Multicenter cohort study reveals recurrent HRAS and RAS pathway mutations in sporadic ampullary somatostatin-producing neuroendocrine tumors, indicating potential targets for precision therapy.
Ampullary somatostatin-producing D-cell neuroendocrine tumors are rare neoplasms that may be associated with type 1 neurofibromatosis. The molecular features of sporadic ampullary somatostatin-producing D-cell neuroendocrine tumors (SAMSOM-NETs) remain poorly characterized. We performed an integrated morphological, immunohistochemical, and genomic analysis of a multicenter series of SAMSOM-NETs. Eleven cases were included (73% male; median age: 63 years). All six patients who underwent lymphadenectomy were staged as pN1, and liver metastases were found in three cases; however, no tumor-related deaths occurred (median follow-up: 104 months). Common histologic features that can pose diagnostic challenges in the differential diagnosis with adenocarcinoma included a tubulo-glandular architecture (100%), periodic Acid-Schiff (PAS)-positive intraluminal mucin (73%), MUC1 expression (100%), and carcinoembryonic antigen (45%) expression. All tumors exhibited dot-like cytoplasmic reactivity for cytokeratins (CK) CAM5.2 or CK AE1/AE3, and 82% were CK7-positive. ISL1 and PDX1 were diffusely expressed in all cases, while CDX2 was positive in 54% and ARX showed only focal expression in four tumors. Genomic profiling revealed microsatellite stability and low tumor mutational burden. Alterations in the RAS pathway, including HRAS mutations (4 cases, 36%), a KRAS mutation (1 case), and NF1 alterations (one case), were identified in 54% of cases and in all tumors with liver metastases. Additional molecular findings included a CDK12 splice-site alteration and an NTRK3::PRDM4 fusion. Potentially actionable alterations affecting kinase-related pathways were detected in 64% of tumors. Our findings support SAMSOM-NET as a peculiar neuroendocrine tumor subtype showing distinctive histologic and molecular characteristics with potential diagnostic and therapeutic implications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vanoli et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: