Assessing the Relationship Between Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor Grade and Overall Survival: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Neuroendocrine tumors (NET) are a rare group of epithelial neoplasm present in gastrointestinal tract (GI) (67.5%), bronchopulmonary tree (25.3-30%), and in 15% of cases, the primary sites cannot be identified. Although endoscopic screening, improvement in pathological techniques, and early detection have shown improvement in NET survival rates, the prognosis of advanced, metastatic, and poorly differentiated NET is very poor. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effect of Gastrointestinal and pancreatic (GEPs) NETs grade on overall survival. Method: We searched observational studies describing the overall survival or prognostic factors of primary GEP NETs from May 2011 -May 2021 following PRISMA guidelines. Studies describing the effect of primary grade 3 GEP NETs on overall survival were included. Meta-analysis was performed, and pooled hazard ratio and their 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were obtained. The forest plots were created using random-effects models and sensitivity analysis was performed to account for the heterogeneity. Results: Seven studies with 7692 confirmed patients were included. In our meta-analysis grade 3 GEP NET were associated with higher odds of poor survival (pooled HR: 2.73; 95% CI: 1.36–5.47; p = 0.005), with 92% heterogeneity between studies (p < 0.0001). To account for heterogeneity, sensitivity analysis was performed by removing two outlying studies (Fathi et al. and Foubert et al.) on funnel plots. The results after sensitivity analysis did not change and still showed significant association of grade 3 with poor survival (pooled HR: 4.53; 95% CI: 3.54–5.78; p < 0.00001), with no heterogeneity between studies (p = 0.72; I2 = 0%). Conclusion: Our meta-analysis found that grade 3 GEP NETs are associated with poor survival and additional future studies are needed to identify other risk factors associated with poor survival in GEP NETs to improve mortality.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.040 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".