period) might possibly have climbed well beyond 6/100,000 and even further if the same rate of increase displayed by the study had continued. This study also confirmed a prevalence of 103,000 NET patients as at 2004. As this is regarded as the most accurate NET statistic ever produced, it is interesting to note that was at a time when the prognostics for NET were not as good as they are today indicating there must be a very significant increase by 2017. Moreover, this was prior to the WHO 2010 reclassification of NETs so more diagnoses will be counted today that were not counted in 2004. See below to see the significance of this figure (see section ‘Do the math’).

The 2004 data was an astonishing set of statistics – particularly as they were based on 12 year old data. However, there is now new data up to 2012 that overtakes the above-mentioned groundbreaking study and confirmed the incidence is now even higher.  See section entitled “Meanwhile in USA …….” 

incidence
SEER study 2004 – NETs

Meanwhile in Norway ……

Data from the Norwegian Registry of Cancer showed a similar incidence of Neuroendocrine Cancers with a 72% increase between 2000 and 2004 compared with 1993–1997 [2]. Also in Norway, an article published in 2015 entitled “Epidemiology and classification of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms using current coding criteria” indicated a high crude incidence of GEP-NEN, at 5·83 per 100 000 inhabitants over the period 2003-2013 (adjusting to 7.64 for Europe in 2013 – see diagram below extracted from cited article 2a).  It was also noted together with the statement “….a significant increasing trend over time”. [2a] Citation [2b]
extrapolation europe

Meanwhile in Canada …….

CNETs have highlighted an article published in the magazine ‘Cancer’, February 15, 2015, showing that the incidence of Neuroendocrine Tumours has markedly increased in Canada over the course of 15 years (1994-2009). The results showed that the incidence of Neuroendocrine Tumours has increased from 2.48 to 5.86 per 100,000 per year. [3] [4]

Meanwhile in UK …….

The latest figures from Public Health England (PHE) indicate the incidence of NETs has risen to almost 9/100,000 (i.e. not rare) using the latest International Classification of Diseases for Oncology (ICD-O) methodology version 3 – ICD-O-3. Even that figure is understated because it does not include Lung Neuroendocrine Carcinomas (i.e. NSCLC and LCNEC). As at 31 Mar 2016, the age-standardised incidence rate for NETs in England (excluding small and large cell neuroendocrine carcinomas, SCLC and LCNEC respectively) was 8.84, 8.37 in males and 9.30 in females – rising from 3.9 in 2001.  These figures are from the NET Patient Foundation and were issued as a result of a NPF and PHE (NCRAS) partnership project which has been compiling statistics on the incidence, prevalence and survival of NET Patients in England using English cancer registry data. They also have an aim to also access the rest of UK cancer registry data to get UK wide figures.

That means a new NET diagnosis every 2 hours. You can see a summary of the report   NEW:  Public Health England release new incidence data for Neuroendocrine Cancer

A slide from the recent UKINETS 2017 conference indicating an agreement from UK and Ireland NET Specialists.

IMG_20171204_214918
as presented at UKINETS 2017

Meanwhile in New Zealand …….

as presented by Unicorn Foundation NZ on 11 Mar 2017

Meanwhile in USA …….

The latest evidence of its rise is contained in the largest ever study ever conducted. It is based on data up to 2012 so it’s worth noting that this data is now 5 years old (3 years for the project prevalence figure), so even these figures may still be conservative.  The document, which was published in 2017 can be found here: Click here.  A short summary follows:

In this population-based study that included 64 971 patients with neuroendocrine tumors, age-adjusted incidence rates increased 6.4-fold between 1973 and 2012, mostly for early stage tumors.  Survival for all neuroendocrine tumors has improved, especially for distant stage gastrointestinal and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

Of the 64 971 cases of NETs, 34 233 (52.7%) were women. The age-adjusted incidence rate increased 6.4-fold from 1973 (1.09 per 100 000) to 2012 (6.98 per 100 000). This increase occurred across all sites, stages, and grades. In the SEER 18 registry grouping (2000-2012), the highest incidence rates were 1.49 per 100 000 in the lung, 3.56 per 100 000 in gastroenteropancreatic sites, and 0.84 per 100 000 in NETs with an unknown primary site. The estimated 20-year limited-duration prevalence of NETs in the United States on January 1, 2014, was 171 321

Conclusion: The incidence and prevalence of NETs have continued to rise in the United States, owing to the increased diagnosis of early-stage disease and possibly stage migration. The survival of patients with NETs has improved, and this improvement has been greater for those with distant gastrointestinal NETs and, in particular, distant pancreatic NETs.

Combine that with a revised annual incidence rate of 23,000 and the very well known fact that NETs is a highly prevalent disease, it must be mathematically impossible for the figure not to be above the USA rare threshold of 200,000 in 2017.  As you can see from the graph below, the incidence rate for NETs continues to outstrip the incidence rate for all malignant neoplasms (another word for tumour).  Amazingly, the report authors even state “…….. it is likely that we have underestimated their true incidence and prevalence”.

not rare yao netrf

incidence 2012 jama
NET Cancer diagnoses continues to outstrip all other cancer diagnoses

The NET Research Foundation published an amazing infographic which summarises the output of the SEER 2012 study (although it does omit the prevalence figure ‘as at’ date).  See it below and you can read the accompanying text here.

dasari-infographic-2
Graphic from the NET Research Foundation – https://netrf.org/study-shows-rising-rates-of-net-incidence-prevalence-and-survival/

Let’s do the Math

Neuroendocrine Cancer is not only the fastest growing cancer in incidence terms but as a group of cancers, given the mounting epidemiological evidence, it can no longer be rare as a grouping of cancers.  Neuroendocrine disease IS NOT RARE.

For example, if you roughly extrapolate the US SEER data graph above to 2017 and recalculate the prevalence rate based on 23 000 per year from the 2014 figure of 171 321.  Unfortunately, some people will have passed, but it’s well documented as a highly prevalent cancer and therefore more people live. The prevalence of neuroendocrine tumors in USA was higher than the combined estimated prevalence of esophageal cancer (n = 36,857), gastric adenocarcinoma (n = 79,843) and pancreatic adenocarcinoma (n = 49,620) in 2013. In fact, one of the conclusions of the 2012 SEER report is that we are living longer with NETs. This is in line with many other cancers due to improved diagnostic and treatment regimes.  Cleary more work still needs doing.

Dr Kunz has done the math
hendifar not rare
Dr Hendifar has done the math
not rare yao netrf
Dr Yao has done the math

The Invisible NET Patient Population

The heading of this section is my name for those who have not yet been diagnosed with NETs but are walking around having been either misdiagnosed, diagnosed with another cancer in the same part of the anatomy, living and putting up with the symptoms whilst the tumours grow.  To add to this part of the underdiagnoses of NETs is this most amazing piece of research published in 2018 – Pan-cancer molecular classes transcending tumor lineage across 32 cancer types, multiple data platforms, and over 10,000 cases.  It was published in the American Association of Cancer Research (AACR) journal ‘Clinical Cancer Research and authored by Chad Creighton et al. D.  This was a pan cancer piece of research which indicated that Neuroendocrine disease may be more prevalent than anyone had ever thought.  There’s a summary article here which I suggest you read fully.  The rather explosive extract is as follows:

We expected that about 1 percent of

Go figure

Whilst reporting has been improved, it is most likely still not 100% accurate. Therefore, even the figures above may be understated due to an incorrect cause of death reporting and incorrect diagnosis/recording of the wrong cancers (e.g. pNETs recorded as Pancreatic Cancer, Lung NETs recorded as Lung Cancer, etc).  This is certainly still happening in UK and I suspect in most other countries. Add to that the regular reports of Neuroendocrine Tumours being found during autopsies and you have the potential for an even further unrecorded increase had these been found prior to death. In fact, according to SEER 2012, the true incidence and prevalence is most likely underestimated. In fact here is a statement straight from the horse’s mouth:

SEER 2012 Underestimated
more math

The issue is also complicated by the method used in USA for naming a disease ‘rare’. Rather than use incidence rates, the USA uses the number of people living with the disease at any one time (i.e. essentially the prevalence). This is currently 200,000 as a threshold – anything below that is considered rare.  It seems mathematically impossible for NETs to be less than 200,000 given the data provided above.

Eric Liu Not Rare

When I first started researching NETs back in 2010, the US figure (which varies from source to source) was around 125-150,000.  Why are people quoting figures less than this in 2017 when the 2014 figure has now been confirmed above? There also seems to be a selective omission of the new US incidence rate of 7/100,000.

You will also see that Dana Farber is estimating more than 200,000 people are as yet undiagnosed.  Even if that were 50% accurate, it would put the current prevalence figure in US over 300,000.

Let’s cut to the chase – NETs are not rare, they are just less common

Are we shouting loud enough about this?  I don’t think so.  ‘Rare’ is very frequently used within the NET community almost to the point of being a status symbol. Based on these figures, this looks like an outdated approach along with its associated icons.  The evidence above is so compelling that saying the group of cancers officially called Neuroendocrine Neoplasms is rare is starting to sound like fake news.

“A neoplasm on the rise.  More prevalent than you may think.  Incidence increased dramatically during past 3 decades” (Novartis)

“it’s less rare than we used to think. It’s more malignant than we previously thought” (Dr Richard Warner)

“…..it is one of the most rapidly increasing cancers in the U.S. There has been a 500-percent increase in the last 30 years” (Dr Edward Wolin)

“Estimated more than 200,000 undiagnosed cases in the US” (Dana Farber)

“I actually think NETs are not a rare cancer” (Dr James Yao)

“NETS will no longer be rare” (UKINETS 2017 one of the opening slides)

“NETs are no longer rare” (Dr Andrew Hendifar)

“One study showed that the number of people diagnosed has risen 50% over the last decade and unfortunately, I worry that is an underestimate” (Dr Eric Liu)

“Neuroendocrine Cancer – NETs are not rare, just less common.  We need a new paradigm” (Ronny Allan since 2015)

You may also wish to check out my article “The Invisible NET Patient Population” where this is explored further.

Thanks for reading

Ronny

I’m also active on Facebook.  Like my page for even more news.  I’m also building up this site here: Ronny Allan

Disclaimer

My Diagnosis and Treatment History

Most Popular Posts

Sign up for my twitter newsletter

Read my Cure Magazine contributions

Remember ….. in the war on Neuroendocrine Cancer, let’s not forget to win the battle for better quality of life!

Carcinoid vs Neuroendocrine

OPINION

CARCINOID misnomer etc

There’s a constant debate regarding the validity of the term ‘Carcinoid‘.  I’ve posted about this a few times and as far as I know, the debate has been raging for some years.

You may have noticed that ‘Carcinoid’ is often used as a standalone word and tends not to be suffixed with the word ‘Cancer’ or ‘Tumour’ – unlike Bowel Cancer, Breast Cancer, Prostrate Cancer, Lung Cancer, Brain Tumour, etc.  Nobody goes around saying “Breast” or “Bowel” do they?  But they happily say “Carcinoid”.  Unfortunately, the term ‘Carcinoid’ has become entrenched in both pathology and clinical literature over the past 100 years. The main problem with the word Carcinoid is that it means different things to different people. Some use the term almost exclusively to designate serotonin-producing tumours that arise from the enterochromaffin cells that can result in carcinoid syndrome i.e. most commonly in the appendix, small intestine, stomach, lung, rectum and uncommonly in other places. Some use it to (incorrectly) refer to all Neuroendocrine Tumours. The most worrying connotation of the use of the word ‘Carcinoid’ is the belief that they all have benign clinical and biological behaviour.  That is dangerous thinking and has the potential to kill people.  Fortunately, NET specialists are starting to move away from using the word – check out the quote below:
carcinoid falling out of favor

Siegfried Oberndorfer
Siegfried Oberndorfer

The Origins

The following history of ‘Carcinoid’ is well documented: Siegfried Oberndorfer (1876-1944) became the first to adequately characterise the nature of Carcinoid tumours and refer to them as “benign carcinomas.” During his tenure at the Pathological Institute of the University of Munich, Oberndorfer noted in 1907 that the lesions were distinct clinical entities and named them “karzinoide” (“carcinoma-like“), emphasizing in particular their benign features. However, In 1929 he amended his classification to include the possibility that these small tumours could be malignant and also metastasise. (Author’s note – a name change would have been handy at this point).

100 years later

NANETS, UKINETS and ENETS seem to defer to the WHO classification nomenclature and it is here another term is introduced – Neuroendocrine Neoplasms (NENs).  NANETs state that “all of the entities under discussion are neoplastic, and neoplasm is therefore a more accurate term than tumor, which means only a mass“.  These organisations tend to use the term Neoplasm as a catch-all for all Neuroendocrine disease and then the term ‘tumor’ and ‘carcinoma’ applies to well and poorly differentiated respectively.  It’s worth noting that since 2010, the WHO classification is based on the concept that all NETs have malignant potential, and has therefore abandoned the division into benign and malignant NETs and tumours of uncertain malignant potential. Neuroendocrine Carcinoma is malignant by defintion. All of this has been reinforced in the 2017 publication. The term ‘Carcinoid’ is conspicuously missing from these texts.

To put it simply – the term ‘carcinoid’ is no longer credible

Due to its historical meaning, Carcinoid does not adequately convey the potential for malignant behaviour that accompanies many of these neoplasms as described above.  The term Carcinoid decodes to ‘Carcinoma like’.  Contextually “Carcinoid Cancer” decodes to “carcinoma like cancer” which is, of course, totally misleading and its use simply perpetuates the claim by some that it is ‘not a proper cancer’.  If we only needed one reason to ditch the word ‘Carcinoid’, this would be it.

carcinoid is inadequate oberg quote 2016

I mentioned confusion above and this has led to a hybrid effect of naming the condition.  For example, there is a tendency by some (including medical establishments and patient organisations) to use the term ‘Carcinoid’ and ‘Neuroendocrine Tumors’ interchangeably which is patently incorrect. Neither is it helpful that many patients and organisations continue to refer to this disease as “Carcinoid Neuroendocrine Tumor”, “Neuroendocrine Carcinoid Tumor”, “Neuroendocrine Carcinoid Cancer”, “Carcinoid/Neuroendocrine”, “CNET”; and many other variations along these lines. Many seemingly credible organisations will say “Carcinoid and Neuroendocrine Tumors” not realising it’s a contradiction in terms. Continued use of the term in any phrase or standalone context is not doing our case for recognition any good – it’s bad enough that some seem to cling to outdated and invalid diagnostic clichés and icons from the 1980s.  All of it needs to go.

carcinoid npf quote

I know I’m not alone in this thinking given the decrease of its use in the NET world, including NET Specialists (see lead graphic) and NET Specialist organisations (some have changed their names).  There’s an interesting article written by a NET specialist where the term ‘carcinoid’ is described as “unfortunate”, “misleading”, “outmoded”, “archaic”, “confusing” and “misnomer”. Exactly!  In the recent SEER NET study, a NET specialist reaffirmed this thinking by stating that “the belief these tumors did not metastasize, did not reach any great size, and appeared harmless, has since been proven false”.  Continued use of the term ‘Carcinoid’ has the potential to regress this thinking.  We must not let this happen.

referring to carcinoid

So what terms should we be using?

People and organisations will be out of date with modern Neuroendocrine Neoplasms nomenclature and some will still want to continue with their own nomenclature (….. and because of the confusion, some will fall into both categories not realising they’re out of date).  Here’s a classic example of the problem we face – the American Cancer Society(ACS) does not even list Neuroendocrine Tumor as a cancer type.  Instead you can find “Gastrointestinal Carcinoid Tumors” and “Lung Carcinoid Tumor”. You’ll find Pancreatic NETs inside Pancreatic Cancer.  Americans should harangue the ACS to get this right. I could go on with many similar observations on seemingly respectable sites. I intentionally used a US example as this country appears to be way behind in the changes to NET nomenclature, pretty surprising as they tend to be at the forefront of many other aspects in the world of NETs.

Personally, I think the acceptance of a common worldwide nomenclature should come from the World Health Organisation (WHO) classification for Neuroendocrine Neoplasms.  They are divided into a number of chapters including ‘Endocrine Organs’, Digestive System, Lung Tumours….. and no doubt some others.  Frustrating, but medical people tend to look at things in anatomical terms. Nonetheless, the agreed classification nomenclature for the whole group of Neuroendocrine Neoplasms can be found with some research and access to clinical publications.  The correct nomenclature should then be flowed down in regional groupings, e.g. ENETS representing Europe, NANETS representing North America, etc.  As I understand it, ENETS and UKINETS are already essentially aligned with WHO and NANETS appears to be. From these organisations, the use of the correct terminology should then rub off on patients, patient advocate organisations and general cancer sites.  However, the biggest challenge will be with hospitals/medical centres, cancer registries and insurance companies whose medical record processing is run using reference data (think drop down selections and database structures).  Easier said than done but ‘change’ always has to start somewhere.  Technically it has started (albeit late) as the big NET medical organisations are already starting to reduce the use of outmoded words such as ‘carcinoid’.

I once argued that the term ‘carcinoid’ needed to be retained as it represented a histopathological grouping of a particular type of NET comprising mostly appendiceal, stomach (gastric), rectal, small intestine and lung NETs.  However, reading through the ENETS 2016 guidance in conjunction with the most up to date WHO classification publications, I’ve changed my mind after noticing they no longer use the word ‘Carcinoid’ in relation to a tumor type.  Rather, they use the latest WHO terms above and then use the anatomy to distinguish the different types of NET (like we already do for Pancreatic NET or pNET).

Perhaps patients can lead the way here ………

Rather than say:

‘Carcinoid’ or ‘Carcinoid Tumor’….. why not say Neuroendocrine Tumor or NET (adding your primary location if required – see below);

‘Carcinoid Cancer; ….. why not say Neuroendocrine Cancer;

‘Lung Carcinoid’ ….. why not say Lung NET (adding typical or atypical if required);

‘Small intestine Carcinoid’, why not say Small Intestine NET (or ‘SiNET which is becoming popular); p.s. I’m not a fan of ‘small bowel’ due to the potential for confusion with the widely used term ‘bowel cancer’);

‘Gastric Carcinoid’, why not say Gastric NET (adding your type if required);

‘Rectal Carcinoid’, why not say Rectal NET;

‘Appendiceal Carcinoid’, why not say Appendiceal NET;

…. and so on.  And you can add your stage and grade/differentiation for a richer picture.

You can listen to a very well known NET Specialist say something similar in this video here.

Worth noting that even ENETS and NANETS cannot agree on tumor type terminology – the latter uses Small Bowel NETs (SBNETs) whereas ENETS uses Small Intestine NENs (SiNENs). I did say it’s easier said than done.

As I said above, the term ‘Carcinoid’ has become entrenched in both pathology and clinical literature over the past 100 years so it will still appear in many texts and need to be searchable online to support medical and advocacy business.  However, these are technical issues and I don’t therefore believe people need to use the terms to make them searchable online.  I tag all my posts with ‘Carcinoid’ even if I don’t mention the word in my text.  I have started only using the term for context when it is required and am currently reviewing all of my posts to ensure that is still the case.

Hang on…what about Carcinoid Syndrome

When someone wants to know which syndrome you have, you can’t just state (say) “small intestine syndrome” or “midgut syndrome”.  ‘NET Syndrome’ doesn’t work either as there are several NET syndromes.  This has led to the situation where people try to drop the word ‘carcinoid’ and just say “the syndrome” which is even more confusing! I accept this one is a difficult challenge but I don’t believe it’s insurmountable, just needs some willpower and agreement.

What about Carcinoid Heart Disease

Personally I don’t see why this cannot be renamed to ‘Neuroendocrine Heart Disease’ or its technical name – ‘Hedinger syndrome’.

What about Carcinoid Crisis

World renowned NET specialists already make statements that these issues can apply to all types of NET; and it’s well-known that a similar crisis situation already applies to other types e.g. Pheochromocytomas.  I cannot see why something along the lines of ‘Neuroendocrine Crisis’ or ‘NET Crisis’ would not be acceptable.

Summary

We as patients are unlikely to be able to force changes on the medical and insurance communities but we can be a ‘force for change’ by setting the example of using a correct and more apt terminology to describe our disease.

 

Thanks for listening

Ronny

I’m also active on Facebook.  Like my page for even more news. Please also support my other site – click here and ‘Like’

Disclaimer

My Diagnosis and Treatment History

Most Popular Posts

Sign up for my twitter newsletter

Check out my Podcast (click and press play)

Remember ….. in the war on Neuroendocrine Cancer, let’s not forget to win the battle for better quality of life!

patients included

WEGO Awards

 

Neuroendocrine Cancer – Hormones

HormonesNET 2018

Until I was diagnosed with metastatic Neuroendocrine Cancer, I didn’t have a clue about hormones – it’s one of those things you just take for granted. However, hormones are vital to human health (male and female) and it’s only when things go wrong you suddenly appreciate how important they are ……..like a lot of other things in life I suppose! The presence of over-secreting hormones (often called peptides throughout) is useful to aid diagnosis albeit it often means the tumours have metastasized. It’s also a frequent indication that the person has an associated NET syndrome.

This is a really complex area and to understand the hormone problems associated with Neuroendocrine Cancer, you need to have a basic knowledge of the endocrine and neuroendocrine systems.  I’ve no intention of explaining that (!) – other than the following high level summary:

  • Glands in the endocrine system use the bloodstream to monitor the body’s internal environment and to communicate with each other through substances called hormones, which are released into the bloodstream.  Endocrine glands include; Pituitary, Hypothalmus, Thymus, Pineal, Testes, Ovaries Thyroid, Adrenal, Parathyroid, Pancreas.
  • A Hormone is a chemical that is made by specialist cells, usually within an endocrine gland, and it is released into the bloodstream to send a message to another part of the body. It is often referred to as a ‘chemical messenger’. In the human body, hormones are used for two types of communication. The first is for communication between two endocrine glands, where one gland releases a hormone which stimulates another target gland to change the levels of hormones that it is releasing. The second is between an endocrine gland and a target organ, for example when the pancreas releases insulin which causes muscle and fat cells to take up glucose from the bloodstream. Hormones affect many physiological activities including growth, metabolism, appetite, puberty and fertility.
  • The Endocrine system. The complex interplay between the glands, hormones and other target organs is referred to as the endocrine system.
  • The Neuroendocrine System. The diffuse neuroendocrine system is made up of neuroendocrine cells scattered throughout the body.  These cells receive neuronal input and, as a consequence of this input, release hormones to the blood. In this way they bring about an integration between the nervous system and the endocrine system (i.e. Neuroendocrine).  A complex area but one example of what this means is the adrenal gland releasing adrenaline to the blood when the body prepares for the ‘fight or flight’ response in times of stress, ie, for vigorous and/or sudden action.

Hormones – The NET Effect

Hormones – the NET Effect

At least one or more hormones will be involved at various sites and even within certain syndromes, the dominant and offending hormone may differ between anatomical tumour sites. For example, NETs of the small intestine, lung or appendix (and one or two other places) may overproduce serotonin and other hormones which can cause a characteristic collection of symptoms currently called carcinoid syndrome.   The key symptoms are flushing, diarrhea and general abdominal pain, loss of appetite, fast heart rate and shortness of breath and wheezing. The main symptom for me was facial flushing and this was instrumental in my eventual diagnosis. The fact that I was syndromic at the point of diagnosis made it easier to discover, albeit the trigger for the investigation was a fairly innocuous event.  Other types of NETs are also affected by the overproduction of hormones including Insulinomas, Gastrinomas, Glucagonomas, VIPomas, Somatostatinomas, and others.  These can cause their own syndromes and are not part of carcinoid syndrome as some organisations incorrectly state. For more on NET syndromes – Read Here.

So are hormones horrible? 

Absolutely not, they are essential to the normal function of the human body.  For example if you didn’t have any of the hormone Serotonin in your system, you would become extremely ill.  On the other hand, if your glands start secreting too much of certain hormones, your body could become dysfunctional and in some scenarios, this situation could become life threatening.  So hormones are good as long as the balance is correct. NET patients with an oversecreting tumor may be classed as “functional”.

  • Functional tumors make extra amounts of hormones, such as gastrin, insulin, and glucagon, that cause signs and symptoms.
  • Nonfunctional tumors do not make extra amounts of hormones. Signs and symptoms are caused by the tumor as it spreads and grows. Many NET patients are deemed to be “non-functioning” with normal hormone levels. It’s also accurate to say that many can move from one stage to the other.

Location Location Location

It’s accurate to say that the type and amount of hormone secretion differs between locations or sites of the functional tumor and this can also create different effects.  The division of NETs into larger anatomical regions appears to differ depending on where you look but they all look something likes this:

Foregut NETs: In the respiratory tract, thymus, stomach, duodenum, and pancreas. This group mostly lack the enzyme aromatic amino decarboxylase that converts 5-HTP (5-Hydroxytryptophan – a precursor to serotonin) to serotonin (5-HT); such tumours tend to produce 5-HTP and histamine instead of serotonin.  The Pancreas is a particularly prominent endocrine organ and can produce a number of different syndromes each with their associated hormone oversecretion – although many can be non-functional (at least to begin with). Please note the respiratory tract and thymus are not really ‘Foregut’ but grouped there for convenience. 

Midgut NETs: In the small intestine, appendix, and ascending colon. For example, serotonin secreting tumors tend to be associated with carcinoid syndrome which tends to be associated with midgut NETs and this is normally the case. Many texts will also tell you that a syndrome only occurs at a metastatic stage.  Both are a good rule of thumb but both are technically incorrect. For example, in the bronchus or ovary you can have a form of carcinoid syndrome without liver metastasis (tends to be described as atypical carcinoid syndrome). It’s also possible to see serotonin secreting tumors in places such as the pancreas (although what you would call that type of NET is open for debate).

Hindgut NETs (transverse, descending colon and rectum) cannot convert tryptophan to serotonin and other metabolites and therefore rarely cause carcinoid syndrome even if they metastasise to the liver.

Less Common Locations – there are quite a few less common NET locations which may involve less common hormones – some are covered below including the key glands contributing to NETs.

Unknown Primary? –  One clue to finding the primary might be by isolating an offending hormone causing symptoms.

The key NET hormones

Serotonin

I used the example of Serotonin above because it is the most cited problem with NET Cancer although it does tend to be most prevalent in midgut tumors. Serotonin is a monoamine neurotransmitter synthesized from Tryptophan, one of the eight essential amino acids (defined as those that cannot be made in the body and therefore must be obtained from food or supplements). About 90% of serotonin produced in the body is found in the enterochromaffin cells of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract where it is used mainly to regulate intestinal movements amongst other functions. The remainder is synthesized in the central nervous system where it mainly regulates mood, appetite, and sleep. Please note there is no transfer of serotonin across the blood-brain barrier.

Alterations in tryptophan metabolism may account for many symptoms that accompany carcinoid syndrome. Serotonin in particular is the most likely cause of many features of carcinoid syndrome as it stimulates intestinal motility and secretion and inhibits intestinal absorption. Serotonin may also stimulate fibroblast growth and fibrogenesis and may thus account for peritoneal and valvular fibrosis encountered in such tumours; serotonin, however, it is said not to be associated with flushing. The diversion of tryptophan to serotonin may lead to tryptophan deficiency as it becomes unavailable for nicotinic acid synthesis, and is associated with reduced protein synthesis and hypoalbuminaemia; this may lead to the development of pellagra (skin rash, glossitis, stomatitis, confusion/dementia).

Serotonin is also thought to be responsible for ‘right sided’ heart disease (Carcinoid Heart Disease). It is thought that high levels of serotonin in the blood stream damages the heart, leading to lesions which cause fibrosis, particularly of the heart valves. This generally affects the right side of the heart when liver metastases are present. The left side of the heart is usually not affected because the lungs can break down serotonin. Right sided heart failure symptoms include swelling (edema) in the extremities and enlargement of the heart.

Whilst serotonin can be measured directly in the blood, it’s said to be more accurate to measure 5HIAA (the output of serotonin) via blood or urine.

Tachykinins

Tackykinins include Substance P, Neurokinin A, Neuropeptide K and others. They are active in the enterochromaffin cells of the GI tract but can also be found in lung, appendiceal and ovarian NETs, and also in Medullary Thyroid Carcinoma and Pheochromocytomas. They are thought to be involved in flushing and diarrhea in midgut NETs. The most common tachykinin is Substance P, which is a potent vasodilator (substances which open up blood vessels). Telangiectasias are collections of tiny blood vessels which can develop superficially on the faces of people who have had NETs for several years. They are most commonly found on the nose or upper lip and are purplish in color. They are thought to be due to chronic vasodilatation.

Histamine

Histamine is a hormone that is chemically similar to the hormones serotonin, epinephrine, and norepinephrine. After being made, the hormone is stored in a number of cells (e.g., mast cells, basophils, enterochromaffin cells). Normally, there is a low level of histamine circulating in the body. However (and as we all know!), the release of histamine can be triggered by an event such as an insect bite. Histamine causes the inconvenient redness, swelling and itching associated with the bite. For those with severe allergies, the sudden and more generalized release of histamine can be fatal (e.g., anaphylactic shock). Mast cell histamine has an important role in the reaction of the immune system to the presence of a compound to which the body has developed an allergy. When released from mast cells in a reaction to a material to which the immune system is allergic, the hormone causes blood vessels to increase in diameter (e.g., vasodilation) and to become more permeable to the passage of fluid across the vessel wall. These effects are apparent as a runny nose, sneezing, and watery eyes. Other symptoms can include itching, burning and swelling in the skin, headaches, plugged sinuses, stomach cramps, and diarrhea. Histamine can also be released into the lungs, where it causes the air passages to become constricted rather than dilated. This response occurs in an attempt to keep the offending allergenic particles from being inhaled. Unfortunately, this also makes breathing difficult. An example of such an effect of histamine occurs in asthma. Histamine has also been shown to function as a neurotransmitter (a chemical that facilitates the transmission of impulses from one neural cell to an adjacent neural cell).

In cases of an extreme allergic reaction, adrenaline is administered to eliminate histamine from the body. For minor allergic reactions, symptoms can sometimes be lessened by the use of antihistamines that block the binding of histamine to a receptor molecule.  Histamine is thought to be involved with certain types and locations of NET, including Lung and foregut NETs where they can cause pulmonary obstruction, atypical flush and hormone syndromes.

Histamine, another amine produced by certain NETs (particularly foregut), may be associated with an atypical flushing and pruritus; increased histamine production may account for the increased frequency of duodenal ulcers observed in these tumours.

Kallikrein

Kallikrein is a potent vasodilator and may account for the flushing and increased intestinal mobility.

Prostaglandins

Although prostaglandins are overproduced in midgut tumours, their role in the development of the symptoms of carcinoid syndrome is not well established but triggering peristalsis is mentioned in some texts.

Bradykinin

Bradykinin acts as a blood vessel dilator. Dilation of blood vessels can lead to a rapid heartbeat (tachycardia) and a drop in blood pressure (hypotension). Dilation of blood vessels may also be responsible for the flushing associated with carcinoid syndrome.

Gastrin

Gastrin is a hormone that is produced by ‘G’ cells in the lining of the stomach and upper small intestine. During a meal, gastrin stimulates the stomach to release gastric acid. This allows the stomach to break down proteins swallowed as food and absorb certain vitamins. It also acts as a disinfectant and kills most of the bacteria that enter the stomach with food, minimising the risk of infection within the gut. Gastrin also stimulates growth of the stomach lining and increases the muscle contractions of the gut to aid digestion. Excess gastrin could indicate a NET known as a Gastric NET (stomach) or a pNET known as Gastrinoma (see pancreatic hormones below).

Endocrine Organs

Thyroid Gland

Calcitonin is a hormone that is produced in humans by the parafollicular cells (commonly known as C-cells) of the thyroid gland. Calcitonin is involved in helping to regulate levels of calcium and phosphate in the blood, opposing the action of parathyroid hormone. This means that it acts to reduce calcium levels in the blood. This hormone tends to involve Medullary Thyroid Carcinoma and Hyperparathyroidism in connection to those with Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia. Worth also pointing out the existence of Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) which is a member of the calcitonin family of peptides and a potent vasodilator.  Please note that hypothyroidism is often a side effect of NETs or treatment for NETs – please click here to read about the connection.

Pituitary Gland

HPA AXIS – It’s important to note something called the HPA axis when discussing pituitary hormones as there is a natural and important connection and rhythm between the Hypothalamus, Pituitary and the Adrenal glands. However, I’m only covering the pituitary and adrenal due to their strong connection with NETs.

Adrenocorticotropic hormone (ATCH) is made in the corticotroph cells of the anterior pituitary gland. It’s production is stimulated by receiving corticotrophin releasing hormone (CRH) from the Hypothalamus. ATCH is secreted in several intermittent pulses during the day into the bloodstream and transported around the body. Like cortisol (see below), levels of ATCH are generally high in the morning when we wake up and fall throughout the day. This is called a diurnal rhythm. Once ACTH reaches the adrenal glands, it binds on to receptors causing the adrenal glands to secrete more cortisol, resulting in higher levels of cortisol in the blood. It also increases production of the chemical compounds that trigger an increase in other hormones such as adrenaline and noradrenaline. If too much is released, The effects of too much ATCH are mainly due to the increase in cortisol levels which result. Higher than normal levels of ATCH may be due to:

Cushing’s disease – this is the most common cause of increased ATCH. It is caused by a tumor in the pituitary gland (PitNET), which produces excess amounts of ATCH. (Please note, Cushing’s disease is just one of the numerous causes of Cushing’s syndrome). It is likely that a Cortisol test will also be ordered if Cushing’s is suspected.

A tumour outside the pituitary gland, producing ATCH is known as an ectopic ATCH. With NETs, this is normally a pNET, Lung/Bronchial/Pulmonary NET or Pheochromocytoma.

Adrenal Glands

Adrenaline and Noradrenline

These are two separate but related hormones and neurotransmitters, known as the ‘Catecholamines’. They are produced in the medulla of the adrenal glands and in some neurons of the central nervous system. They are released into the bloodstream and serve as chemical mediators, and also convey the nerve impulses to various organs. Adrenaline has many different actions depending on the type of cells it is acting upon.  However, the overall effect of adrenaline is to prepare the body for the ‘fight or flight’ response in times of stress, i.e. for vigorous and/or sudden action. Key actions of adrenaline include increasing the heart rate, increasing blood pressure, expanding the air passages of the lungs, enlarging the pupil in the eye, redistributing blood to the muscles and altering the body’s metabolism, so as to maximise blood glucose levels (primarily for the brain). A closely related hormone, noradrenaline, is released mainly from the nerve endings of the sympathetic nervous system (as well as in relatively small amounts from the adrenal medulla). There is a continuous low-level of activity of the sympathetic nervous system resulting in release of noradrenaline into the circulation, but adrenaline release is only increased at times of acute stress.  These hormones are normally related to adrenal and extra adrenal NETs such as Pheochromocytoma and Paraganglioma.  Like serotonin secreting tumours, adrenal secreting tumours convert the offending hormone into something which comes out in urine. In fact, this is measured (amongst other tests) by 24 hour urine test very similar to 5HIAA (with its own diet and drug restrictions).  It’s known as 24-hour urinary catacholamines and metanephrines.  Worth noting that adrenaline is also known as Epinephrine (one of the 5 E’s of Carcinoid Syndrome).

Cortisol

This is a steroid hormone, one of the glucocorticoids, made in the cortex of the adrenal glands and then released into the blood, which transports it all round the body. Almost every cell contains receptors for cortisol and so cortisol can have lots of different actions depending on which sort of cells it is acting upon. These effects include controlling the body’s blood sugar levels and thus regulating metabolism acting as an anti-inflammatory, influencing memory formation, controlling salt and water balance, influencing blood pressure. Blood levels of cortisol vary dramatically, but generally are high in the morning when we wake up, and then fall throughout the day. This is called a diurnal rhythm. In people who work at night, this pattern is reversed, so the timing of cortisol release is clearly linked to daily activity patterns. In addition, in response to stress, extra cortisol is released to help the body to respond appropriately. Too much cortisol over a prolonged period of time can lead to Cushing’s syndrome.  Cortisol oversecretion can be associated with Adrenal Cortical Carcinoma (ACC) which can sometimes be grouped within the NET family.

Other hormones related to ACC include:

Androgens (e.g. Testosterone) – increased facial and body hair, particularly females. Deepened voice in females.

Estrogen – early signs of puberty in children, enlarged breast tissue in males.

Aldosterone – weight gain, high blood pressure.

Adrenal Insufficiency (Addison’s Disease) occurs when the adrenal glands do not produce enough of the hormone cortisol and in some cases, the hormone aldosterone. For this reason, the disease is sometimes called chronic adrenal insufficiency, or hypocortisolism.

Parathyroid

Parathyroid hormone (PTH) is secreted from four parathyroid glands, which are small glands in the neck, located behind the thyroid gland. Parathyroid hormone regulates calcium levels in the blood, largely by increasing the levels when they are too low.  A primary problem in the parathyroid glands, producing too much parathyroid hormone causes raised calcium levels in the blood (hypercalcaemia – primary hyperparathyroidism). You may also be offered an additional test called Parathyroid Hormone-Related Peptide (PTHrP). They would probably also measure Serum Calcium in combination with these type of tests. The parathyroid is one of the ‘3 p’ locations often connected to Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia – MEN 1

Pancreatic Hormones (Syndromes)

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors form in hormone-making cells of the pancreas. You may see these described as ‘Islet Cells’ or ‘Islets of Langerhans’ after the scientist who discovered them. Pancreatic NETs may also be functional or nonfunctional:

  • Functional tumors make extra amounts of hormones, such as gastrin, insulin, and glucagon, that cause signs and symptoms.
  • Nonfunctional tumors do not make extra amounts of hormones. Signs and symptoms are caused by the tumor as it spreads and grows.

There are different kinds of functional pancreatic NETs. Pancreatic NETs make different kinds of hormones such as gastrin, insulin, and glucagon. Functional pancreatic NETs include the following:

  • Gastrinoma: A tumor that forms in cells that make gastrin. Gastrin is a hormone that causes the stomach to release an acid that helps digest food. Both gastrin and stomach acid are increased by gastrinomas. When increased stomach acid, stomach ulcers, and diarrhea are caused by a tumor that makes gastrin, it is called Zollinger-Ellison syndrome. A gastrinoma usually forms in the head of the pancreas and sometimes forms in the small intestine. Most gastrinomas are malignant (cancer).
  • Insulinoma: A tumor that forms in cells that make insulin. Insulin is a hormone that controls the amount of glucose (sugar) in the blood. It moves glucose into the cells, where it can be used by the body for energy. Insulinomas are usually slow-growing tumors that rarely spread. An insulinoma forms in the head, body, or tail of the pancreas. Insulinomas are usually benign (not cancer).
  • Glucagonoma: A tumor that forms in cells that make glucagon. Glucagon is a hormone that increases the amount of glucose in the blood. It causes the liver to break down glycogen. Too much glucagon causes hyperglycemia (high blood sugar). A glucagonoma usually forms in the tail of the pancreas. Most glucagonomas are malignant (cancer).
  • Pancreatic Polypeptide (PPoma). A pancreatic polypeptide is a polypeptide hormone secreted by the pancreatic polypeptide (PP) cells of the islets of Langerhans in the endocrine portion of the pancreas. Its release is triggered in humans by protein-rich meals, fasting, exercise, and acute hypoglycemia and is inhibited by somatostatin and intravenous glucose. The exact biological role of pancreatic polypeptide remains uncertain. Excess PP could indicate a pNET known as PPoma.
  • Other types of tumors: There are other rare types of functional pancreatic NETs that make hormones, including hormones that control the balance of sugar, salt, and water in the body. These tumors include:
    • VIPomas, which make vasoactive intestinal peptide. VIPoma may also be called Verner-Morrison syndrome, pancreatic cholera syndrome, or the WDHA syndrome (Watery Diarrhea, Hypokalemia (low potassium)and Achlorhydria).
    • Somatostatinomas, which make somatostatin. Somatostatin is a hormone produced by many tissues in the body, principally in the nervous and digestive systems. It regulates a wide variety of physiological functions and inhibits the secretion of other hormones, the activity of the gastrointestinal tract and the rapid reproduction of normal and tumour cells. Somatostatin may also act as a neurotransmitter in the nervous system.

The pancreas is one of the ‘3 p’ locations often connected to Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia – MEN 1

Having certain syndromes can increase the risk of pancreatic NETs.

Anything that increases your risk of getting a disease is called a risk factor. Having a risk factor does not mean that you will get cancer; not having risk factors doesn’t mean that you will not get cancer. Talk with your doctor if you think you may be at risk. Multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) syndrome is a risk factor for pancreatic NETs.

Signs and symptoms of pancreatic NETs

Signs or symptoms can be caused by the growth of the tumor and/or by hormones the tumor makes or by other conditions. Some tumors may not cause signs or symptoms. Check with your doctor if you have any of these problems.

Signs and symptoms of a non-functional pancreatic NET

A non-functional pancreatic NET may grow for a long time without causing signs or symptoms. It may grow large or spread to other parts of the body before it causes signs or symptoms, such as:

  • Diarrhea.
  • Indigestion.
  • A lump in the abdomen.
  • Pain in the abdomen or back.
  • Yellowing of the skin and whites of the eyes.

Signs and symptoms of a functional pancreatic NET

The signs and symptoms of a functional pancreatic NET depend on the type of hormone being made.

Too much gastrin may cause:

  • Stomach ulcers that keep coming back.
  • Pain in the abdomen, which may spread to the back. The pain may come and go and it may go away after taking an antacid.
  • The flow of stomach contents back into the esophagus (gastroesophageal reflux).
  • Diarrhea.

Too much insulin may cause:

  • Low blood sugar. This can cause blurred vision, headache, and feeling lightheaded, tired, weak, shaky, nervous, irritable, sweaty, confused, or hungry.
  • Fast heartbeat.

Too much glucagon may cause:

  • Skin rash on the face, stomach, or legs.
  • High blood sugar. This can cause headaches, frequent urination, dry skin and mouth, or feeling hungry, thirsty, tired, or weak.
  • Blood clots. Blood clots in the lung can cause shortness of breath, cough, or pain in the chest. Blood clots in the arm or leg can cause pain, swelling, warmth, or redness of the arm or leg.
  • Diarrhea.
  • Weight loss for no known reason.
  • Sore tongue or sores at the corners of the mouth.

Too much vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP) may cause:

  • Very large amounts of watery diarrhea.
  • Dehydration. This can cause feeling thirsty, making less urine, dry skin and mouth, headaches, dizziness, or feeling tired.
  • Low potassium level in the blood. This can cause muscle weakness, aching, or cramps, numbness and tingling, frequent urination, fast heartbeat, and feeling confused or thirsty.
  • Cramps or pain in the abdomen.
  • Facial flushing.
  • Weight loss for no known reason.

Too much somatostatin may cause:

  • High blood sugar. This can cause headaches, frequent urination, dry skin and mouth, or feeling hungry, thirsty, tired, or weak.
  • Diarrhea.
  • Steatorrhea (very foul-smelling stool that floats).
  • Gallstones.
  • Yellowing of the skin and whites of the eyes.
  • Weight loss for no known reason.

Too much pancretic polypeptide may cause:

  • belly pain.
  • an enlarged liver.

Testing hormones

Clearly the presenting symptoms will give doctors a clue to the oversecreting hormone (see list above). Excessive secretions or high levels of hormones and other substances can be measured in a number of ways. For example:

Well known tests for the most common types of NET include 5-Hydroxyindoleacetic Acid (5-HIAA) 24 hour urine test which is also measured by a blood draw. Note: – tumor markers can be measured simultanously e.g. Chromogranin A (CgA) blood test and/or Pancreastatin as there can very often be a correlation between tumour mass and tumour secreting activity. CgA / Pancreastatin is a blood test which measures a protein found in many NET tumour cells. These marker tests are normally associated with tumour mass rather than tumour functionality.

By measuring the level of 5-HIAA in the urine or blood, healthcare providers can calculate the amount of serotonin in the body (5-HIAA is a by-product of serotonin).  5-HIAA test is the most common biochemical test for carcinoid syndrome or the degree of how ‘functional’ tumours are.  If you’ve understood the text above, you can now see why there are dietary and drug restrictions in place prior to the test.

Pancreatic Hormone testing. There are other tests for other hormones and there is a common test which measured the main hormones seen in NETs. It may be called different things in different countries, but in UK, it’s known as a ‘Fasting Gut Hormone Profile‘.

Scratching the surface here so for a comprehensive list of marker tests for NETs, have a read here.

Treatment for Over-secreting Hormones

Of course, reducing tumour bulk through surgery and other treatment modalities, should technically reduce over-secretion (I suspect that doesn’t work for all).  Other treatments may have the dual effect of reducing tumour burden and the effects of hormone oversecretions.

One of the key treatment breakthroughs for many NET cancer patients, is the use of ‘Somatostatin Analogues’ mainly branded as Octreotide (Sandostatin) or Lanreotide (Somatuline). People tend to associate these drugs with serotonin related secretions and tumours but they are in actual fact useful for many others including the pancreatic NETs listed above.  Patients will normally be prescribed these drugs if they are displaying these symptoms but some people may be more avid to the drug than others and this may influence future use and dosages. This is another complex area but I’ll try to describe the importance here in basic terms. Somatostatin is a naturally occurring protein in the human body. It is an inhibitor of various hormones secreted from the endocrine system (some of which were listed above) and it binds with high affinity to the five somatostatin receptors found on secretory endocrine cells. NETs have membranes covered with receptors for somatostatin. However, the naturally occurring Somatostatin has limited clinical use due to its short half-life (<3 min). Therefore, specific somatostatin analogues (synthetic versions) have been developed that bind to tumours and block hormone release. Thus why Octreotide and Lanreotide do a good job of slowing down hormone production, including many of the gut hormones controlling emptying of the stomach and bowel.  It also slows down the release of hormones made by the pancreas, including insulin and digestive enzymes – so there can be side effects including fat malabsorption.

The recent introduction of Telotristat Ethyl (XERMELO) is interesting as that inhibits a precursor to serotonin and reduces diarrhea in those patients where it is not adequately controlled by somatostatin analogues.

Other than the effects of curative or cytoreductive surgery, some NETs may have very specialist drugs for inhibiting the less common hormone types.  This is not an exhaustive list.

Worth also noting that oversecreting hormones can contribute to a phenomenon known as Carcinoid Crisis – read more here.  For catacholamine secreting tumors (Pheochromocytoma/Paraganglioma), this may be known as Intraoperative Hypertensive Crisis

Sorry about the long article – it’s complex and you should always consult your specialist about issues involving hormones, testing for hormones and treating any low or high scores.

Thanks for reading

Ronny

I’m also active on Facebook.  Like my page for even more news.  I’m also building up this site here: Ronny Allan

Disclaimer

My Diagnosis and Treatment History

Most Popular Posts

Sign up for my twitter newsletter

Remember ….. in the war on Neuroendocrine Cancer, let’s not forget to win the battle for better quality of life!

patients included
This is a Patients Included site