• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    An update on the diagnosis of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms

    2022-03-31 08:09:48JiayunFangJayLiJiaqiShi
    World Journal of Gastroenterology 2022年10期

    Jiayun M Fang, Jay Li, Jiaqi Shi

    Abstract Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs) arise from neuroendocrine cells found throughout the gastrointestinal tract and islet cells of the pancreas. The incidence and prevalence of GEP-NENs have been increasing each year due to higher awareness, improved diagnostic modalities, and increased incidental detection on cross-sectional imaging and endoscopy for cancer screening and other conditions and symptoms. GEP-NENs are a heterogeneous group of tumors and have a wide range in clinical presentation,histopathologic features, and molecular biology. Clinical presentation most commonly depends on whether the GEP-NEN secretes an active hormone. The World Health Organization recently updated the classification of GEP-NENs to introduce a distinction between high-grade neuroendocrine tumors and neuroendocrine carcinomas, which can be identified using histology and molecular studies and are more aggressive with a worse prognosis compared to high-grade neuroendocrine tumors. As our understanding of the biology of GEP-NENs has grown, new and improved diagnostic modalities can be developed and optimized. Here, we discuss clinical features and updates in diagnosis, including histopathological analysis, biomarkers, molecular techniques, and radiology of GEP-NENs. We review established diagnostic tests and discuss promising novel diagnostic tests that are currently in development or require further investigation and validation prior to broad utilization in patient care.

    Key Words: Neuroendocrine tumor; Neuroendocrine carcinoma; Gastrointestinal;Pancreas; Pathology; Diagnosis

    lNTRODUCTlON

    Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) account for 0 .5 % of all malignancies, and 62 %-70 % of these are found in the gastroenteropancreatic system (GEP-NENs)[1 -3 ]. They arise from neuroendocrine cells,which are characterized by their ability to synthesize and secrete neuropeptides and hormones as well as the expression of neuroendocrine markers such as synaptophysin and chromogranin[2 ]. Neuroendocrine cells are most commonly found throughout the gastrointestinal tract, the islets of Langerhans of the pancreas, and in the lungs[2 ]. GEP-NENs are often slow-growing and indolent, so they can go undetected for years prior to diagnosis[4 ]. Though GEP-NENs were previously considered rare, the incidence has dramatically increased over the years as awareness of GEP-NENs grew and diagnostic modalities improved[1 ,4 -7 ]. GEP-NENs are currently the second most prevalent gastrointestinal neoplasm, second only to colorectal adenocarcinoma[4 ]. Despite their indolent behavior, GEP-NENs can cause significant morbidity. Furthermore, their clinical presentation may mimic other classes of neoplasms, leading to inappropriate treatment and delays in appropriate therapy. Due to delays in diagnosis, metastases are present in 21 % to 69 % of patients at the time of diagnosis[6 ,7 ]. Therefore, it is imperative to come to an accurate diagnosis in a timely manner.

    Oberndorfer first described GEP-NENs in 1907 as “Karzinoide” to describe benign-appearing tumors of the small intestine[2 ,6 ]. Now, the term “carcinoid” is no longer recommended as these neoplasms have been found to have the malignant potential[6 ]. The World Health Organization (WHO) classification of GEP-NENs has changed over the years. A major recent update is the division of NENs into neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) and neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs). Previous editions classified GEP-NENs into grade 1 and grade 2 NETs, while grade 3 tumors were classified as NECs; however,molecular discoveries have aided in distinguishing grade 3 NETs from NECs and this distinction has been implemented as of the WHO 2019 [8 ]. In addition to the changes in WHO classification, there are new developments in diagnosing GEP-NENs, including histopathology, biomarkers, and imaging.Here, we discuss updates on the diagnosis of GEP-NENs across these various modalities.

    CLlNlCAL FEATURES

    GEP-NENs can broadly be divided into functional and nonfunctional neoplasms. Though nonfunctional NENs can secrete calcitonin, chromogranins, ghrelin, neuron-specific enolase, or pancreatic polypeptide, they do not present with a hormone-related clinical syndrome[9 ]. By contrast, functional GEP-NENs secrete a hormone with an associated clinical syndrome caused by an excess of that hormone.

    Nonfunctional GEP-NENs present with symptoms as primary tumor growth or metastases progress.For example, esophageal NENs are rare but present with dysphagia and vomiting due to physical obstruction[10 ]. Nonfunctional pancreatic NENs can present with symptoms of abdominal pain, early satiety, and obstructive jaundice[10 ,11 ]. Colorectal NENs present with hematochezia, change in bowel habits, abdominal pain, and anorectal symptoms[12 -14 ].

    With the increased usage of cross-sectional imaging and endoscopies to screen for cancer, many nonfunctional GEP-NENs are detected incidentally[15 ]. For example, gastric and colorectal NENs can be detected on upper and lower endoscopy, respectively[12 ,13 ,16 ,17 ]. Similarly, appendiceal NENs have been found incidentally in less than 1 % of appendectomy specimens[14 ,18 ].

    Functional GEP-NENs present with a clinical syndrome consistent with the hormone that they secrete. Due to the associated clinical syndrome, these often present earlier than nonfunctional GEPNENs. Insulinomas are insulin-secreting tumors that present with symptoms of hypoglycemia such as palpitations, diaphoresis, and altered mental status[19 ]. Gastrinomas cause Zollinger-Ellison syndrome,in which excess gastrin leads to hypersecretion of gastric acid, resulting in severe peptic ulcer disease,gastroesophageal reflux disease, and chronic diarrhea[20 ]. Glucagonomas present with necrolytic migratory erythema, diabetes mellitus, weight loss, and diarrhea[21 -23 ]. VIPomas are characterized by autonomous secretion of VIP leading to watery diarrhea, hypokalemia, and achlorhydria syndrome[24 ,25 ]. Secretion of serotonin and other active amines and peptides leads to carcinoid syndrome, which presents with episodic flushing, wheezing, and diarrhea[26 ,27 ].

    WHO CLASSlFlCATlON UPDATE

    The WHO classification of GEP-NENs has undergone numerous changes over the past couple of decades. The first WHO in 2000 described three categories: (1 ) Well-differentiated endocrine tumors(carcinoids) to describe neoplasms with low malignant potential and well-differentiated endocrine carcinomas for those with aggressive behavior and metastases; (2 ) Poorly-differentiated endocrine carcinomas; and (3 ) Mixed exocrine-endocrine tumors[28 ]. It was not until 2010 that the WHO updated the classification to “neuroendocrine” to describe the cell origin better and discouraged the use of“carcinoid”[28 ]. A critical change in 2010 was an introduction of a broader classification system for GEPNENs that was not based on anatomic sites[8 ]. GEP-NENs were then categorized as grade 1 and grade 2 NETs, with grade 3 tumors being classified as NECs. This division was based on the Ki-67 proliferation index and mitotic count of the tumor (Table 1 )[8 ,29 ].

    Following the WHO 2010 , it became apparent that there were two groups of grade 3 GEP-NENs with drastically different prognoses. One group was made up of neoplasms with a better prognosis that were proliferative but rarely displayed high-grade features (e.g., nuclear pleomorphism and necrosis), while the other group included poorly differentiated NECs that were more aggressive with a poorer prognosis[29 ]. This distinction was best established in pancreatic NENs, and in 2017 , the WHO introduced an additional classification distinguishing between well-differentiated grade 3 NETs and poorly-differentiated NECs in the pancreas[30 ]. The most recent WHO 2019 applied this distinction to all GEP-NENs(Table 1 )[8 ].

    MOLECULAR FlNDlNGS

    Molecular discoveries have recently shown that NETs and NECs are distinct entities with different molecular profiles[31 -33 ]. This has been best described in pancreatic NENs. Whole exome sequencing of pancreatic NETs led to the discovery that most pancreatic NETs are associated with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1 ) inactivation (44 %) and death domain-associated protein (DAXX)/alphathalassemia/mental retardation X-linked (ATRX) gene mutations (43 %)[31 ]. Less commonly, alterations in the mTOR pathway (15 %) have also been identified including in PTEN, TSC2 , and PIK3 CA[30 ,31 ].

    These genetic alterations have been essential in distinguishing high-grade NETs from NECs. Up to 43 % of high-grade pancreatic NETs demonstrate mutatedDAXX/ATRX, whereas pancreatic NECs are not known to have this mutation[30 -32 ]. Instead, up to 92 % of pancreatic NECs have TP53 or RB1 mutations[30 ,32 ,34 ]. Other less commonly seen mutations in NECs include mutations in KRAS, SMAD4 ,CDKN2A/p16 , and BCL2 [8 ,30 ,32 ].

    For non-pancreatic gastrointestinal NENs, genomic studies are still emerging but suggest that NECs similarly harborTP53 and RB1 mutations[8 ]. On the other hand, genomic sequencing identified a very low mutation rate in extrapancreatic NETs, and no recurrent mutation has been identified[8 ,35 ].Although no specific mutation has been validated in small intestinal NENs, analysis of chromosomal changes showed that approximately 50 % of cases had a loss of chromosome 18 and 10 %-30 % of cases had a gain of chromosomes 4 , 5 , 7 , 14 , or 20 [33 ]. Overall, due to the heterogeneity of gastrointestinal NETs, identifying recurrent mutations in extrapancreatic NETs has been challenging[8 ,33 ].

    In addition to molecular classification, genome sequencing has been utilized to identify risk factors of genetic susceptibility to developing sporadic GEP-NENs. Autosomal dominantly inherited genetic syndromes account for a minority of GEP-NENs and include multiple endocrine neoplasia types 1 and 2 , Von Hippel-Lindau syndrome, tuberous sclerosis, and neurofibromatosis type 1 [36 ]. A 2011 study by Ter-Minassianet al[37 ] evaluated single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in patients with sporadic NETs, including small bowel and pancreas primaries. They identified 2 SNPs that were associated with increased overall risk of NET, IL12 A rs2243123 , and DAD1 rs8005354 , suggesting that inflammatory and apoptosis pathways play a role in tumorigenesis of NENs[37 ]. However, a larger follow-up genomic study in 2016 was not able to confirm these associations. Instead, Du et al[36 ] found a potential risk locus on 12 q23 that may be associated with developing small bowel NENs. This locus is in proximity to ELK3 , which is implicated in angiogenesis. A 2018 study by Obazee et al[38 ] analyzed susceptibility loci associated with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma for possible overlap association with pancreatic NENs and found that rs9543325 , rs10919791 , and rs1561927 may increase the risk of developing pancreatic NENs. Genome-wide association studies for GEP-NENs have been limited by sample size,but further studies along these lines may yield a greater understanding of the molecular pathways underlying the pathogenesis of GEP-NENs and potentially facilitate the identification of therapeutic targets.

    HlSTOPATHOLOGlC DlAGNOSlS

    Histologic analysis of the tumor is necessary to establish the diagnosis of a GEP-NEN. The WHO 2019 classification divided GEP-NENs into NETs, grades 1 through 3 , and NECs (Table 1 ). Low-grade NETs(grades 1 and 2 ) classically show an organoid architecture, but various patterns may be appreciated,including trabecular, glandular, tubuloacinar, and solid (Figure 1 ). Tumor cells are monotonous with round nuclei and finely granular cytoplasm. The chromatin is finely stippled and classically referred to as “salt and pepper.” High-grade NETs (grade 3 ) have many overlapping morphologic features with low-grade NETs, with the key difference being that they show higher mitotic activity and higher proliferation indices (Ki-67 ). Rarely, high-grade NETs may show marked nuclear pleomorphism, diffuse infiltrative patterns, and necrosis. Such features can make it difficult to distinguish from NECs, which is why ancillary studies may be needed in NENs with high-grade features.

    By contrast, NECs are poorly differentiated with significant atypia and frequently have geographic necrosis. They can be further subclassified into small cell NEC and large cell NEC. The small cell variant typically grows in a solid, diffuse, sheet-like pattern, and the tumor cells have scant cytoplasm and show nuclear molding with hyperchromatic nuclei and inconspicuous nucleoli. The large cell variant has moderate to abundant cytoplasm, vesicular nuclei, and prominent nucleoli. The classic “salt and pepper” chromatin is not appreciated.

    Immunohistochemical stains for neuroendocrine differentiation are used to confirm the diagnosis.The most common markers are chromogranin and synaptophysin, with the former being more specific for neuroendocrine differentiation and the latter more sensitive. Other neuroendocrine markers include neuron-specific enolase and CD56 . Insulinoma-associated protein 1 (INSM1 ) is a recently identified marker proposed to have high specificity for neuroendocrine differentiation[34 ,39 ]. In more poorly differentiated NENs, multiple markers may be needed to confirm the neuroendocrine etiology. Approximately 25 % of NECs may lack chromogranin and synaptophysin expression, attributed to the decreased number of dense-core granules[30 ,34 ].

    Tumor grading is dependent on mitotic activity and Ki-67 . In situations where the Ki-67 index and mitotic index are discrepant, the higher grade is assigned, as studies have shown tumors tend to behave more like those of the higher grade[29 ,40 ]. Current recommendations include counting Ki-67 in at least 500 cells in “hot spots,” areas with increased activity, and counting 50 high power fields for mitoses.“Eyeballing” the mitotic count and Ki-67 is discouraged due to the lack of reproducibility, and it is preferred to count on printed images of the “hot spots” manually. Automated systems for counting have been explored but are currently limited by high costs.

    Distinguishing between high-grade NETs from NECs by morphology can be challenging. The molecular differences between NETs and NECs can assist in these situations, especially in pancreatic NENs[7 ,8 ,29 ,30 ,40 ]. As previously described,DAXX/ATRXmutations can be detected in approximately 43 % of pancreatic NETs, including high-grade NETs. These mutations can be detected by loss of protein expression by DAXX and ATRX immunohistochemistry[32 ]. As for NECs, immunohistochemical stains for p53 and RB1 may be used, either showing aberrant p53 expression (diffuse positivity or null) or absent RB1 staining[32 ]. A subset of NECs also shows loss of p16 expression, which is not appreciated in NETs[33 ]. Overexpression of BCL2 has also been reported, especially in the small cell variant (up to 100 %); however, approximately 18 % of NETs may also demonstrate this[32 ]. Although most cases of NETs can be morphologically differentiated from NECs; immunohistochemistry is available when the morphology is not definitive.

    Despite the advancements made in histopathology, it still has limitations[41 ]. Biopsies are invasive,prone to sampling error, and can only provide a snapshot of a single time point in the course of the disease. It is not capable of providing a real-time evaluation of disease progression, recurrence, or therapy response. Other diagnostic modalities such as anatomical and functional imaging and clinical symptoms and biomarkers are needed in the surveillance of disease[42 ].

    Figure 1 Morphologic features of low-grade well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors and poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma. A-D: Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms have a variety of architectural patterns (hematoxylin and eosin staining); A and B: Low-grade well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) typically have monotonous cells with round nuclei and “salt and pepper” chromatin; C: High-grade well-differentiated NETs tend to have more nuclear pleomorphism with readily identifiable mitoses; D: Small cell carcinoma, a variant of neuroendocrine carcinoma, has significant atypia with nuclear molding and scant cytoplasm. Mitoses are also readily identified; E and F: In addition to mitotic count, the Ki-67 proliferation index is necessary for grading. Low-grade well-differentiated NETs have a low proliferation index, < 20 % on Ki-67 immunohistochemical (IHC) stain (E), while high-grade well-differentiated NETs have a high proliferation index, > 20 % on Ki-67 IHC stain (F). Scale bars: 100 μm (A), 200 μm (B, E and F), 50 μm (C and D).

    BlOMARKERS

    Due to the invasiveness of biopsy and limitations of histopathology, there is demand for non-invasive,reproducible biomarkers that can provide not only a diagnosis but also longitudinal data on prognosis,disease evolution, therapy response, and disease recurrence[41 ]. This has been challenging, and currently, there are no widely available biomarkers that can act as a standalone indicator[43 ]. However,with the emergence of multianalyte analysis, the field of biomarkers for GEP-NENs is expanding.

    Monoanalytes

    Monoanalytes are measured in plasma by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA). The primary targets were identified based on secretory products and include chromogranin A (CgA), pancreastatin,neuron-specific enolase, and neurokinin A[7 ,41 ,44 ]. While these biomarkers were initially regarded with much praise and are currently the only widely utilized biomarkers, they have limited sensitivity,specificity, and reproducibility[41 ,42 ,44 ,45 ]. Furthermore, they cannot identify early disease progression[41 ]. Overall, the greatest challenge is that a single analyte is incapable of providing information on the tumor molecular biology, such as cell proliferation and growth factor signaling[41 ,42 ,44 ].

    Chromogranin A is a glycoprotein found in neuroendocrine cells and was first introduced as a biomarker over 3 decades ago[46 ,47 ]. It is currently the most commonly used biomarker for GEP-NENs[7 ]. It has a 10 %-35 % specificity, and its sensitivity ranges from 32 % to 92 %[44 ,48 ]. False elevations are common, especially in patients on proton pump inhibitors and those with chronic atrophic gastritis,renal insufficiency, arterial hypertension, and adenocarcinoma[6 ,7 ,42 ,48 ]. It is not recommended to use CgA as a screening tool, and it has greater utility in monitoring response to therapy and surveillance after a diagnosis has been made[7 ,44 ,49 ]. Studies originally showed that CgA correlated with tumor size and prognosis, though this is now considered controversial[41 ].

    Another traditional biomarker for GEP-NENs, especially in patients with carcinoid syndrome, is 5 -hydroxyindoleacetic acid (5 -HIAA), a product of serotonin metabolism[50 ,51 ]. Although it may be measured in the plasma, it is more commonly measured in the urine. It is helpful in serotonin-secreting tumors, which account for only 15 %-20 % of GEP-NENs[41 ]. Elevation of urinary 5 -HIAA has a sensitivity of 70 % and a specificity of 90 %-100 % for NENs in the presence of carcinoid syndrome[41 ,52 ].However, the sensitivity of this biomarker is as low as 35 % in the absence of carcinoid syndrome[41 ,53 ,54 ]. Similar to other monoanalyte biomarkers, urinary 5 -HIAA levels can be falsely elevated in many scenarios, including recent consumption of foods rich in serotonin, tryptophan, and dopamine, as well as malabsorptive diseases like celiac sprue and Whipple disease[51 ,53 ]. A study of 371 patients with NENs showed that urine 5 -HIAA level was not a useful prognosticator for overall survival[55 ]. Other specific hormone markers such as insulin, gastrin, glucagon, VIP, somatostatin, ACTH, and calcitonin are also available; however, these collectively only apply to < 2 % of GEP-NENs[7 ,41 ].

    In 2008 , Leja et al[56 ] analyzed serotonin-producing metastatic small intestinal NENs and identified six possible novel marker genes, including paraneoplastic antigen Ma2 . Cui et al[57 ] used ELISA to detect Ma2 autoantibodies in 124 patients with small intestinal NENs at different stages of the disease and showed a sensitivity that ranged from 46 %-50 % and a specificity of 98 % compared to the healthy patients. Their findings suggested that Ma2 may be a better biomarker than CgA.

    Angiogenic factors have also been suggested as potential biomarkers as GEP-NENs are highly vascularized tumors[58 ]. Angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2 ) and the receptor tyrosine kinase Tie-2 have gained the most attention as potential biomarkers out of the angiogenic factors[59 ]. Ang-2 binds to its receptor, Tie-2 , promoting endothelial cell survival and influencing vascular remodeling[60 ]. In 2009 , Srirajaskanthanet al[61 ] and Detjen et al[59 ] found that Ang-2 serum levels were increased in patients with NENs compared to healthy patients. In contrast, Melen-Muchaet al[58 ] compared multiple angiogenic factors,including Ang-2 and Tie-2 , and CgA serum levels in patients with NENs to those without and found that only Tie-2 and CgA were elevated in patients with NENs compared to controls. However, they found that Ang-2 was increased in the subgroup of patients with metastatic disease compared to those with localized disease. Figueroa-Vegaet al[60 ] also found that Ang-2 and Tie-2 Levels were elevated in patients with metastatic disease. Another key angiogenic factor is the vascular endothelial growth factor, which is largely studied for its prognostic role as a possible therapeutic target instead of diagnosing GEP-NENs[62 -65 ]. Overall, unlike the current monoanalytes that rely on secretory products,angiogenic factors reflect the tumorigenesis of NENs and represent a potential future category of biomarkers. Isidoriet al[66 ] have an ongoing clinical trial (NCT04464122 ) to evaluate how Tie-2 and other angiogenic factors change in GEP-NENs after treatment.

    Multianalytes

    Due to the limitations of monoanalyte analyses, multianalyte approaches have been studied over the last decade to improve the accuracy of biomarkers and correlate with tissue expression[41 ,44 ]. A panel of analytes, instead of a single biomarker as described above, is measured and interpreted to provide a more comprehensive picture of a tumor’s biology[41 ,42 ,44 ]. For example, disease-specific analytes can be evaluated alongside markers associated with cell proliferation to provide a diagnosis and predict tumor behavior[44 ].

    Neuroendocrine gene transcript assay (NETest) is the first neuroendocrine tumor liquid biopsy, using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to detect 51 transcriptomic signatures of NENs[35 ,44 ,67 -69 ]. These genes were identified to have significant differences in expression in patients with GEP-NENs and bronchopulmonary NENsvsthose without NENs[41 ,70 ]. After measuring RNA expression in whole blood, an algorithm calculates a risk score that ranges from 0 % to 100 %[45 ]. Current cutoffs are < 20 %normal, 21 % to 40 % stable/low risk disease, and 41 %-100 % progressive/high risk disease[41 ,45 ]. These cutoffs will likely be refined as more studies are performed. However, even with the current parameters, NETest has shown promising results with high sensitivity and specificity (> 95 % and > 90 %,respectively)[69 ].

    In 2014 , Modlin et al[44 ] compared NETest with the monoanlytes CgA, pancreastatin, and neurokinin A in 40 patients with grade 1 and grade 2 GEP-NETs and found that NETest was superior to the monoanalytes in sensitivity and specificity. The authors concluded that NETest could facilitate early detection of disease recurrence and predict therapy response[44 ]. In 2017 , Pavel et al[42 ] followed patients with GEP-NENs for a median of 4 years to compare NETest and CgA and found that NETest more accurately correlated with the clinical status and was able to identify those with progressive disease approximately one year before being detectable by imaging. In 2016 , Modlin et al[69 ,71 ] also found that the NETest risk score fell after tumor debulking, suggesting it can be used to identify residual disease after surgery[41 ]. A current clinical trial (NCT03012789 ) by Wren Laboratories investigates whether NETest accurately correlates with surgical excision, identifies residual tumor, and predicts early disease relapse[72 ].

    Although NETest is highly sensitive and has shown value in disease monitoring, studies on its use as a screening tool are less promising. Van Treijenet al[70 ] compared patients with diagnosed GEP-NENs to healthy patients and found that NETest was less specific than CgA (56 %-72 % vs 83 %, respectively).Al-Toubahet al[45 ] compared patients with metastatic GEP-NENs and bronchopulmonary NENs with a mixed group of healthy patients and patients with metastatic non-NEN gastrointestinal malignancies.Unlike the previous study, they found that NETest successfully ruled out 100 % of healthy patients, but specificity was only 67 % when compared to patients with non-NEN gastrointestinal malignancies[45 ].This is likely because NETest includes genes whose expression is associated with proliferation and metabolism which may be upregulated in non-NEN malignancies as well as nonspecific environments of stress and inflammation[70 ]. Additionally, studies have shown that NETest does not correlate with tumor grade[70 ].

    Overall, the sensitivity of NETest far exceeds that of other currently used biomarkers for GEP-NENs,while specificity has varied depending on the cohort[41 ,70 ]. Importantly, unlike current monoanalyte biomarkers, NETest is not affected by proton pump inhibitor use and diet[41 ]. Although it shows promise as a valuable biomarker for GEP-NENs, further studies are still warranted in nongastrointestinal NENs such as paragangliomas and malignancies with mixed epithelial or neuroendocrine phenotype, such as prostate cancer[43 ]. Wren Laboratories is conducting a clinical trial(NCT02270567 ) on patients with confirmed diagnoses of NENs to have a better overall understanding of NETest in clinical practice[73 ]. Another clinical trial (NCT02948946 ) by H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute to evaluate the NETest sensitivity and specificity in GEP-NENs and lung NENs recently concluded[74 ]. Currently, studies show that NETest has great promise in identifying early disease progression, assessing therapy response, and evaluating if the surgical tumor resection is complete[43 ]. NETest is currently available at select accredited laboratories in the United States and Europe[75 ].

    In addition to NETest, other multianalyte biomarkers are also being explored. MicroRNAs (miRNAs)are small non-coding RNAs that regulate gene expression at the post-transcriptional level and act as oncogenes or tumor suppressors[76 ]. They can be detected by PCR and have been investigated as a potential serum target. More than 100 miRNAs are differentially expressed in NENs[48 ,76 ]. About 10 %of these are nonspecific in terms of tumor location, such as miRNA-375 and miRNA-7 , while the remaining 90 % appear to be specific to the anatomic site[76 ]. For GEP-NENs, potential biomarker targets have been identified in the small intestine (miRNA-7 -75 -p, miRNA-182 , miRNA-183 , and miRNA-96 -5 p), stomach (miRNA-375 , miRNA-7 , miR-96 -5 p, and miRNA-222 ), and pancreas (miRNA-193 b, miRNA-144 /451 , miRNA-21 , miR-1290 , miRNA-103 , miRNA-107 , miRNA-155 , miRNA-204 , miR-328 , miRNA-642 , miRNA-3653 , miRNA-23 b, miRNA-137 , miRNA-196 a, and miRNA449 a)[76 ,77 ].Clinical applications of miRNAs have been challenging, and currently, there is no standardization of the process[41 ,78 ]. Existing studies have small sample sizes and inconsistent methodologies, making it difficult to draw conclusions[41 ,69 ].

    Another area of development in multianalyte analyses is next-generation sequencing (NGS) and other genetic analyses. These include studies on samples consisting of primary tumor tissue and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), the fraction of cell-free DNA that is released by dying tumor cells and can be detected in plasma for analysis[79 ,80 ]. Recent studies have been guided by the current understanding of genes implicated in GEP-NENs, includingMEN1, DAXX, ATRX, and mTOR pathway genes[31 ]. A 2017 study by Gleesonet al[81 ] used a 15 gene NGS panel to determine if any genes involved in commonly implicated pathways could be used as prognosticators in patients with pancreatic NENs. Only variants inTSC2, KRAS, and TP53were identified to have prognostic significance, and each of these variants was present in fewer than 10 % of samples examined[81 ]. Further, 40 % of tumors assessed were wild-type for all 15 genes assessed, and this set of patients did not demonstrate meaningful differences in tumor or clinical characteristics[81 ]. A 2018 study analyzed ctDNA in pancreatic NENs in 10 patients and showed a correlation with genetic characteristics of ctDNA and tumor tissue, suggesting a role for less invasive liquid biopsies in pancreatic NEN diagnosis and monitoring[82 ]. Zakka et al[83 ] performed a larger study in 2020 that further demonstrated the feasibility of NGS analysis of ctDNA in 320 patients with NENs, including those outside the gastrointestinal system. While their gene panel did not include implicated genes likeMEN1,ATRX, orDAXX, and they lacked data for clinical or histopathological correlation in many patients, the study further reinforced the promise and necessity of future studies on liquid biopsies, ctDNA, and NGS[83 ]. Another 2021 study on NENs of various origins identified actionable mutations in over 50 % of patients using NGS on liquid biopsies and formalin-fixed paraffinembedded tissue[84 ]. Studies to date on GEP-NEN ctDNA analysis through NGS and other methods are promising and offer proof-of-concept of feasibility, clinical applicability, and potential prognostication of disease progression and survival. However, larger-scale prospective studies correlating genetic,histopathologic, and clinical data are needed before the widespread use of these tests. Additionally, an increased understanding of molecular pathways underlying the development and progression of GEPNENs will refine genetic tests analyzing ctDNA and tumor tissue.

    Multianalyte analysis of neuroendocrine metabolites has also been explored as a diagnostic strategy for GEP-NENs. A 2021 study from Jiménez et al[85 ] used nuclear magnetic resonance to compare urine samples from patients with GEP-NENs and healthy controls and generated a model that could accurately discriminate between the two groups. The study suggests that nuclear magnetic resonance could be a useful clinical tool for diagnosing GEP-NENs[85 ]. They identified several metabolites that were either increased or decreased in GEP-NENs, including kynurenine, hippurate, and phenylacetylglutamine[85 ]. These novel biomarkers represent areas of future study and suggest that a multianalyte test involving multiple metabolites that are altered in GEP-NENs could be more effective than monoanalyte tests.

    lMAGlNG MODALlTlES

    Anatomic imaging

    Conventional cross-sectional imaging such as computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are critical diagnostic tools in localizing, characterizing, and staging GEP-NENs[9 ,86 ].MRI is used less commonly than CT due to increased cost, acquisition time, and potential for motion artifact[87 ]. Multiphasic CT with intravenous contrast is essential to increase diagnostic yield[87 ]. NENs are generally hypervascular and show enhancement in the late arterial phase, and NEN metastases are also hypervascular and best visualized in the arterial phase[87 ]. For detection of metastases to the liver,MRI is more sensitive than CT[88 ,89 ]. A 2003 study of different MRI techniques suggested that hepatic arterial phase and fast spin-echo T2 weighted images were most sensitive for hepatic metastases of NENs, further emphasizing the importance of multiphase imaging[89 ].

    Recent advances in conventional cross-sectional imaging of GEP-NENs include studies assessing hepatic metastases of GEP-NENs with contrast-enhanced MRI utilizing hepatocellular phase-contrast agents[90 ]. The most studied agent is gadoxetate disodium, a gadolinium-based contrast with hepatobiliary excretion[91 ]. A 2018 study from Tirumani et al[92 ] compared the ability of 6 MRI phases after gadoxetate disodium injection to assess hepatic metastases of GEP-NENs and found that the hepatocellular phase was superior to all other phases examined. Another study demonstrated that combining diffusion-weighted and hepatobiliary phases of gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI in patients with suspected neuroendocrine liver metastases had the best diagnostic yield, with a sensitivity of 86 % and a specificity of 94 %, compared to other combinations of contrast-enhanced phases[93 ]. These studies highlight an essential role for contrast-enhanced MRI with gadoxetate disodium or other liver-targeted contrast agents in the assessment of GEP-NENs with potential liver metastases and long-term surveillance of disease with known liver involvement.

    Functional imaging

    Somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS) has been used since the 1990 s to assess GEP-NENs. Studies from 1995 and 1996 showed that 111 In-pentetreotide, a radiolabeled somatostatin analog, could safely and effectively detect GEP-NENs more effectively than conventional imaging[94 ,95 ]. A 2001 study examined68 Ga-DOTATOC compared to older SRS techniques and found a higher diagnostic yield by 30 %[96 ]. More tracers for GEP-NENs have been developed over the years, including Ga-DOTANOC[68 ]and Ga-DOTATATE[97 -99 ]. Two 2016 studies compared 111 in-pentetreotide and 68 Ga-DOTATATE imaging for identification of primary tumor and metastatic lesions of NENs[98 ,100 ]. Both studies showed that68 Ga-DOTATATE had identified more lesions than 111 In-pentetreotide, and altered management in 33 %-36 % of patients with GEP-NENs[98 ,100 ]. An established principle of functional imaging for GEP-NENs is the distinction in imaging characteristics between low-grade NENsvshighgrade NENs and NECs. Low-grade NENs express high levels of somatostatin receptors and are less metabolically active, and thus,68 Ga-DOTATATE and other somatostatin analogs are superior to 18 Ffluorodeoxyglucose (18 F-FDG) as a tracer for functional imaging of grade 1 and 2 NENs[87 ,101 ,102 ].High-grade NENs and NECs tend to have higher rates of glucose metabolism and lower expression of somatostatin receptors. As a result,18 F-FDG is superior to somatostatin analogs for functional imaging of high-grade NENs[103 ,104 ].

    Recent studies have made advances in comparing head-to-head imaging modalities and tracers to determine which are optimal for functional imaging of GEP-NENs. A 2017 study compared positron emission tomography (PET)/CT and PET/MRI using68 Ga-DOTATOC and found that both imaging modalities performed comparably in identifying abdominal primary tumors and yield of lymph node metastases[105 ,106 ]. Sawicki et al[105 ] found that PET/CT performed better in identifying bone lesions,but PET/MRI with68 Ga-DOTATOC outperformed PET/CT in identifying hepatic lesions. However, the further identification of metastases did not alter the management of patients in this study, as most already had advanced stages of the disease[105 ]. Given the prevalence of liver metastases in GEP-NENs,these data suggest that there may be a valuable role for PET/MRI over or in conjunction with PET/CT in the diagnosis and staging of GEP-NENs[107 ]. A similar 2021 study of 11 patients with GEP-NENs prospectively compared PET/MRI with68 Ga-DOTATOC and PET/CT with 68 Ga-DOTATOC[88 ]. For detection of all lesions, PET/MRI with68 Ga-DOTATOC outperformed PET/CT with 68 Ga-DOTATOC[88 ]. Consistent with the 2017 study, 68 Ga-DOTATOC PET/MRI was superior to 68 Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT in detecting liver metastases[88 ]. These studies suggest that PET/MRI with 68 Ga-DOTATOC may be superior to PET/CT in guiding the management of GEP-NENs.

    Other recent studies have examined specific clinical scenarios when functional imaging is likely to influence the clinical management of patients with GEP-NENs. A 2017 study of 40 patients with metastatic NENs who had undergone CT or MRI but still had an unknown primary tumor location showed that68 Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT could effectively localize the primary tumor to facilitate treatment[108 ]. A meta-analysis of studies on 68 Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT identified that this imaging modality changed management when the patient had a known NEN around half of the time[109 ]. By contrast, in patients with symptoms consistent with a NEN and elevated biomarkers but no proven NEN, there was only a 13 % yield[109 ]. Notably, four studies included in this meta-analysis showed a 44 % yield for detection of primary tumor site in patients with metastatic disease[109 ].

    Finally, advances in the application of automation and artificial intelligence could improve diagnostic consistency and accuracy of functional imaging for GEP-NENs. This area has been more extensively studied for18 F-FDG PET/CT[110 ,111 ]. A retrospective 2021 study retrospectively demonstrated that deep learning could facilitate the automation of detection of hepatic metastases, though future studies with larger sample sizes are required for further validation[112 ]. Continued optimization of imaging techniques and development of more selective tracers will continue to improve diagnostic yield and ability of functional imaging to guide the management of GEP-NENs effectively.

    Ultrasound

    Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has been used for decades to assess gastrointestinal tract tumors,including GEP-NENs[113 ,114 ]. This technique combines endoscopy with ultrasound to image structures and can diagnose, stage, and sample malignancies[115 ]. EUS is especially useful for gastric, duodenal,pancreatic, and rectal NENs[116 ,117 ]. EUS is more sensitive than other modalities such as CT or MRI for pancreatic NENs and is the most sensitive method for detection of rectal NENs[118 -122 ]. It provides additional information on the depth of invasion and can assess local lymph node involvement. Further advantages of EUS include the ability to perform a fine needle aspiration (FNA) to obtain tissue for cytologic and molecular analysis and to place a radiofrequency ablation probe for poor surgical candidates[114 ,116 ,123 ]. Cytologic analysis of pancreatic NENs facilitated by EUS-FNA including Ki-67 index correlates with tumor grade confirmed after resection, influences management, and predicts survival, especially when sampling is sufficient[124 ,125 ]. Disadvantages include operator dependence and limited assessment beyond the local area compared to broader imaging techniques[116 ,117 ].

    Recent updates on EUS for the diagnosis of GEP-NENs include technical advances in ultrasonography and new histologic and molecular analyses of tissue obtained using EUS. A recent 2021 study compared the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA and EUS with fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) and found that EUS-FNB may be superior to EUS-FNA for pancreatic NENs, including a better correlation of Ki-67 proliferation index between EUS-FNB and the surgical specimen[126 ]. However, there was no difference in the accuracy of grade estimation between EUS-FNB and EUS-FNA[118 ].

    Immunocytochemical analysis can be performed on EUS-FNA samples for confirmation of the diagnosis of pancreatic NEN. A recent study immunocytochemically analyzed INSM1 expression in 14 EUS-FNA samples of pancreatic NENs and 15 pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDACs)[127 ]. All pancreatic NENs contained cells expressing INSM1 , and INSM1 was expressed at a higher rate in pancreatic NEN samples than PDAC samples[127 ]. Advances in molecular analysis of EUS-FNA samples can also improve diagnostic accuracy for pancreatic lesions. A 2020 study used digital droplet PCR to detectKRASmutations in EUS-FNA samples from PDAC, pancreatic NENs, and chronic pancreatitis. Combining molecular and cytologic analyses improved diagnostic accuracy from 74 % with cytology alone to 91 %[128 ]. Further technical advancement and refinement of molecular and cytologic analyses will continue to improve the efficacy of EUS and EUS-FNA.

    CONCLUSlON

    There are many new developments in the pathologic, molecular, and imaging diagnosis of GEP-NENs.The WHO classification of GEP-NENs has changed over the years, with the most recent significant update being the distinction between high-grade NETs and NECs. Due to the heterogeneity of GEPNENs, a multimodal approach to diagnosis and disease surveillance is necessary. A better understanding of the molecular biology of GEP-NENs has allowed for the distinction between highgrade NETs and NECs, the introduction of exciting new biomarker tests such as the NETest, and continued advances toward eventual validation and implementation of other multianalyte tests assessing biomarkers such as miRNA and ctDNA. Recent advances in imaging include the validation of improved PET tracers and determination of which imaging modalities are optimal for anatomic and functional imaging of primary GEP-NENs and metastases, especially to the liver. Updates to EUS and EUS-FNA include technological advances and improved molecular and cytological analysis of tissue obtained using EUS.

    FOOTNOTES

    Author contributions:Fang JM drafted the manuscript and prepared the figures and tables; Li J drafted the manuscript and provided input in the writing; Shi J formulated the idea, designed the outline, and edited the manuscript.

    Supported bythe National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health, No. K08 CA234222 (JS).

    Conflict-of-interest statement:Dr. Shi reports grants from NIH/NCI, during the conduct of the study.

    Open-Access:This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BYNC 4 .0 ) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is noncommercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4 .0 /

    Country/Territory of origin:United States

    ORClD number:Jiayun M Fang 0000 -0001 -9517 -297 X; Jay Li 0000 -0002 -8146 -4450 ; Jiaqi Shi 0000 -0003 -4893 -1587 .

    Corresponding Author's Membership in Professional Societies:United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, 28212 ;American Association for Cancer Research (AACR), 76093 ; Pancreatobiliary Pathology Society; Rodger C. Haggitt Gastrointestinal Pathology Society.

    S-Editor:Zhang H

    L-Editor:A

    P-Editor:Zhang H

    悠悠久久av| 高潮久久久久久久久久久不卡| 七月丁香在线播放| 一级片'在线观看视频| 又粗又硬又长又爽又黄的视频| 伦理电影免费视频| av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看| 免费不卡黄色视频| 色综合欧美亚洲国产小说| av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看| 男女高潮啪啪啪动态图| 两个人看的免费小视频| 国产亚洲午夜精品一区二区久久| 久久ye,这里只有精品| 9色porny在线观看| 精品高清国产在线一区| 国产精品免费大片| 久久久久久久精品精品| 久久人人爽av亚洲精品天堂| 大码成人一级视频| 中文精品一卡2卡3卡4更新| 又大又黄又爽视频免费| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠久久av| 狠狠婷婷综合久久久久久88av| 亚洲av日韩在线播放| a 毛片基地| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 日韩中文字幕视频在线看片| 国产精品偷伦视频观看了| 免费女性裸体啪啪无遮挡网站| 岛国毛片在线播放| 亚洲精品美女久久av网站| 97在线人人人人妻| 亚洲国产欧美日韩在线播放| 一二三四在线观看免费中文在| 午夜91福利影院| 中文字幕av电影在线播放| 国产成人啪精品午夜网站| av片东京热男人的天堂| 亚洲av国产av综合av卡| 满18在线观看网站| 黄频高清免费视频| 色94色欧美一区二区| 国产一区二区三区综合在线观看| 国产主播在线观看一区二区 | 免费在线观看影片大全网站 | 国产黄色视频一区二区在线观看| 91精品伊人久久大香线蕉| 久久精品久久精品一区二区三区| 一级毛片电影观看| 国产精品人妻久久久影院| 最新在线观看一区二区三区 | 国产一区二区在线观看av| 久9热在线精品视频| 51午夜福利影视在线观看| 人妻一区二区av| 日韩视频在线欧美| 午夜激情久久久久久久| av福利片在线| 91麻豆av在线| 免费看十八禁软件| 波野结衣二区三区在线| 久久久欧美国产精品| 亚洲国产看品久久| 国产成人一区二区在线| 免费看不卡的av| 国产精品久久久人人做人人爽| 国产精品香港三级国产av潘金莲 | 人妻一区二区av| 日本欧美视频一区| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆| 伊人久久大香线蕉亚洲五| 亚洲 国产 在线| 另类精品久久| 啦啦啦啦在线视频资源| 国产视频一区二区在线看| 精品少妇一区二区三区视频日本电影| 欧美乱码精品一区二区三区| 国产免费一区二区三区四区乱码| 国产av国产精品国产| xxxhd国产人妻xxx| 一级毛片 在线播放| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看| 午夜福利视频在线观看免费| www.自偷自拍.com| 三上悠亚av全集在线观看| 午夜视频精品福利| 丝袜在线中文字幕| 三上悠亚av全集在线观看| 国产无遮挡羞羞视频在线观看| 老司机在亚洲福利影院| 咕卡用的链子| 咕卡用的链子| 亚洲国产最新在线播放| 午夜福利视频精品| 午夜免费鲁丝| 美女扒开内裤让男人捅视频| 久久久久视频综合| 免费不卡黄色视频| 国产一区二区在线观看av| 国产国语露脸激情在线看| 一区二区三区精品91| 日韩av在线免费看完整版不卡| 交换朋友夫妻互换小说| 99精国产麻豆久久婷婷| 欧美激情 高清一区二区三区| 热99久久久久精品小说推荐| 成年动漫av网址| 一区二区日韩欧美中文字幕| 日本欧美视频一区| 精品一区二区三卡| 日韩 欧美 亚洲 中文字幕| 男女午夜视频在线观看| 国产一区有黄有色的免费视频| 欧美97在线视频| 日韩 欧美 亚洲 中文字幕| 国产成人系列免费观看| 美女国产高潮福利片在线看| av国产久精品久网站免费入址| 久久精品久久精品一区二区三区| netflix在线观看网站| 人人妻人人添人人爽欧美一区卜| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 丰满人妻熟妇乱又伦精品不卡| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看| 国产成人欧美在线观看 | 777米奇影视久久| 日韩中文字幕视频在线看片| 自拍欧美九色日韩亚洲蝌蚪91| 精品一区二区三区四区五区乱码 | 最黄视频免费看| 久久久久久久久久久久大奶| 久久久久久久久久久久大奶| 又大又爽又粗| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| 国产精品 国内视频| 免费女性裸体啪啪无遮挡网站| 免费高清在线观看日韩| 久久人妻福利社区极品人妻图片 | 国产男人的电影天堂91| 亚洲欧洲国产日韩| 99热网站在线观看| 亚洲国产中文字幕在线视频| 亚洲成国产人片在线观看| 成人国产av品久久久| 国产黄色免费在线视频| 午夜免费成人在线视频| 欧美 日韩 精品 国产| 中文字幕人妻丝袜制服| 美女大奶头黄色视频| 成人手机av| 国产国语露脸激情在线看| 性少妇av在线| 国产一区二区 视频在线| 精品第一国产精品| 少妇 在线观看| 午夜免费成人在线视频| 欧美黑人欧美精品刺激| 亚洲av电影在线进入| 国产精品 国内视频| 在线观看免费午夜福利视频| 国产熟女午夜一区二区三区| 视频在线观看一区二区三区| 亚洲欧美激情在线| 另类精品久久| 三上悠亚av全集在线观看| 国产精品麻豆人妻色哟哟久久| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 亚洲av美国av| 老汉色av国产亚洲站长工具| www.av在线官网国产| 国产精品一区二区在线观看99| 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 亚洲国产精品一区二区三区在线| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91| 日韩人妻精品一区2区三区| 国产精品成人在线| 观看av在线不卡| 国产一区二区在线观看av| 久久久精品国产亚洲av高清涩受| 伊人亚洲综合成人网| 色精品久久人妻99蜜桃| 久久99一区二区三区| 国产伦理片在线播放av一区| 国产精品香港三级国产av潘金莲 | 日韩欧美一区视频在线观看| 欧美变态另类bdsm刘玥| 国产伦理片在线播放av一区| 亚洲中文av在线| 久久精品国产亚洲av高清一级| 麻豆av在线久日| 大香蕉久久成人网| 国产极品粉嫩免费观看在线| 中文字幕色久视频| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx| 久久ye,这里只有精品| av在线播放精品| 国产99久久九九免费精品| 国产免费视频播放在线视频| av电影中文网址| 亚洲欧美中文字幕日韩二区| 性色av一级| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三区在线| 免费黄频网站在线观看国产| 成人午夜精彩视频在线观看| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 性高湖久久久久久久久免费观看| 永久免费av网站大全| 大香蕉久久成人网| 日韩av不卡免费在线播放| 久久免费观看电影| 亚洲人成电影观看| 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久| 日韩av免费高清视频| 人人澡人人妻人| 一本综合久久免费| 国产黄色视频一区二区在线观看| 精品国产超薄肉色丝袜足j| av天堂在线播放| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 国产欧美日韩精品亚洲av| 人体艺术视频欧美日本| 男女下面插进去视频免费观看| 欧美精品一区二区免费开放| 99香蕉大伊视频| 黄色片一级片一级黄色片| 一边亲一边摸免费视频| 在线观看国产h片| 一区二区三区乱码不卡18| 国产亚洲av高清不卡| 黑人巨大精品欧美一区二区蜜桃| 男女无遮挡免费网站观看| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 性色av乱码一区二区三区2| 最近中文字幕2019免费版| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看| 一级,二级,三级黄色视频| 免费观看a级毛片全部| 国产麻豆69| 男女高潮啪啪啪动态图| 久久 成人 亚洲| 中文乱码字字幕精品一区二区三区| 91九色精品人成在线观看| 日韩 亚洲 欧美在线| 久久人人97超碰香蕉20202| 男女午夜视频在线观看| 亚洲第一av免费看| 少妇被粗大的猛进出69影院| 精品人妻熟女毛片av久久网站| 女人久久www免费人成看片| 大型av网站在线播放| 中文欧美无线码| 激情五月婷婷亚洲| 激情五月婷婷亚洲| 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频 | 亚洲 国产 在线| 国产日韩欧美亚洲二区| 欧美黑人精品巨大| 19禁男女啪啪无遮挡网站| 黄频高清免费视频| 久久精品亚洲av国产电影网| 欧美日韩一级在线毛片| 可以免费在线观看a视频的电影网站| 我的亚洲天堂| 中文字幕精品免费在线观看视频| 午夜两性在线视频| 老司机靠b影院| 亚洲中文av在线| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 99九九在线精品视频| 一区福利在线观看| 久久精品成人免费网站| 成人影院久久| 热re99久久精品国产66热6| 成人免费观看视频高清| 成人国语在线视频| 97人妻天天添夜夜摸| 黄片小视频在线播放| 精品国产一区二区久久| 在线观看免费高清a一片| 亚洲欧美色中文字幕在线| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看| 久久99热这里只频精品6学生| 好男人电影高清在线观看| 波野结衣二区三区在线| 少妇人妻久久综合中文| 精品卡一卡二卡四卡免费| 精品亚洲成a人片在线观看| 国产熟女欧美一区二区| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 老司机亚洲免费影院| 亚洲欧美色中文字幕在线| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91| 成年人黄色毛片网站| 欧美日韩亚洲国产一区二区在线观看 | 大话2 男鬼变身卡| 日韩av在线免费看完整版不卡| 久久久久久亚洲精品国产蜜桃av| 色视频在线一区二区三区| 国产片特级美女逼逼视频| av不卡在线播放| 纯流量卡能插随身wifi吗| 国产成人系列免费观看| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免| 久久中文字幕一级| 亚洲熟女精品中文字幕| 欧美日韩亚洲国产一区二区在线观看 | 久久久久精品国产欧美久久久 | 丝袜喷水一区| 欧美黑人欧美精品刺激| a级毛片在线看网站| 操美女的视频在线观看| 久久影院123| 老司机深夜福利视频在线观看 | 国产一区二区 视频在线| 高清欧美精品videossex| 黑人巨大精品欧美一区二区蜜桃| 午夜福利,免费看| 日韩一本色道免费dvd| 少妇的丰满在线观看| 欧美日韩国产mv在线观看视频| 亚洲熟女毛片儿| 成人午夜精彩视频在线观看| 最近最新中文字幕大全免费视频 | 国精品久久久久久国模美| a级毛片黄视频| 亚洲少妇的诱惑av| 欧美人与善性xxx| 婷婷色麻豆天堂久久| 国产精品免费大片| 免费在线观看视频国产中文字幕亚洲 | 亚洲成av片中文字幕在线观看| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 日本一区二区免费在线视频| 久久国产精品人妻蜜桃| 日韩 亚洲 欧美在线| 日韩 欧美 亚洲 中文字幕| 欧美日本中文国产一区发布| 亚洲黑人精品在线| 波多野结衣一区麻豆| 欧美日韩视频高清一区二区三区二| 亚洲精品第二区| h视频一区二区三区| 男的添女的下面高潮视频| 亚洲综合色网址| 真人做人爱边吃奶动态| 97精品久久久久久久久久精品| 新久久久久国产一级毛片| 尾随美女入室| 老司机影院毛片| 色94色欧美一区二区| 最近最新中文字幕大全免费视频 | 国产精品国产三级国产专区5o| 国产精品香港三级国产av潘金莲 | 亚洲精品国产av成人精品| 搡老乐熟女国产| 一本大道久久a久久精品| 99热全是精品| 巨乳人妻的诱惑在线观看| 成人亚洲精品一区在线观看| 免费观看a级毛片全部| 亚洲精品久久午夜乱码| 妹子高潮喷水视频| 久久亚洲国产成人精品v| 亚洲国产精品一区二区三区在线| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站 | 国产精品国产av在线观看| 男女下面插进去视频免费观看| 一级毛片 在线播放| 一区二区三区四区激情视频| 亚洲图色成人| 天天添夜夜摸| 99久久精品国产亚洲精品| 女性被躁到高潮视频| 中文字幕人妻丝袜一区二区| 男人操女人黄网站| 欧美久久黑人一区二区| 2021少妇久久久久久久久久久| 黄网站色视频无遮挡免费观看| 久久亚洲国产成人精品v| 天天操日日干夜夜撸| 美女主播在线视频| 久久午夜综合久久蜜桃| 国产黄色视频一区二区在线观看| 久久精品熟女亚洲av麻豆精品| 黄色一级大片看看| 国产精品成人在线| 精品欧美一区二区三区在线| 国语对白做爰xxxⅹ性视频网站| 91精品国产国语对白视频| 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜| 超色免费av| 黄片播放在线免费| 黄网站色视频无遮挡免费观看| 免费看不卡的av| 亚洲国产欧美一区二区综合| 精品欧美一区二区三区在线| 国产一区二区 视频在线| 国产精品一二三区在线看| 亚洲第一av免费看| 国产成人精品久久久久久| 人人妻人人澡人人看| 天堂8中文在线网| 久久久久网色| 国产av一区二区精品久久| cao死你这个sao货| 日本猛色少妇xxxxx猛交久久| 97人妻天天添夜夜摸| 80岁老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 亚洲av成人精品一二三区| 国产一级毛片在线| 熟女av电影| 女警被强在线播放| 午夜激情av网站| 久久精品人人爽人人爽视色| 777米奇影视久久| 一二三四在线观看免费中文在| 国产伦理片在线播放av一区| 成人国语在线视频| 亚洲欧美精品综合一区二区三区| 女性生殖器流出的白浆| 日韩av免费高清视频| 欧美日韩亚洲高清精品| 狠狠婷婷综合久久久久久88av| 久久ye,这里只有精品| 久久人人97超碰香蕉20202| 欧美在线一区亚洲| 男男h啪啪无遮挡| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 亚洲精品久久久久久婷婷小说| 精品国产国语对白av| av视频免费观看在线观看| 啦啦啦 在线观看视频| 久久久精品免费免费高清| 国产麻豆69| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| av网站免费在线观看视频| av国产久精品久网站免费入址| kizo精华| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| 每晚都被弄得嗷嗷叫到高潮| 亚洲av日韩在线播放| 亚洲av片天天在线观看| 国产精品二区激情视频| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx| 婷婷色av中文字幕| 日韩一本色道免费dvd| 亚洲精品国产av成人精品| 亚洲成av片中文字幕在线观看| 七月丁香在线播放| 国产成人欧美| 精品福利永久在线观看| 精品卡一卡二卡四卡免费| 亚洲成av片中文字幕在线观看| 高清av免费在线| 十八禁高潮呻吟视频| 国产精品一国产av| 9热在线视频观看99| 精品国产一区二区三区久久久樱花| 丰满人妻熟妇乱又伦精品不卡| 欧美日韩一级在线毛片| av网站免费在线观看视频| 亚洲人成电影免费在线| 各种免费的搞黄视频| 日本av手机在线免费观看| 91精品伊人久久大香线蕉| 精品福利观看| 成在线人永久免费视频| 啦啦啦视频在线资源免费观看| 国产伦理片在线播放av一区| 各种免费的搞黄视频| 国产爽快片一区二区三区| 国产精品一国产av| 久热爱精品视频在线9| 精品国产乱码久久久久久男人| 高清不卡的av网站| 亚洲av美国av| 国产精品免费大片| 亚洲少妇的诱惑av| 观看av在线不卡| 另类精品久久| 1024视频免费在线观看| 久久久久网色| 国产高清不卡午夜福利| 国产一区二区 视频在线| 美女午夜性视频免费| 久久久久久亚洲精品国产蜜桃av| 91字幕亚洲| 日本午夜av视频| 欧美成人午夜精品| 美女大奶头黄色视频| 国产精品熟女久久久久浪| 色网站视频免费| 热re99久久国产66热| 宅男免费午夜| 一级毛片电影观看| 国产野战对白在线观看| 欧美人与性动交α欧美精品济南到| 秋霞在线观看毛片| 久久久久久久久久久久大奶| 老司机亚洲免费影院| 精品久久久久久久毛片微露脸 | 欧美老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 多毛熟女@视频| 美女中出高潮动态图| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 男人舔女人的私密视频| 免费观看a级毛片全部| 国产亚洲av高清不卡| 1024视频免费在线观看| 黄色视频在线播放观看不卡| 久久精品国产亚洲av高清一级| 老司机亚洲免费影院| 日本a在线网址| av国产久精品久网站免费入址| 19禁男女啪啪无遮挡网站| 免费av中文字幕在线| 久久精品熟女亚洲av麻豆精品| 啦啦啦在线观看免费高清www| 国产亚洲精品第一综合不卡| 国产麻豆69| 乱人伦中国视频| 亚洲美女黄色视频免费看| 亚洲中文字幕日韩| 十八禁人妻一区二区| 一边摸一边做爽爽视频免费| 18在线观看网站| 亚洲五月色婷婷综合| 纵有疾风起免费观看全集完整版| 99九九在线精品视频| 大陆偷拍与自拍| 精品久久久精品久久久| 色94色欧美一区二区| 国产99久久九九免费精品| 欧美黑人欧美精品刺激| 91老司机精品| 人妻 亚洲 视频| 美女扒开内裤让男人捅视频| av在线老鸭窝| 成人国语在线视频| av在线老鸭窝| 可以免费在线观看a视频的电影网站| 一个人免费看片子| 久久久久国产一级毛片高清牌| 精品亚洲成a人片在线观看| 一级毛片 在线播放| 91成人精品电影| 女人精品久久久久毛片| videos熟女内射| 操美女的视频在线观看| 亚洲精品一区蜜桃| 人人妻人人澡人人看| 纯流量卡能插随身wifi吗| 精品国产乱码久久久久久小说| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影| 制服诱惑二区| 久久精品久久久久久久性| 只有这里有精品99| 欧美亚洲日本最大视频资源| 亚洲色图 男人天堂 中文字幕| 免费看av在线观看网站| 后天国语完整版免费观看| 在线观看www视频免费| 91国产中文字幕| 另类精品久久| 欧美日韩福利视频一区二区| 老司机靠b影院| 视频区图区小说| av线在线观看网站| 一级毛片 在线播放| 午夜影院在线不卡| 国产黄频视频在线观看| 性色av一级| 亚洲熟女精品中文字幕| 欧美亚洲日本最大视频资源| 麻豆国产av国片精品| 中文字幕亚洲精品专区| 久久久精品国产亚洲av高清涩受| av线在线观看网站| 18禁裸乳无遮挡动漫免费视频| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆| 亚洲免费av在线视频| 无遮挡黄片免费观看| 中文精品一卡2卡3卡4更新| 日韩电影二区| 精品一区在线观看国产| 蜜桃在线观看..| 国产99久久九九免费精品| 老司机影院毛片| 女性被躁到高潮视频| 麻豆av在线久日| 婷婷成人精品国产| 黄色片一级片一级黄色片| 欧美av亚洲av综合av国产av| 国产成人啪精品午夜网站| a级片在线免费高清观看视频| 50天的宝宝边吃奶边哭怎么回事| 午夜福利免费观看在线| 无限看片的www在线观看| 亚洲国产欧美一区二区综合| 少妇 在线观看| 日本午夜av视频| 午夜福利视频在线观看免费| 亚洲欧洲日产国产| 高清视频免费观看一区二区| 啦啦啦视频在线资源免费观看| 成在线人永久免费视频| a级毛片黄视频| 香蕉国产在线看| 日韩制服丝袜自拍偷拍| 成人国语在线视频| 另类亚洲欧美激情| 丁香六月欧美| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区黑人|