Predictive Nomogram and Propensity Score Matching in Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of the Tubular Gastrointestinal Tract: A US Population-Based Clinical Outcome Study

Abstract

Background: Neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs) of the tubular gastrointestinal tract (GI-NECs) are rare and associated with worse clinical outcomes. This population-based study aims to highlight key demographics, clinicopathological factors, and survival outcomes in the US population. Methods: Data from 10,387 patients with GI-NECs were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Result (SEER) database from 2000 to 2020. Results: Most patients were >40 years old at the time of presentation with a median age of 63 years old, with almost equal ethnic distribution per US population data. The most common primary tumor site was the small intestine (33.6%). The metastatic spread was localized in 34.8%, regional in 27.8%, and distant in 37.3% of cases, and the liver was the most common site of metastasis (19.9%) in known cases of metastases. Most NEC patients underwent surgery, presenting the highest 5-year overall survival of 73.2% with a 95% confidence interval (CI) (95% CI 72.0–74.4%), while chemotherapy alone had the lowest 5-year survival of 8.0% (95% CI 6.4–10.0%). Compared to men, women had a superior 5-year survival rate of 59.0% (95% CI 57.6–60.5%). On multivariate analysis, age > 65 (HR 2.49, 95% CI 2.36–2.54%, p ≤ 0.001), distant metastasis (HR 2.57, 95% CI 2.52–2.62%, p ≤ 0.001), tumor size > 4 mm (HR 1.98, 95%, CI 1.70–2.31%, p ≤ 0.001), esophageal (HR 1.49, 95% CI 0.86–2.58%, p ≤ 0.001), transverse colon (HR 1.95, 95% CI 1.15–3.33%, p ≤ 0.01), descending colon (HR 2.12, 95% CI 1.12, 3.97%, p = 0.02) anorectal sites, and liver or lung metastases were associated with worse survival. Surgical intervention and tumors located in the small intestine or appendix showed a better prognosis. Conclusion: GI-NECs are a group of rare malignancies associated with a poor prognosis. Therefore, epidemiological studies analyzing national databases may be the best alternative to have a more comprehensive understanding of this condition, assess the impact of current practices, and generate prognosis tools.