Comparison of clinical characteristics between sporadic gastrinoma and multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1-related gastrinoma / 中华胃肠外科杂志

ABSTRACT

Objective: To compare clinical characteristics of sporadic gastrinoma and multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1)-related gastrinoma. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted. Patients with clinical manifestations of Zollinger-Ellison syndrome, pathological diagnosis as neuroendocrine neoplasm (NEN) and complete clinical and follow-up data were enrolled. Patients with only high gastric acid secretion but without evidence of NEN, or with other concurrent non-NEN tumors were excluded. According to the above criteria, the clinicopathological data of 52 cases of gastrinoma diagnosed from April 2003 to December 2020 in the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, were collected. Patients who met the diagnostic criteria of gastrinoma and met one of the following conditions were diagnosed as MEN1-related gastrinoma: (1) the presence of pathogenic mutations in the MEN1 gene confirmed by genetic testing; (2) NENs involving two or more endocrine glands, namely, pituitary, parathyroid, thymic, pancreatic, and adrenal NENs; (3) NEN and at least one first-degree relatives diagnosed as MEN1. The remaining gastrinomas were defined as sporadic gastrinoma. Student's t test and chi-square test were used for statistical analysis. Clinicopathological characteristics, endoscopic findings, imaging characteristics, treatment, and prognosis of sporadic and MEN1-related gastrinoma were compared. Results: Among 52 patients with gastrinoma, 33 were sporadic gastrinoma and 19 were MEN1-related gastrinoma. The common symptoms of both sporadic and MEN1-related gastrinomas were diarrhea (24/33, 72.7%; 17/19, 89.5%) and abdominal pain (19/33, 57.6%; 9/19, 47.4%). Compared with sporadic gastrinoma, MEN1-related gastrinoma needed longer time for diagnosis [(7.4±4.9) years vs. (3.9±5.2) years, t=-2.355, P=0.022), were more likely multiple tumors [47.4% (9/19) vs. 15.2% (5/33), χ(2)=6.361, P=0.012], had smaller diameter [(1.7±1.0) cm vs. (3.1±1.8) cm, t=2.942, P=0.005), presented the lower tumor grade [G1: 83.3% (15/18) vs. 39.4% (13/33); G2: 11.1% (2/18) vs. 54.5% (18/33); G3: 5.6% (1/18) vs. 6.1% (2/33), Z=-2.766, P=0.006], were less likely to have serum gastrin which was 10 times higher than normal [11.8% (2/17) vs. 56.0% (14/33), χ(2)=8.396, P=0.004], had higher probability of complication with type 2 gastric neuroendocrine tumors (g-NET) [31.6% (6/19) vs. 3.0%(1/33), χ(2)=6.163, P=0.013], and had lower rate of liver metastasis [21.1% (4/19) vs. 51.5% (17/33), χ(2)=4.648, P=0.031). There was no obvious difference between sporadic gastrinomas and MEN1-related gastrinomas in endoscopic findings. Both types presented enlarged and swollen gastric mucosa under the stimulation of high gastric acid, and multiple ulcers in the stomach and duodenum could be seen. Gastrinoma with type 2 g-NET presented multiple polypoid raised lesions in the fundus and body of the stomach. (68)Ga-SSR-PET/CT scan had a 100% detection rate for both types while (18)F-FDG-PET/CT scan had a higher detection rate for sporadic gastrinoma compared with MEN1-related gastrinoma [57.9% (11/19) vs. 20.0% (3/15), χ(2)=4.970, P=0.026]. Among the patients with sporadic gastrinoma, 19 received surgical treatment, 1 underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection, 8 underwent transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE), and 5 underwent surgery combined with TAE. Among patients with MEN1-related gastrinoma, 13 received surgical treatment, and the other 6 received conservative treatment. The median follow-up of all the patients was 21.5 (1-129) months, and the 5-year survival rate was 88.4%. The 5-year survival rate of patients with sporadic and MEN1-related gastrinomas was 89.5% and 80.0% respectively (P=0.949). The 5-year survival rate of patients with and without liver metastasis was 76.2% vs. 100%, respectively (P=0.061). Conclusions: Compared with sporadic gastrinoma, MEN1-related gastrinoma has longer diagnosis delay, smaller tumor diameter, lower tumor grading, lower risk of liver metastasis, and is more likely to complicate with type 2 g-NET, while there is no difference in survival between the two tumor types.