王玉,陳慶法,劉佳,陳興田
胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤預(yù)后模型的建立與驗(yàn)證
王玉,陳慶法,劉佳,陳興田
臨沂市中心醫(yī)院消化內(nèi)科,山東臨沂 276400
探討影響胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤預(yù)后的危險(xiǎn)因素,構(gòu)建胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤預(yù)后預(yù)測(cè)模型。選取SEER數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)中2004年1月至2015年12月經(jīng)病理明確診斷為胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤的患者3606例,按照3∶1分割為訓(xùn)練集(=2704)和驗(yàn)證集(=902),在訓(xùn)練集中通過(guò)Cox比例風(fēng)險(xiǎn)模型篩選影響胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤預(yù)后的危險(xiǎn)因素,進(jìn)一步構(gòu)建其預(yù)后模型并繪制列線圖。分別在訓(xùn)練集和驗(yàn)證集中對(duì)模型的預(yù)測(cè)效能進(jìn)行內(nèi)部及外部驗(yàn)證。單因素Cox回歸分析顯示,性別、年齡、婚姻狀態(tài)、腫瘤部位、分化程度、TNM分期、美國(guó)癌癥聯(lián)合委員會(huì)(American Joint Committee on Cancer,AJCC)分期、手術(shù)均是影響胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤預(yù)后的危險(xiǎn)因素(<0.05);多因素Cox回歸分析顯示,年齡、性別、婚姻狀態(tài)、分化程度、TNM分期、手術(shù)均是影響胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤預(yù)后的危險(xiǎn)因素(<0.05)。最終將年齡、性別、分化程度、腫瘤部位、TNM分期、手術(shù)、婚姻狀態(tài)等變量納入預(yù)測(cè)模型并繪制列線圖。在訓(xùn)練集和驗(yàn)證集中,預(yù)測(cè)模型的C指數(shù)分別為0.8579和0.8572。訓(xùn)練集和驗(yàn)證集中3年、5年生存率的校準(zhǔn)曲線顯示,預(yù)測(cè)生存率與實(shí)際生存率存在較好的一致性。構(gòu)建的胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤預(yù)測(cè)模型具有良好的預(yù)測(cè)價(jià)值。
胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤;預(yù)測(cè)模型;SEER數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)
胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤起源于胰腺的神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌細(xì)胞,是僅次于胰腺導(dǎo)管細(xì)胞癌的胰腺腫瘤,具有相對(duì)惰性的生物學(xué)行為[1],占所有胰腺腫瘤的1%~2%,占所有神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤的7.0%[2],免疫組織化學(xué)可見突觸素和(或)嗜鉻粒蛋白的陽(yáng)性表達(dá)[3]。根據(jù)是否存在臨床癥狀,胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤分為功能性和無(wú)功能性,具體取決于它們是否釋放產(chǎn)生癥狀的激素,其中60%~90%的胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤是無(wú)功能的[4]。隨著診斷意識(shí)提高、影像學(xué)及分子病理學(xué)的進(jìn)展,其發(fā)病率也在逐年提高。研究數(shù)據(jù)表明,在過(guò)去的40年里,胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤發(fā)病率約6.98/10萬(wàn),較前增長(zhǎng)6.4倍[5]。與胰腺導(dǎo)管腺癌相比,胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤的特征是發(fā)病率更低,年齡更小,預(yù)后更好[6],5年生存率80%~90%[7];但胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤的臨床特征和預(yù)后高度異質(zhì)性,其中一小部分患者表現(xiàn)出惡性特征,給臨床實(shí)踐帶來(lái)挑戰(zhàn)[8]。由于其異質(zhì)性較強(qiáng),目前關(guān)于胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤的生存預(yù)后與風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分層缺乏公認(rèn)的精準(zhǔn)分期系統(tǒng)[9]。本研究基于SEER數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)提取相關(guān)發(fā)病人群的大樣本數(shù)據(jù),分析胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤的臨床病理特征,并進(jìn)一步構(gòu)建和驗(yàn)證其預(yù)后模型,為個(gè)體化臨床方案的制定提供參考。
研究數(shù)據(jù)來(lái)自SEER數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)(https://seer.cancer. gov/),通過(guò)SEER*Stat 8.4軟件收集數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)中2004年1月至2015年12月經(jīng)病理明確診斷為胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤的患者,其中組織學(xué)類型根據(jù)《國(guó)際疾病分類腫瘤學(xué)專輯》第3版(ICD-O-3),選擇神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤,代碼為8150,8151,8152,8153,8155,8156,8240,8241,8242,8243,8246,8249。納入標(biāo)準(zhǔn):①年齡>18歲;②經(jīng)病理組織學(xué)確診為神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤/癌(代碼同上);③原發(fā)部位為胰腺。排除標(biāo)準(zhǔn):①30d內(nèi)死亡;②相關(guān)臨床信息缺失,如淋巴結(jié)轉(zhuǎn)移、遠(yuǎn)處轉(zhuǎn)移、治療方式、隨訪時(shí)間、生存狀態(tài)等。根據(jù)上述納入、排除標(biāo)準(zhǔn),本研究共納入3606例患者。采用隨機(jī)樣本分割(分割比3∶1)分為訓(xùn)練集(=2704)與驗(yàn)證集(=902)。
3606例胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤患者的臨床病理特征見表1。訓(xùn)練集和驗(yàn)證集的年齡、性別、部位、分化程度、美國(guó)癌癥聯(lián)合委員會(huì)(American Joint Committee on Cancer,AJCC)分期、TNM分期、手術(shù)、種族、婚姻狀態(tài)及生存時(shí)間等比較差異均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(>0.05),證明兩組數(shù)據(jù)集間具有可比性。
基于訓(xùn)練集數(shù)據(jù),以胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤特異性死亡作為因變量(存活定義為0,死亡定義為1),其臨床病理特征作為自變量進(jìn)行單因素及多因素Cox回歸分析。單因素Cox分析結(jié)果顯示,性別、年齡、婚姻狀態(tài)、腫瘤部位、分化程度、TNM分期、AJCC分期、手術(shù)均是影響胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤預(yù)后的危險(xiǎn)因素(<0.05)。鑒于胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤較強(qiáng)的異質(zhì)性,T分期、N分期、M分期可能提供更多的臨床信息,AJCC分期與上述變量可能存在共線性問(wèn)題,多因素Cox回歸分析未將AJCC分期納入,結(jié)果顯示,年齡、性別、婚姻狀態(tài)、分化程度、TNM分期、手術(shù)均是影響胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤預(yù)后的獨(dú)立危險(xiǎn)因素(<0.05)。
在訓(xùn)練集中,將多因素篩選的年齡、性別、婚姻狀態(tài)、分化程度、TNM分期、手術(shù)等變量納入模型。胰腺腫瘤的發(fā)病部位是影響預(yù)后的關(guān)鍵因素,因此將腫瘤部位納入模型中,以此構(gòu)建胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤3年、5年生存率預(yù)測(cè)的列線圖,見圖1。列線圖是回歸模型的可視化圖表,根據(jù)每個(gè)自變量對(duì)應(yīng)的分值相加,可計(jì)算出個(gè)體的生存概率。
在訓(xùn)練集和驗(yàn)證集中,預(yù)測(cè)模型的C指數(shù)分別為0.8579和0.8572。利用列線圖在訓(xùn)練集和驗(yàn)證集中預(yù)測(cè)胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤3年、5年生存率的ROC曲線見圖2,訓(xùn)練集中曲線下面積(area under the curve,AUC)分別為0.882、0.873,驗(yàn)證集中AUC分別為0.878、0.877。訓(xùn)練集和驗(yàn)證集中3年、5年生存率的校準(zhǔn)曲線顯示,預(yù)測(cè)生存率與實(shí)際生存率存在較好的一致性,見圖3。
表1 3606例胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤患者的臨床病理特征
注:*包含未婚、離婚、寡居等婚姻狀態(tài)
表2 胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤特異性死亡的單因素及多因素Cox回歸分析
續(xù)表2
注:*包含未婚、離婚、寡居等婚姻狀態(tài)
圖1 胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤3年、5年生存率的列線圖
圖2 訓(xùn)練集和驗(yàn)證集列線圖預(yù)測(cè)3年、5年生存率的ROC曲線
A.訓(xùn)練集3年生存率;B.訓(xùn)練集5年生存率;C.驗(yàn)證集3年生存率;D.驗(yàn)證集5年生存率
圖3 訓(xùn)練集和驗(yàn)證集列線圖預(yù)測(cè)3年、5年生存率的校準(zhǔn)曲線
A.訓(xùn)練集3年生存率;B.訓(xùn)練集5年生存率;C.驗(yàn)證集3年生存率;D.驗(yàn)證集5年生存率
與其他神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤相比,胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤異質(zhì)性更強(qiáng),具有獨(dú)特的病理生理學(xué)特征,給該種疾病的管理帶來(lái)一定的挑戰(zhàn)[9]。由于缺乏特定的生物標(biāo)志物和疾病相關(guān)癥狀,大多數(shù)患者在疾病后期才被診斷出來(lái)。大多數(shù)胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤是無(wú)功能的,且診斷時(shí)腫瘤已進(jìn)展至晚期不可切除或已轉(zhuǎn)移[10]。隨著影像學(xué)及各種檢測(cè)技術(shù)的發(fā)展,胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤檢出率越來(lái)越高,然而,仍然沒(méi)有一套標(biāo)準(zhǔn)可確定患者的預(yù)后[11]。鑒于上述因素,目前需要一種更精確的預(yù)后工具估計(jì)這些患者的生存率,以協(xié)助臨床決策和治療策略的優(yōu)化[12]。由于具有強(qiáng)異質(zhì)性和復(fù)雜的生物學(xué)行為,僅使用傳統(tǒng)的分期系統(tǒng)評(píng)估其預(yù)后是不精確的,必須建立一個(gè)有效的預(yù)后系統(tǒng)[13]。研究表明,在多種惡性腫瘤中,列線圖比經(jīng)典的AJCC分期具有更好的預(yù)測(cè)能力[14]。除了臨床分期外,其他人口統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)和臨床特征,如診斷時(shí)的年齡、性別、腫瘤大小、腫瘤位置和微環(huán)境及腫瘤炎癥特征也可影響胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤患者的預(yù)后[15]。本研究基于SEER數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù),從人口學(xué)及臨床病理特征等基本信息入手,構(gòu)建胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤預(yù)后模型,同時(shí)進(jìn)行外部驗(yàn)證,為胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤預(yù)后評(píng)價(jià)提供臨床證據(jù)。
目前大多數(shù)情況下,手術(shù)仍是胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤的主要治療手段。所有>2cm的胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤,無(wú)論大小及功能如何,均應(yīng)手術(shù)切除[16]。<2cm的胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤通常表現(xiàn)出良性行為,是否進(jìn)行手術(shù)仍存在爭(zhēng)議[17]。一項(xiàng)單中心研究表明,對(duì)<2cm的胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤進(jìn)行非手術(shù)治療是安全可行的,平均隨訪3~4年,隨訪期間未發(fā)生轉(zhuǎn)移及特異性病死率增加[18];薈萃分析顯示,即使對(duì)<2cm的胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤,手術(shù)也具有顯著的總體生存獲益[19]。本研究多因素分析顯示,手術(shù)治療可使胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤死亡風(fēng)險(xiǎn)下降73%,這與既往研究結(jié)果一致。既往研究表明,相較于胰腺體尾部,胰腺頭部腫瘤直徑更大,淋巴結(jié)轉(zhuǎn)移更常見,更容易發(fā)生局部侵襲和遠(yuǎn)處轉(zhuǎn)移,因此胰頭部胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤預(yù)后更差[20]。本研究結(jié)果顯示,相較于其他部位,胰頭部神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤預(yù)后更差。TNM分期是常用的惡性腫瘤預(yù)后評(píng)估工具,隨著分期增加,預(yù)后越差。此外,本研究發(fā)現(xiàn),男性、年齡≥60歲、婚姻狀態(tài)(非已婚)均是胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤預(yù)后不良的危險(xiǎn)因素,與既往研究結(jié)果一致[21-22]。
本研究仍有一定局限性。首先,本研究為基于SEER數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)的回顧性研究,建立的預(yù)測(cè)模型仍需在人群中進(jìn)一步行前瞻性驗(yàn)證;其次,SEER數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)中并沒(méi)有關(guān)于胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤的分子病理信息,且缺乏手術(shù)及術(shù)后并發(fā)癥、放化療等具體信息,因此納入變量有進(jìn)一步調(diào)整的可能。未來(lái)仍需要大樣本、前瞻性、更加詳細(xì)的臨床病理特征構(gòu)建理想的預(yù)測(cè)模型,以更好地指導(dǎo)胰腺神經(jīng)內(nèi)分泌腫瘤的臨床診治。
[1] HALFDANARSON T R, RABE K G, RUBIN J, et al. Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs): Incidence, prognosis and recent trend toward improved survival[J]. Ann Oncol, 2008, 19(10): 1727–1733.
[2] BILIMORIA K Y, TALAMONTI M S, TOMLINSON J S, et al. Prognostic score predicting survival after resection of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: Analysis of 3851 patients[J]. Ann Surg, 2008, 247(3): 490–500.
[3] SCOAZEC J Y, COUVELARD A. Classification of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours: Changes made in the 2017 WHO classification of tumours of endocrine organs and perspectives for the future[J]. Ann Pathol, 2017, 37(6): 444–456.
[4] METZ D C, JENSEN R T. Gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors: pancreatic endocrine tumors[J]. Gastroenterology, 2008, 135(5): 1469–1492.
[5] DASARI A, SHEN C, HALPERIN D, et al. Trends in the incidence, prevalence, and survival outcomes in patients with neuroendocrine tumors in the United States[J]. JAMA Oncol, 2017, 3(10): 1335–1342.
[6] WEN J, CHEN J, LIU D, et al. The eighth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer distant metastases stage classification for metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors might be feasible for metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas[J]. Neuroendocrinology, 2020, 110(5): 364–376.
[7] LUO G, JAVED A, STROSBERG J R, et al. Modified staging classification for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors on the basis of the American Joint Committee on Cancer and European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society Systems[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2017, 35(3): 274–280.
[8] JILESEN A P, VAN EIJCK C H, IN'T HOF K H, et al. Postoperative complications, in-hospital mortality and 5-year survival after surgical resection for patients with a pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor: A systematic review[J]. World J Surg, 2016, 40(3): 729–748.
[9] GAO L, NATOV N S, DALY K P, et al. An update on the management of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors[J]. Anticancer Drugs, 2018, 29(7): 597–612.
[10] ORDITURA M, PETRILLO A, VENTRIGLIA J, et al. Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: Nosography, management and treatment[J]. Int J Surg, 2016, 28 Suppl 1: S156–S162.
[11] BAUR A D, PAVEL M, PRASAD V, et al. Diagnostic imaging of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (pNEN): Tumor detection, staging, prognosis, and response to treatment[J]. Acta Radiol, 2016, 57(3): 260–270.
[12] WANG Z X, QIU M Z, JIANG Y M, et al. Comparison of prognostic nomograms based on different nodal staging systems in patients with resected gastric cancer[J]. J Cancer, 2017, 8(6): 950–958.
[13] OHMOTO A, ROKUTAN H, YACHIDA S. Pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms: Basic biology, current treatment strategies and prospects for the future[J]. Int J Mol Sci, 2017, 18(1): 143.
[14] FANG C, WANG W, FENG X, et al. Nomogram individually predicts the overall survival of patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms[J]. Br J Cancer, 2017, 117(10): 1544–1550.
[15] MILIONE M, MICELI R, BARRETTA F, et al. Microenvironment and tumor inflammatory features improve prognostic prediction in gastro-entero-pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms[J]. J Pathol Clin Res, 2019, 5(4): 217–226.
[16] SCOTT A T, HOWE J R. Evaluation and management of neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas[J]. Surg Clin North Am, 2019, 99(4): 793–814.
[17] BETTINI R, PARTELLI S, BONINSEGNA L, et al. Tumor size correlates with malignancy in nonfunctioning pancreatic endocrine tumor[J]. Surgery, 2011, 150(1): 75–82.
[18] GAUJOUX S, PARTELLI S, MAIRE F, et al. Observational study of natural history of small sporadic nonfunctioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors[J]. J Clin Endocrinol Metab, 2013, 98(12): 4784–4789.
[19] FINKELSTEIN P, SHARMA R, PICADO O, et al. Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (panNETs): Analysis of overall survival of nonsurgical management versus surgical resection[J]. J Gastrointest Surg, 2017, 21(5): 855–866.
[20] MEI W, DING Y, WANG S, et al. Head and body/tail pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors have different biological characteristics and clinical outcomes[J]. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol, 2020, 146(11): 3049–3061.
[21] LIU M, SUN X, ZHANG Z, et al. The clinical characteristics and survival associations of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: Does age matter?[J]. Gland Surg, 2021, 10(2): 574–583.
[22] ZHOU H, ZHANG Y, SONG Y, et al. Marital status is an independent prognostic factor for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors patients: An analysis of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database[J]. Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol, 2017, 41(4): 476–486.
Prognostic prediction model construction and validation of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor
Department of Digestive, Linyi Central Hospital, Linyi 276400, Shandong, China
To investigate the risk factors affecting the prognosis of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, and to construct a prognosis prediction model of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.A total of 3606 patients diagnosed with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor from January 2004 to December 2015 were selected from the SEER database. They were divided into training set (=2704) and validation set (=902) according to the ratio of 3:1. In training set, the Cox proportional hazards model was used to screen the effects of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors prognostic risk factors, further construct its prognostic model and draw nomogram. The predictive performance of the model was validated internally and externally on the training set and validation set, respectively.Univariate Cox regression analysis showed that gender, age, marital status, tumor location, degree of differentiation, TNM stage, American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage, and surgery or not were risk factors for the prognosis of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (<0.05). Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that age, gender, marital status, degree of differentiation, TNM stage and surgery were the risk factors affecting the prognosis of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (<0.05). Finally, variables such as age, gender, degree of differentiation, tumor location, TNM stage, surgery, and marital status were incorporated into the prediction model and nomograms were drawn to predict 3-year and 5-year survival rates. In training set and validation set, the C-index of the prediction model was 0.8579 and 0.8572, respectively. The calibration curves of the 3-year and 5-year survival rates in the training set and the verification set showed that the predicted survival rate was in good agreement with the actual survival rate.The constructed pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor prediction model has good predictive value.
Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor; Prediction model; SEER database
R735.9
A
10.3969/j.issn.1673-9701.2023.07.014
陳慶法,電子信箱:qingfachen@163.com
(2022–09–05)
(2023–02–06)