Pick Topic
Review Topic
List Experts
Examine Expert
Save Expert
  Site Guide ··   
Pancreatic Neoplasms: HELP
Articles by Andrea Frasoldati
Based on 4 articles published since 2009
(Why 4 articles?)

Between 2009 and 2019, Andrea Frasoldati wrote the following 4 articles about Pancreatic Neoplasms.
+ Citations + Abstracts
1 Guideline None 2018

Grimaldi, Franco / Fazio, Nicola / Attanasio, Roberto / Frasoldati, Andrea / Papini, Enrico / Cremonini, Nadia / Davi, Maria V / Funicelli, Luigi / Massironi, Sara / Spada, Francesca / Toscano, Vincenzo / Versari, Annibale / Zini, Michele / Falconi, Massimo / Oberg, Kjell. ·Endocrinology and Metabolic Disease Unit, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Integrata di Udine, Udine, Italy. · Division of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology and Neuroendocrine Tumor, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy. · Endocrinology Service, Galeazzi Institute IRCCS, Milan, Italy. · Endocrinology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera S. Maria Nuova IRCCS, Reggio Emilia, Italy. · Department of Endocrinology and Metabolic Diseases, Regina Apostolorum Hospital, Albano Laziale (Rome), Italy. · Endocrinology Clinics, Clinica Villalba, Bologna, Italy. · Section of Endocrinology, Medicina Generale e Malattie Aterotrombotiche e Degenerative, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata, Verona, Italy. · Division of Radiology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy. · Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda, Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy. · Endocrinology, Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sant'Andrea Hospital, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy. · Nuclear Medicine Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera S. Maria Nuova IRCCS, Reggio Emilia, Italy. · Division of Pancreatic Surgery, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita e Salute University, Milan, Italy. · Department of Endocrine Oncology, University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden. ·Endocr Metab Immune Disord Drug Targets · Pubmed #29237387.

ABSTRACT: Well-established criteria for evaluating the response to treatment and the appropriate followup of individual patients are critical in clinical oncology. The current evidence-based data on these issues in terms of the management of gastroenteropancreatic (GEP) neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN) are unfortunately limited. This document by the Italian Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AME) on the criteria for the follow-up of GEP-NEN patients is aimed at providing comprehensive recommendations for everyday clinical practice based on both the best available evidence and the combined opinion of an interdisciplinary panel of experts. The initial risk stratification of patients with NENs should be performed according to the grading, staging and functional status of the neoplasm and the presence of an inherited syndrome. The evaluation of response to the initial treatment, and to the subsequent therapies for disease progression or recurrence, should be based on a cost-effective, risk-effective and timely use of the appropriate diagnostic resources. A multidisciplinary evaluation of the response to the treatment is strongly recommended and, at every step in the follow-up, it is mandatory to assess the disease state and the patient performance status, comorbidities, and recent clinical evolution. Local expertise, available technical resources and the patient preferences should always be evaluated while planning the individual clinical management of GEP-NENs.

2 Article Italian Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AME) position statement: a stepwise clinical approach to the diagnosis of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms. 2014

Grimaldi, Franco / Fazio, Nicola / Attanasio, Roberto / Frasoldati, Andrea / Papini, Enrico / Angelini, Francesco / Baldelli, Roberto / Berretti, Debora / Bianchetti, Sara / Bizzarri, Giancarlo / Caputo, Marco / Castello, Roberto / Cremonini, Nadia / Crescenzi, Anna / Davì, Maria Vittoria / D'Elia, Angela Valentina / Faggiano, Antongiulio / Pizzolitto, Stefano / Versari, Annibale / Zini, Michele / Rindi, Guido / Oberg, Kjell. ·Endocrinology and Metabolic Disease Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria "S. Maria della Misericordia", P.le S.M. della Misericordia, 15-33100, Udine, Italy, franco.grimaldi@aliceposta.it. ·J Endocrinol Invest · Pubmed #25038902.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

3 Article Ki-67 cytological index can distinguish well-differentiated from poorly differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a comparative cytohistological study of 53 cases. 2014

Carlinfante, Gabriele / Baccarini, Paola / Berretti, Debora / Cassetti, Tiziana / Cavina, Maurizio / Conigliaro, Rita / De Pellegrin, Alessandro / Di Tommaso, Luca / Fabbri, Carlo / Fornelli, Adele / Frasoldati, Andrea / Gardini, Giorgio / Losi, Luisa / Maccio, Livia / Manta, Raffaele / Pagano, Nico / Sassatelli, Romano / Serra, Silvia / Camellini, Lorenzo. ·Department of Pathology, Arcispedale Santa Maria Nuova-IRCCS, Viale Risorgimento 80, 42123, Reggio Emilia, Italy, carlinfante.gabriele@asmn.re.it. ·Virchows Arch · Pubmed #24807732.

ABSTRACT: The Ki-67 labeling index has been found to bear prognostic significance in gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), and it was recently incorporated in NET histological grading. Nevertheless, a reliable preoperative determination of NET grading could be useful in clinical practice. The aim of this study is to compare the results of Ki-67 labeling index, as measured on cytological samples and on surgical specimens of patients with pancreatic NETs (P-NETs). We also investigated whether concordance might be improved, using a 5 % (instead of 2 %) cutoff value for defining G2 tumors. We retrospectively identified 48 consecutive patients with 53 P-NETs, from our five institutions, and we measured Ki-67 labeling index on their cytological samples and surgical specimens. The traditional 2 % and the alternative 5 % cutoff values were used to classify G2 tumors. The concordance rate between cytological and histological grading was 46/53 (86.8 %; weighted κ statistic 0.77; 95 % confidence interval (95 % CI) 0.60-0.94). No cases of cytological G1-G2 NETs were upgraded to G3 neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) at histological grading. Cytology was found to be highly specific in the diagnosis of both G2 (94.1 %; 95 % CI 80.3-99.3) and G3 tumors (100.0 %; 95 % CI 92.8-100), but the sensitivity was poor for G2 NETs (66.7 %; 95 % CI 38.4-88.2) and high for the prediction of G3 NECs (100 %; 95 % CI 39.8-100.0). When the 5 % cutoff value was adopted, concordance rate was 49/53 (92.4 %; weighted κ 0.82; 95 % CI 0.64-1.00). In conclusion, Ki-67 cytological expression can distinguish well-differentiated (both G1 and G2) from poorly differentiated P-NETs, and it may be useful for their preoperative classification.

4 Article Ga-68 DOTATOC PET, endoscopic ultrasonography, and multidetector CT in the diagnosis of duodenopancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a single-centre retrospective study. 2010

Versari, Annibale / Camellini, Lorenzo / Carlinfante, Gabriele / Frasoldati, Andrea / Nicoli, Franco / Grassi, Elisa / Gallo, Carmine / Giunta, Francesca P / Fraternali, Alessandro / Salvo, Diana / Asti, Mattia / Azzolini, Francesco / Iori, Veronica / Sassatelli, Romano. ·Nuclear Medicine Unit, Santa Maria Nuova Hospital, Reggio Emilia, Italy. ·Clin Nucl Med · Pubmed #20395703.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: In this report, we compared endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), multidetector CT (MDCT), and Ga-68 DOTATOC PET/CT in patients with neuroendocrine tumors (NETs). We report our experience with use of these methods in patients suspected to have duodenopancreatic primitive NET. METHODS: Nineteen consecutive patients (mean age, 56; 21-80), who underwent both Ga-68 DOTATOC PET/CT and EUS between March 2007 and November 2008 were retrospectively included in the study (16 underwent MDCT). Suspicion of NET was confirmed by EUS-FNA and/or surgery. Operative characteristics of PET, EUS, and MDCT were compared. RESULTS: Twenty-three neuroendocrine lesions were diagnosed in 13/19 patients. EUS, PET, and MDCT correctly identified as affected 13/13 (100%), 12/13 (92%), and 10/11 (91%) patients, respectively. On a lesion basis, EUS, PET, and MDCT identified correctly as NETs 22/23 (96%), 20/23 (87%), and 13/18 (72%) lesions (P = 0.08 EUS vs. CT). Both on a patient and on a lesion basis, specificity was 67%, 83%, and 80% for EUS, PET, and MDCT, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: EUS, Ga-68 DOTATOC PET, and MDCT seem to have comparable accuracy in diagnosis of duodenopancreatic NET and their combination may allow an optimal preoperative diagnosis.