Radionuclide therapy for neuroendocrine tumors is a form of systemic radiotherapy that allows the administration of targeted radionuclides into tumor cells that express a large quantity of somatostatin receptors. The two most commonly used radio-peptides for radionuclide therapy in neuroendocrine tumors are ⁹⁰Y-DOTATOC and ¹⁷⁷Lu-DOTATATE. Radio-peptides have been used for several years in the treatment of advanced neuroendocrine tumors. Recently, the randomized Phase III study NETTER-1 compared¹⁷⁷Lu-DOTATATE versus high-dose (double-dose) octreotide LAR in patients with metastatic midgut neuroendocrine tumors, and demonstrated its efficacy in this setting. Strong signals in favor of efficiency seem to exist for other tumors, in particular for pancreatic and pulmonary neuroendocrine tumors. This focus on radionuclide therapy in gastroenteropancreatic and pulmonary neuroendocrine tumors addresses the treatment modalities, the validated and potential indications, and the safety of the therapy.

Interventional radiology plays an important role in the management of patients with neuroendocrine tumor liver metastasis (NELM). Transarterial embolization (TAE), transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), and selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) are intra-arterial therapies available for these patients in order to improve symptoms and overall survival. These treatment options are proposed in patients with NELM not responding to systemic therapies and without extrahepatic progression. Currently, available data suggest that TAE should be preferred to TACE in patients with NELM from extrapancreatic origin because of similar efficacy and better patient tolerance. TACE is more effective in patients with pancreatic NELM and SIRT has shown promising results along with good tolerance. However, large randomized controlled trials are still lacking in this setting. Available literature mainly consists in small sample size and retrospective studies with important technical heterogeneity. The purpose of this review is to provide an updated overview of the currently reported endovascular interventional radiology procedures that are used for the treatment of NELM.

The incidence of liver metastasis in digestive neuroendocrine tumors is high. Their presence appears as an important prognostic factor in terms of quality of life and survival. These tumors may be symptomatic because of the tumor burden itself and/or the hormonal hyper-secretion induced by the tumor. Surgery is the treatment of choice for resectable tumors and metastasis. Nevertheless, surgery is only possible in a small number of cases. The management of non-resectable liver metastasis is a challenge. The literature is rich but consists predominantly in small retrospective series with a low level of proof. Thus, the choice of one technique over another could be difficult. Local ablative techniques (radiofrequency) or trans-catheter intra-arterial liver-directed treatments (hepatic artery embolization, chemo-embolization, and radio-embolization) are frequently considered for liver metastasis. In the present review, we focus on these different therapeutic approaches in advanced neuroendocrine tumors, results (clinical and radiological), and overall efficacy, and summarize recommendations to help physicians in their clinical practice.

Background: Esophagectomy is recommended after endoscopic resection of an early esophageal cancer when pejorative histoprognostic criteria indicate a high risk of lymph node involvement. Our aim was to analyze the clinical outcomes of a non-surgical, organ preserving management in this clinical setting. Patients and Methods: This retrospective study was performed in two tertiary centers from 2015 to 2020. Patients were included if they had histologically complete resection of an early esophageal cancer, with poor differentiation, lymphovascular invasion or deep submucosal invasion. Endoscopic resection was followed by chemoradiotherapy or follow-up in case of surgical contraindications or patient refusal. Outcome measures were disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), cancer specific survival (CSS) and toxicity of chemoradiotherapy. Results: Forty-one patients (36 with squamous cell carcinoma and 5 with adenocarcinomas) were included. The estimated high risk of lymph node involvement was based on poor differentiation (10/41; 24%), lympho-vascular invasion (11/41; 27%), muscularis mucosa invasion or deep sub-mucosal invasion (38/41; 93%). Thirteen patients (13/41; 32%) were closely monitored, and 28 (28/41; 68%) were treated by chemoradiotherapy or radiotherapy alone. In the close follow-up group, DFS, OS and CSS were 92%, 92% and 100%, respectively vs. 75%, 79% and 96%, respectively in the chemoradiotherapy group at the end of the follow-up. Serious adverse events related to chemoradiotherapy occurred in 10% of the patients. There were no treatment-related deaths. Conclusions: Our study shows that close follow-up may be an alternative to systematic esophagectomy after endoscopic resection of early esophageal cancer with a predicted high risk of lymph node involvement.

Pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (panNENs) are relatively rare but their incidence has increased almost sevenfold over the last four decades. Neuroendocrine neoplasms are classified according to their histologic differentiation and their grade. Their grade is based on their Ki-67 proliferation index and mitotic index. Their prognosis is highly variable according to these elements and treatments also vary according to their classification. Surgery is the only curative treatment for localized and advanced panNENs and offers a better prognosis than non-surgical treatments. In the case of an advanced panNEN without the possibility of resection and/or ablation, medical treatment remains the cornerstone for improving survival and preserving quality-of-life. PanNENs are considered as chemosensitive tumors, unlike midgut neuroendocrine tumors. Thus, panNENs can be treated with chemotherapy, but targeted therapies and somatostatin analogs are also treatment options. The scarcity and heterogeneity of NENs make their management difficult. The present review aims to clarify the medical treatments currently available for advanced panNENs, based on their characteristics, and to propose a treatment algorithm.

Current guidelines recommend performing esophagectomy after endoscopic resection for early esophageal cancer when the risk of lymph node metastasis or residual cancer is found to be significant and endoscopic treatment is therefore noncurative. Our aim was to assess the safety and oncological outcomes of esophagogastric resection in this specific clinical setting. A retrospective review from 2012 to 2018 was performed at four tertiary referral centers. All patients had a noncurative endoscopic resection of a clinical T1 esophageal cancer, followed by esophagectomy. Outcome measures were the rates of T0N0 specimens, overall survival, disease-free and cancer-specific survival, postoperative morbidity and mortality. A total of 30 patients (13 with squamous cell carcinoma and 17 with adenocarcinoma) were included. The reasons for noncurative endoscopic resection were: positive vertical margins (n = 12), squamous cell carcinoma with muscularis mucosae or submucosal layer invasion (n = 3 and 9), adenocarcinoma with deep submucosal invasion (n = 11), poorly differentiated tumor (n = 6) and lymphovascular invasion (n = 6). Overall, 63% of the esophagi were T0N0: most residual lesions were T1a metachronous lesions, and four (13%) patients had advanced pT status (n = 3) or lymph node metastases (n = 2). Overall survival, disease-free survival and cancer-specific survival were 83%, 75%, and 90% respectively. A total of 43% of patients had severe postoperative complications, and postoperative mortality was 7%. In this cohort, esophagectomy allowed the resection of residual advanced cancer or lymph node metastases in 13% of cases, at the cost of 43% severe morbidity and 7% mortality. Therefore, the possibility of close follow up needs to be balanced with a highly morbid surgical management in these patients.