Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 622

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Hepatic neuroendocrine metastases: does intervention alter outcomes?1

Chamberlain, Ronald S, Canes, David, Brown, Karen T, Saltz, Leonard, Jarnagin, William, Fong, Yuman, Blumgart, Leslie H·2000·Journal of the American College of Surgeons

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In most instances, advanced neuroendocrine tumors follow an indolent course. Hepatic metastases are common, and although they can cause significant pain, incapacitating endocrinopathy, and even death, they are usually asymptomatic. The appropriate timing and efficacy of interventions, such as hepatic artery embolization (HAE) and operation, remain controversial. STUDY DESIGN: The records of 85 selected patients referred for treatment of hepatic neuroendocrine tumor metastases between 1992 and 1998 were reviewed from a prospective database. A multidisciplinary group of surgeons, radiologists, and oncologists managed all patients. Overall survival among this cohort is reported and prognostic variables, which may be predictive of survival, are analyzed. RESULTS: There were 37 men and 48 women, with a median age of 52 years. There were 41 carcinoid tumors, 26 nonfunctional islet cell tumors, and 18 functional islet cell tumors. Thirty-eight patients had extrahepatic metastases, and in 84% of patients, the liver metastases were bilobar. Eighteen patients were treated with medical therapy or best supportive care, 33 patients underwent HAE, and 34 patients underwent hepatic resection. Both the HAE-related mortality and the 30-day operative mortality rates were 6%. By univariate analysis, earlier resection of the primary tumor, curative intent of treatment, and initial surgical treatment were associated with prolonged survival (p < 0.05). On multivariate analysis, only curative intent to treat remained significant (p < 0.04). Patients with bilobar or more than 75% liver involvement by tumor were least likely to benefit from surgical resection. One-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates for the entire group were 83%, 61%, and 53%, respectively. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year survivals for patients treated with medical therapy, HAE, and operation were 76%, 39%, and not available; 94%, 83%, and 50%; and 94%, 83%, and 76%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Hepatic metastases from neuroendocrine tumors are best managed with a multidisciplinary approach. Both HAE and surgical resection provide excellent palliation of hormonal and pain symptoms. In select patients, surgical resection of hepatic metastases may prolong survival, but is rarely curative.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1072-7515(00)00222-2

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 622

Metadata

Authors
Chamberlain, R. S., Canes, D., Brown, K. T., Saltz, L., Jarnagin, W., Fong, Y., & Blumgart, L. H.
Venue
Journal of the American College of Surgeons
Published
2000-04
Volume
190
Issue
4
Pages
432-445
ISSN
1072-7515 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1495055668
Cited by
622
References
0
FWCI
10.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Hepatic neuroendocrine metastases: does intervention alter outcomes?1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s1072-7515(00)00222-2
The paper
Chamberlain, R. S., Canes, D., Brown, K. T., Saltz, L., Jarnagin, W., Fong, Y., & Blumgart, L. H. (2000). Hepatic neuroendocrine metastases: does intervention alter outcomes?1. Journal of the American College of Surgeons. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1072-7515(00)00222-2

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.