Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster Display session

51P - External validation of Rachel score: A prognostic tool for lung neuroendocrine tumors

Date

21 Mar 2025

Session

Poster Display session

Presenters

Anna La Salvia

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2025) 10 (suppl_3): 1-7. 10.1016/esmoop/esmoop104347

Authors

A. La Salvia1, B. Marcozzi2, G. Lamberti3, C. Manai4, R. Mazzilli5, L. Landi4, M. Pallocca6, G. Ciliberto7, F. Cappuzzo8, D. Campana3, A. Faggiano5

Author affiliations

  • 1 National Center For Drug Research And Evaluation, Istituto Superiore di Sanità (ISS), 00161 - Rome/IT
  • 2 Biostatistics, Bioinforcardiovascular, Endocrine-metabolic Disease And Aging, Istituto Superiore di Sanità (ISS), 161 - Rome/IT
  • 3 Oncology Department, Department of Medical or Surgical Sciences, University of Bologna; Division of Medical Oncology, IRCCS A.O.U. Bologna, ENETS Center of Excellence, Bologna, Italy, 40138 - Bologna/IT
  • 4 Medical Oncology 2, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome/IT
  • 5 Endocrinology Unit, Department Of Clinical And Molecular Medicine, Sapienza University Of Rome, Sant’andrea University Hospital, Enets Center Of Excellence, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 - Rome/IT
  • 6 Biostatistics, Bioinformatics And Clinical Trial Center, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, 00128 - Rome/IT
  • 7 Direction, UOSD Sarcomas and Rare Tumors, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy, 00144 - Rome/IT
  • 8 Medical Oncology 2, IRCCS Istiuto Nazionale Tumori Regina Elena (IRE), 00144 - Rome/IT

Resources

This content is available to ESMO members and event participants.

Abstract 51P

Background

Lung NET are a heterogeneous group of tumors, with variegated clinical presentation and course. The histological subtype of typical carcinoids (TC) versus atypical carcinoids (AC), and TNM stage are well-established prognostic factors. In a previous work by our group, we have developed a nomogram that integrates relevant prognostic factors to predict lung NET outcomes. Our model, named Rachel score, demonstrated to a reliable and useful tool to predict survival rates in this population.

Methods

We selected a lung NET patients’ external cohort from Bologna University Hospital to evaluate the applicability and eventually validate the previously built nomogram and Rachel score. This external cohort was composed by 121 lung NET: median age was 59 years, 41 were male (33.88%), 43 were left-sided tumors (35.54%), 20 patients had positive nodal status (16.53%), 54 were atypical carcinoids (44.63%), 20 cases presented necrosis (16.53%), median Ki-67 was 7. Median OS was 89 months and median PFS was 72 months. Of note, Ki67 value was missing in 31 cases (25.62%).

Results

Overall survival (OS) multivariable models confirmed a prognostic role for male sex (p=0.071 in the model with Ki67, p=0.027 in the model without Ki67) and nodal status (p=0.054 in the model with Ki67). In progression free survival (PFS) survival model, AC was a negative prognostic factor (p= 0.001 in the model without KI67). Ki67 was associated both with OS and PFS (P= 0.086 and p=0.003). By applying Rachel score to the validation cohort, we confirmed three prognostic groups (specifically, high, medium and low risk), supporting the validity of this tool for prognostic stratification but only in the model without Ki67 (OS model p = 0.0028 and PFS model p < 0.0001). Unfortunately, in survival models including Ki67, the curves show a lower ability to discriminate between risk groups. This difference is probably related to the high percentage of cases lacking Ki67 value.

Conclusions

OS and PFS Kaplan-Meier curves in the validation cohort confirmed significant differences among the three groups identified by Rachel score by applying the model without Ki67 value, reinforcing a potential value of this tool for patients’ stratification.

Clinical trial identification

Editorial acknowledgement

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.