Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 25, Issue 12, pp 3613–3620 | Cite as

Prognostic Impact of Serum Pancreastatin Following Chemoembolization for Neuroendocrine Tumors

  • David Strosberg
  • Eric B. Schneider
  • Jill Onesti
  • Neil Saunders
  • Bhavana Konda
  • Manisha Shah
  • Mary Dillhoff
  • Carl R. Schmidt
  • Lawrence A. ShirleyEmail author
Gastrointestinal Oncology



The objective of this study was to investigate the prognostic impact of the biomarker serum pancreastatin in patients with metastatic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) treated with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE).


Patients with metastatic NET treated with TACE at a single institution from 2000 to 2013 were analyzed. Patient demographics, response to therapy, and long-term survival were compared with baseline pancreastatin level and changes in pancreastatin levels after TACE.


A total of 188 patients underwent TACE during the study period. An initial pancreastatin level greater than 5000 pg/mL correlated with worse overall survival (OS) from time of first TACE (median OS, 58.5 vs. 22.1 months, p < 0.001). A decrease in pancreastatin level by 50% or more after TACE treatment correlated with improved OS (median OS 53.8 vs. 29.9 months, p = 0.032). Patients with carcinoid syndrome were more likely to have a subsequent increase in pancreastatin after initial drop post-TACE (78.1 vs. 55.2%, p = 0.002). Patients with an increase in pancreastatin levels after initial drop post-TACE were more likely to have liver progression on imaging (70.7 vs. 40.7%, p = 0.005) and more likely to need repeat TACE (21.1 vs. 6.7%, p = 0.009).


For patients with liver metastases from NET treated with TACE, pancreastatin measurement may be a useful prognostic indicator. Extreme high levels before TACE can predict poor outcomes, whereas significant drops in pancreastatin after TACE correlate with improved survival. An increase in levels after initial decrease may predict progressive liver disease requiring repeat TACE. As such, pancreastatin levels should be measured throughout the TACE treatment period.



No authors have any commercial interest in the subject of study.


  1. 1.
    Oberg K, Norheim I, Lundqvist G, Wide L. Cytotoxic treatment in patients with malignant carcinoid tumors. Response to streptozocin–alone or in combination with 5-FU. Acta Oncol. (Stockholm, Sweden). 1987;26(6):429–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hatton MQ, Reed NS. Chemotherapy for neuroendocrine tumors: the Beatson Oncology Centre experience. Clin Oncol [Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)]. 1997;9(6):385–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Faiss S, Pape UF, Bohmig M, et al. Prospective, randomized, multicenter trial on the antiproliferative effect of lanreotide, interferon alfa, and their combination for therapy of metastatic neuroendocrine gastroenteropancreatic tumors–the International Lanreotide and Interferon Alfa Study Group. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(14):2689–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Turner NC, Strauss SJ, Sarker D, et al. Chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil, cisplatin and streptozocin for neuroendocrine tumours. Br J Cancer. 2010;102(7):1106–12.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ruszniewski P, Rougier P, Roche A, et al. Hepatic arterial chemoembolization in patients with liver metastases of endocrine tumors. A prospective phase II study in 24 patients. Cancer. 1993;71(8):2624–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Drougas JG, Anthony LB, Blair TK, et al. Hepatic artery chemoembolization for management of patients with advanced metastatic carcinoid tumors. Am J Surg. 1998;175(5):408–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Roche A, Girish BV, de Baere T, et al. Trans-catheter arterial chemoembolization as first-line treatment for hepatic metastases from endocrine tumors. Eur Radiol. 2003;13(1):136–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gupta S, Johnson MM, Murthy R, et al. Hepatic arterial embolization and chemoembolization for the treatment of patients with metastatic neuroendocrine tumors: variables affecting response rates and survival. Cancer. 2005;104(8):1590–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bloomston M, Al-Saif O, Klemanski D, et al. Hepatic artery chemoembolization in 122 patients with metastatic carcinoid tumor: lessons learned. J Gastrointest Surg. 2007;11(3):264–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Strosberg JR, Choi J, Cantor AB, Kvols LK. Selective hepatic artery embolization for treatment of patients with metastatic carcinoid and pancreatic endocrine tumors. Cancer Control. 2006;13(1):72–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Desai DC, O’Dorisio TM, Schirmer WJ, Jung SS, Khabiri H, Villanueva V, Martin EW. Serum pancreastatin levels predict response to hepatic artery chemoembolization and somatostatin analogue therapy in metastatic neuroendocrine tumors. Regulatory Peptides. 2001;96(3):113–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Arrese D, McNally ME, Chokshi R, et al. Extrahepatic disease should not preclude transarterial chemoembolization for metastatic neuroendocrine carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(4):1114–1120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    O’Dorisio TM, Krutzik SR, Woltering EA, et al. Development of a highly sensitive and specific carboxy-terminal human pancreastatin assay to monitor neuroendocrine tumor behavior. Pancreas. 2010;39(5):611–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Khan TM, Garg M, Warner RR, Uhr JH, Divino CM. Elevated serum pancreastatin is an indicator of hepatic metastasis in patients with small bowel neuroendocrine tumors. Pancreas. 2016;45(7):1032–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Woltering EA, Beyer DT, Thiagarajan R, Ramirez RA, Wang YZ, Ricks MJ, Boudreaux JP. Elevated plasma pancreastatin, but not chromogranin a, predicts survival in neuroendocrine tumors of the duodenum. J Am Coll Surg. 2016;222(4):534–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sherman SK, Maxwell JE, O’Dorisio MS, O’Dorisio TM, Howe JR. Pancreastatin predicts survival in neuroendocrine tumors. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(9):2971–80.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dong XD, Carr BI. Hepatic artery chemoembolization for the treatment of liver metastases from neuroendocrine tumors: a long-term follow-up in 123 patients. Med Oncol (Northwood, London, England). 2011;28 Suppl 1:S286–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ho AS, Picus J, Darcy MD, Tan B, Gould JE, Pilgram TK, Brown DB. Long-term outcome after chemoembolization and embolization of hepatic metastatic lesions from neuroendocrine tumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;188(5):1201–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Engelman ES, Leon-Ferre R, Naraev BG, et al. Comparison of transarterial liver-directed therapies for low-grade metastatic neuroendocrine tumors in a single institution. Pancreas. 2014;43(2):219–25.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Strosberg
    • 1
  • Eric B. Schneider
    • 1
  • Jill Onesti
    • 2
  • Neil Saunders
    • 3
  • Bhavana Konda
    • 4
  • Manisha Shah
    • 4
  • Mary Dillhoff
    • 1
  • Carl R. Schmidt
    • 1
  • Lawrence A. Shirley
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of SurgeryThe Ohio State University Wexner Medical CenterColumbusUSA
  2. 2.Mercy Health Grand RapidsGrand RapidsUSA
  3. 3.Emory University School of MedicineAtlantaUSA
  4. 4.Division of Medical OncologyThe Ohio State University Wexner Medical CenterColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations