• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    An update on the diagnosis of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms

    2022-03-31 08:09:48JiayunFangJayLiJiaqiShi
    World Journal of Gastroenterology 2022年10期

    Jiayun M Fang, Jay Li, Jiaqi Shi

    Abstract Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs) arise from neuroendocrine cells found throughout the gastrointestinal tract and islet cells of the pancreas. The incidence and prevalence of GEP-NENs have been increasing each year due to higher awareness, improved diagnostic modalities, and increased incidental detection on cross-sectional imaging and endoscopy for cancer screening and other conditions and symptoms. GEP-NENs are a heterogeneous group of tumors and have a wide range in clinical presentation,histopathologic features, and molecular biology. Clinical presentation most commonly depends on whether the GEP-NEN secretes an active hormone. The World Health Organization recently updated the classification of GEP-NENs to introduce a distinction between high-grade neuroendocrine tumors and neuroendocrine carcinomas, which can be identified using histology and molecular studies and are more aggressive with a worse prognosis compared to high-grade neuroendocrine tumors. As our understanding of the biology of GEP-NENs has grown, new and improved diagnostic modalities can be developed and optimized. Here, we discuss clinical features and updates in diagnosis, including histopathological analysis, biomarkers, molecular techniques, and radiology of GEP-NENs. We review established diagnostic tests and discuss promising novel diagnostic tests that are currently in development or require further investigation and validation prior to broad utilization in patient care.

    Key Words: Neuroendocrine tumor; Neuroendocrine carcinoma; Gastrointestinal;Pancreas; Pathology; Diagnosis

    lNTRODUCTlON

    Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) account for 0 .5 % of all malignancies, and 62 %-70 % of these are found in the gastroenteropancreatic system (GEP-NENs)[1 -3 ]. They arise from neuroendocrine cells,which are characterized by their ability to synthesize and secrete neuropeptides and hormones as well as the expression of neuroendocrine markers such as synaptophysin and chromogranin[2 ]. Neuroendocrine cells are most commonly found throughout the gastrointestinal tract, the islets of Langerhans of the pancreas, and in the lungs[2 ]. GEP-NENs are often slow-growing and indolent, so they can go undetected for years prior to diagnosis[4 ]. Though GEP-NENs were previously considered rare, the incidence has dramatically increased over the years as awareness of GEP-NENs grew and diagnostic modalities improved[1 ,4 -7 ]. GEP-NENs are currently the second most prevalent gastrointestinal neoplasm, second only to colorectal adenocarcinoma[4 ]. Despite their indolent behavior, GEP-NENs can cause significant morbidity. Furthermore, their clinical presentation may mimic other classes of neoplasms, leading to inappropriate treatment and delays in appropriate therapy. Due to delays in diagnosis, metastases are present in 21 % to 69 % of patients at the time of diagnosis[6 ,7 ]. Therefore, it is imperative to come to an accurate diagnosis in a timely manner.

    Oberndorfer first described GEP-NENs in 1907 as “Karzinoide” to describe benign-appearing tumors of the small intestine[2 ,6 ]. Now, the term “carcinoid” is no longer recommended as these neoplasms have been found to have the malignant potential[6 ]. The World Health Organization (WHO) classification of GEP-NENs has changed over the years. A major recent update is the division of NENs into neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) and neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs). Previous editions classified GEP-NENs into grade 1 and grade 2 NETs, while grade 3 tumors were classified as NECs; however,molecular discoveries have aided in distinguishing grade 3 NETs from NECs and this distinction has been implemented as of the WHO 2019 [8 ]. In addition to the changes in WHO classification, there are new developments in diagnosing GEP-NENs, including histopathology, biomarkers, and imaging.Here, we discuss updates on the diagnosis of GEP-NENs across these various modalities.

    CLlNlCAL FEATURES

    GEP-NENs can broadly be divided into functional and nonfunctional neoplasms. Though nonfunctional NENs can secrete calcitonin, chromogranins, ghrelin, neuron-specific enolase, or pancreatic polypeptide, they do not present with a hormone-related clinical syndrome[9 ]. By contrast, functional GEP-NENs secrete a hormone with an associated clinical syndrome caused by an excess of that hormone.

    Nonfunctional GEP-NENs present with symptoms as primary tumor growth or metastases progress.For example, esophageal NENs are rare but present with dysphagia and vomiting due to physical obstruction[10 ]. Nonfunctional pancreatic NENs can present with symptoms of abdominal pain, early satiety, and obstructive jaundice[10 ,11 ]. Colorectal NENs present with hematochezia, change in bowel habits, abdominal pain, and anorectal symptoms[12 -14 ].

    With the increased usage of cross-sectional imaging and endoscopies to screen for cancer, many nonfunctional GEP-NENs are detected incidentally[15 ]. For example, gastric and colorectal NENs can be detected on upper and lower endoscopy, respectively[12 ,13 ,16 ,17 ]. Similarly, appendiceal NENs have been found incidentally in less than 1 % of appendectomy specimens[14 ,18 ].

    Functional GEP-NENs present with a clinical syndrome consistent with the hormone that they secrete. Due to the associated clinical syndrome, these often present earlier than nonfunctional GEPNENs. Insulinomas are insulin-secreting tumors that present with symptoms of hypoglycemia such as palpitations, diaphoresis, and altered mental status[19 ]. Gastrinomas cause Zollinger-Ellison syndrome,in which excess gastrin leads to hypersecretion of gastric acid, resulting in severe peptic ulcer disease,gastroesophageal reflux disease, and chronic diarrhea[20 ]. Glucagonomas present with necrolytic migratory erythema, diabetes mellitus, weight loss, and diarrhea[21 -23 ]. VIPomas are characterized by autonomous secretion of VIP leading to watery diarrhea, hypokalemia, and achlorhydria syndrome[24 ,25 ]. Secretion of serotonin and other active amines and peptides leads to carcinoid syndrome, which presents with episodic flushing, wheezing, and diarrhea[26 ,27 ].

    WHO CLASSlFlCATlON UPDATE

    The WHO classification of GEP-NENs has undergone numerous changes over the past couple of decades. The first WHO in 2000 described three categories: (1 ) Well-differentiated endocrine tumors(carcinoids) to describe neoplasms with low malignant potential and well-differentiated endocrine carcinomas for those with aggressive behavior and metastases; (2 ) Poorly-differentiated endocrine carcinomas; and (3 ) Mixed exocrine-endocrine tumors[28 ]. It was not until 2010 that the WHO updated the classification to “neuroendocrine” to describe the cell origin better and discouraged the use of“carcinoid”[28 ]. A critical change in 2010 was an introduction of a broader classification system for GEPNENs that was not based on anatomic sites[8 ]. GEP-NENs were then categorized as grade 1 and grade 2 NETs, with grade 3 tumors being classified as NECs. This division was based on the Ki-67 proliferation index and mitotic count of the tumor (Table 1 )[8 ,29 ].

    Following the WHO 2010 , it became apparent that there were two groups of grade 3 GEP-NENs with drastically different prognoses. One group was made up of neoplasms with a better prognosis that were proliferative but rarely displayed high-grade features (e.g., nuclear pleomorphism and necrosis), while the other group included poorly differentiated NECs that were more aggressive with a poorer prognosis[29 ]. This distinction was best established in pancreatic NENs, and in 2017 , the WHO introduced an additional classification distinguishing between well-differentiated grade 3 NETs and poorly-differentiated NECs in the pancreas[30 ]. The most recent WHO 2019 applied this distinction to all GEP-NENs(Table 1 )[8 ].

    MOLECULAR FlNDlNGS

    Molecular discoveries have recently shown that NETs and NECs are distinct entities with different molecular profiles[31 -33 ]. This has been best described in pancreatic NENs. Whole exome sequencing of pancreatic NETs led to the discovery that most pancreatic NETs are associated with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1 ) inactivation (44 %) and death domain-associated protein (DAXX)/alphathalassemia/mental retardation X-linked (ATRX) gene mutations (43 %)[31 ]. Less commonly, alterations in the mTOR pathway (15 %) have also been identified including in PTEN, TSC2 , and PIK3 CA[30 ,31 ].

    These genetic alterations have been essential in distinguishing high-grade NETs from NECs. Up to 43 % of high-grade pancreatic NETs demonstrate mutatedDAXX/ATRX, whereas pancreatic NECs are not known to have this mutation[30 -32 ]. Instead, up to 92 % of pancreatic NECs have TP53 or RB1 mutations[30 ,32 ,34 ]. Other less commonly seen mutations in NECs include mutations in KRAS, SMAD4 ,CDKN2A/p16 , and BCL2 [8 ,30 ,32 ].

    For non-pancreatic gastrointestinal NENs, genomic studies are still emerging but suggest that NECs similarly harborTP53 and RB1 mutations[8 ]. On the other hand, genomic sequencing identified a very low mutation rate in extrapancreatic NETs, and no recurrent mutation has been identified[8 ,35 ].Although no specific mutation has been validated in small intestinal NENs, analysis of chromosomal changes showed that approximately 50 % of cases had a loss of chromosome 18 and 10 %-30 % of cases had a gain of chromosomes 4 , 5 , 7 , 14 , or 20 [33 ]. Overall, due to the heterogeneity of gastrointestinal NETs, identifying recurrent mutations in extrapancreatic NETs has been challenging[8 ,33 ].

    In addition to molecular classification, genome sequencing has been utilized to identify risk factors of genetic susceptibility to developing sporadic GEP-NENs. Autosomal dominantly inherited genetic syndromes account for a minority of GEP-NENs and include multiple endocrine neoplasia types 1 and 2 , Von Hippel-Lindau syndrome, tuberous sclerosis, and neurofibromatosis type 1 [36 ]. A 2011 study by Ter-Minassianet al[37 ] evaluated single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in patients with sporadic NETs, including small bowel and pancreas primaries. They identified 2 SNPs that were associated with increased overall risk of NET, IL12 A rs2243123 , and DAD1 rs8005354 , suggesting that inflammatory and apoptosis pathways play a role in tumorigenesis of NENs[37 ]. However, a larger follow-up genomic study in 2016 was not able to confirm these associations. Instead, Du et al[36 ] found a potential risk locus on 12 q23 that may be associated with developing small bowel NENs. This locus is in proximity to ELK3 , which is implicated in angiogenesis. A 2018 study by Obazee et al[38 ] analyzed susceptibility loci associated with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma for possible overlap association with pancreatic NENs and found that rs9543325 , rs10919791 , and rs1561927 may increase the risk of developing pancreatic NENs. Genome-wide association studies for GEP-NENs have been limited by sample size,but further studies along these lines may yield a greater understanding of the molecular pathways underlying the pathogenesis of GEP-NENs and potentially facilitate the identification of therapeutic targets.

    HlSTOPATHOLOGlC DlAGNOSlS

    Histologic analysis of the tumor is necessary to establish the diagnosis of a GEP-NEN. The WHO 2019 classification divided GEP-NENs into NETs, grades 1 through 3 , and NECs (Table 1 ). Low-grade NETs(grades 1 and 2 ) classically show an organoid architecture, but various patterns may be appreciated,including trabecular, glandular, tubuloacinar, and solid (Figure 1 ). Tumor cells are monotonous with round nuclei and finely granular cytoplasm. The chromatin is finely stippled and classically referred to as “salt and pepper.” High-grade NETs (grade 3 ) have many overlapping morphologic features with low-grade NETs, with the key difference being that they show higher mitotic activity and higher proliferation indices (Ki-67 ). Rarely, high-grade NETs may show marked nuclear pleomorphism, diffuse infiltrative patterns, and necrosis. Such features can make it difficult to distinguish from NECs, which is why ancillary studies may be needed in NENs with high-grade features.

    By contrast, NECs are poorly differentiated with significant atypia and frequently have geographic necrosis. They can be further subclassified into small cell NEC and large cell NEC. The small cell variant typically grows in a solid, diffuse, sheet-like pattern, and the tumor cells have scant cytoplasm and show nuclear molding with hyperchromatic nuclei and inconspicuous nucleoli. The large cell variant has moderate to abundant cytoplasm, vesicular nuclei, and prominent nucleoli. The classic “salt and pepper” chromatin is not appreciated.

    Immunohistochemical stains for neuroendocrine differentiation are used to confirm the diagnosis.The most common markers are chromogranin and synaptophysin, with the former being more specific for neuroendocrine differentiation and the latter more sensitive. Other neuroendocrine markers include neuron-specific enolase and CD56 . Insulinoma-associated protein 1 (INSM1 ) is a recently identified marker proposed to have high specificity for neuroendocrine differentiation[34 ,39 ]. In more poorly differentiated NENs, multiple markers may be needed to confirm the neuroendocrine etiology. Approximately 25 % of NECs may lack chromogranin and synaptophysin expression, attributed to the decreased number of dense-core granules[30 ,34 ].

    Tumor grading is dependent on mitotic activity and Ki-67 . In situations where the Ki-67 index and mitotic index are discrepant, the higher grade is assigned, as studies have shown tumors tend to behave more like those of the higher grade[29 ,40 ]. Current recommendations include counting Ki-67 in at least 500 cells in “hot spots,” areas with increased activity, and counting 50 high power fields for mitoses.“Eyeballing” the mitotic count and Ki-67 is discouraged due to the lack of reproducibility, and it is preferred to count on printed images of the “hot spots” manually. Automated systems for counting have been explored but are currently limited by high costs.

    Distinguishing between high-grade NETs from NECs by morphology can be challenging. The molecular differences between NETs and NECs can assist in these situations, especially in pancreatic NENs[7 ,8 ,29 ,30 ,40 ]. As previously described,DAXX/ATRXmutations can be detected in approximately 43 % of pancreatic NETs, including high-grade NETs. These mutations can be detected by loss of protein expression by DAXX and ATRX immunohistochemistry[32 ]. As for NECs, immunohistochemical stains for p53 and RB1 may be used, either showing aberrant p53 expression (diffuse positivity or null) or absent RB1 staining[32 ]. A subset of NECs also shows loss of p16 expression, which is not appreciated in NETs[33 ]. Overexpression of BCL2 has also been reported, especially in the small cell variant (up to 100 %); however, approximately 18 % of NETs may also demonstrate this[32 ]. Although most cases of NETs can be morphologically differentiated from NECs; immunohistochemistry is available when the morphology is not definitive.

    Despite the advancements made in histopathology, it still has limitations[41 ]. Biopsies are invasive,prone to sampling error, and can only provide a snapshot of a single time point in the course of the disease. It is not capable of providing a real-time evaluation of disease progression, recurrence, or therapy response. Other diagnostic modalities such as anatomical and functional imaging and clinical symptoms and biomarkers are needed in the surveillance of disease[42 ].

    Figure 1 Morphologic features of low-grade well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors and poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma. A-D: Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms have a variety of architectural patterns (hematoxylin and eosin staining); A and B: Low-grade well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) typically have monotonous cells with round nuclei and “salt and pepper” chromatin; C: High-grade well-differentiated NETs tend to have more nuclear pleomorphism with readily identifiable mitoses; D: Small cell carcinoma, a variant of neuroendocrine carcinoma, has significant atypia with nuclear molding and scant cytoplasm. Mitoses are also readily identified; E and F: In addition to mitotic count, the Ki-67 proliferation index is necessary for grading. Low-grade well-differentiated NETs have a low proliferation index, < 20 % on Ki-67 immunohistochemical (IHC) stain (E), while high-grade well-differentiated NETs have a high proliferation index, > 20 % on Ki-67 IHC stain (F). Scale bars: 100 μm (A), 200 μm (B, E and F), 50 μm (C and D).

    BlOMARKERS

    Due to the invasiveness of biopsy and limitations of histopathology, there is demand for non-invasive,reproducible biomarkers that can provide not only a diagnosis but also longitudinal data on prognosis,disease evolution, therapy response, and disease recurrence[41 ]. This has been challenging, and currently, there are no widely available biomarkers that can act as a standalone indicator[43 ]. However,with the emergence of multianalyte analysis, the field of biomarkers for GEP-NENs is expanding.

    Monoanalytes

    Monoanalytes are measured in plasma by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA). The primary targets were identified based on secretory products and include chromogranin A (CgA), pancreastatin,neuron-specific enolase, and neurokinin A[7 ,41 ,44 ]. While these biomarkers were initially regarded with much praise and are currently the only widely utilized biomarkers, they have limited sensitivity,specificity, and reproducibility[41 ,42 ,44 ,45 ]. Furthermore, they cannot identify early disease progression[41 ]. Overall, the greatest challenge is that a single analyte is incapable of providing information on the tumor molecular biology, such as cell proliferation and growth factor signaling[41 ,42 ,44 ].

    Chromogranin A is a glycoprotein found in neuroendocrine cells and was first introduced as a biomarker over 3 decades ago[46 ,47 ]. It is currently the most commonly used biomarker for GEP-NENs[7 ]. It has a 10 %-35 % specificity, and its sensitivity ranges from 32 % to 92 %[44 ,48 ]. False elevations are common, especially in patients on proton pump inhibitors and those with chronic atrophic gastritis,renal insufficiency, arterial hypertension, and adenocarcinoma[6 ,7 ,42 ,48 ]. It is not recommended to use CgA as a screening tool, and it has greater utility in monitoring response to therapy and surveillance after a diagnosis has been made[7 ,44 ,49 ]. Studies originally showed that CgA correlated with tumor size and prognosis, though this is now considered controversial[41 ].

    Another traditional biomarker for GEP-NENs, especially in patients with carcinoid syndrome, is 5 -hydroxyindoleacetic acid (5 -HIAA), a product of serotonin metabolism[50 ,51 ]. Although it may be measured in the plasma, it is more commonly measured in the urine. It is helpful in serotonin-secreting tumors, which account for only 15 %-20 % of GEP-NENs[41 ]. Elevation of urinary 5 -HIAA has a sensitivity of 70 % and a specificity of 90 %-100 % for NENs in the presence of carcinoid syndrome[41 ,52 ].However, the sensitivity of this biomarker is as low as 35 % in the absence of carcinoid syndrome[41 ,53 ,54 ]. Similar to other monoanalyte biomarkers, urinary 5 -HIAA levels can be falsely elevated in many scenarios, including recent consumption of foods rich in serotonin, tryptophan, and dopamine, as well as malabsorptive diseases like celiac sprue and Whipple disease[51 ,53 ]. A study of 371 patients with NENs showed that urine 5 -HIAA level was not a useful prognosticator for overall survival[55 ]. Other specific hormone markers such as insulin, gastrin, glucagon, VIP, somatostatin, ACTH, and calcitonin are also available; however, these collectively only apply to < 2 % of GEP-NENs[7 ,41 ].

    In 2008 , Leja et al[56 ] analyzed serotonin-producing metastatic small intestinal NENs and identified six possible novel marker genes, including paraneoplastic antigen Ma2 . Cui et al[57 ] used ELISA to detect Ma2 autoantibodies in 124 patients with small intestinal NENs at different stages of the disease and showed a sensitivity that ranged from 46 %-50 % and a specificity of 98 % compared to the healthy patients. Their findings suggested that Ma2 may be a better biomarker than CgA.

    Angiogenic factors have also been suggested as potential biomarkers as GEP-NENs are highly vascularized tumors[58 ]. Angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2 ) and the receptor tyrosine kinase Tie-2 have gained the most attention as potential biomarkers out of the angiogenic factors[59 ]. Ang-2 binds to its receptor, Tie-2 , promoting endothelial cell survival and influencing vascular remodeling[60 ]. In 2009 , Srirajaskanthanet al[61 ] and Detjen et al[59 ] found that Ang-2 serum levels were increased in patients with NENs compared to healthy patients. In contrast, Melen-Muchaet al[58 ] compared multiple angiogenic factors,including Ang-2 and Tie-2 , and CgA serum levels in patients with NENs to those without and found that only Tie-2 and CgA were elevated in patients with NENs compared to controls. However, they found that Ang-2 was increased in the subgroup of patients with metastatic disease compared to those with localized disease. Figueroa-Vegaet al[60 ] also found that Ang-2 and Tie-2 Levels were elevated in patients with metastatic disease. Another key angiogenic factor is the vascular endothelial growth factor, which is largely studied for its prognostic role as a possible therapeutic target instead of diagnosing GEP-NENs[62 -65 ]. Overall, unlike the current monoanalytes that rely on secretory products,angiogenic factors reflect the tumorigenesis of NENs and represent a potential future category of biomarkers. Isidoriet al[66 ] have an ongoing clinical trial (NCT04464122 ) to evaluate how Tie-2 and other angiogenic factors change in GEP-NENs after treatment.

    Multianalytes

    Due to the limitations of monoanalyte analyses, multianalyte approaches have been studied over the last decade to improve the accuracy of biomarkers and correlate with tissue expression[41 ,44 ]. A panel of analytes, instead of a single biomarker as described above, is measured and interpreted to provide a more comprehensive picture of a tumor’s biology[41 ,42 ,44 ]. For example, disease-specific analytes can be evaluated alongside markers associated with cell proliferation to provide a diagnosis and predict tumor behavior[44 ].

    Neuroendocrine gene transcript assay (NETest) is the first neuroendocrine tumor liquid biopsy, using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to detect 51 transcriptomic signatures of NENs[35 ,44 ,67 -69 ]. These genes were identified to have significant differences in expression in patients with GEP-NENs and bronchopulmonary NENsvsthose without NENs[41 ,70 ]. After measuring RNA expression in whole blood, an algorithm calculates a risk score that ranges from 0 % to 100 %[45 ]. Current cutoffs are < 20 %normal, 21 % to 40 % stable/low risk disease, and 41 %-100 % progressive/high risk disease[41 ,45 ]. These cutoffs will likely be refined as more studies are performed. However, even with the current parameters, NETest has shown promising results with high sensitivity and specificity (> 95 % and > 90 %,respectively)[69 ].

    In 2014 , Modlin et al[44 ] compared NETest with the monoanlytes CgA, pancreastatin, and neurokinin A in 40 patients with grade 1 and grade 2 GEP-NETs and found that NETest was superior to the monoanalytes in sensitivity and specificity. The authors concluded that NETest could facilitate early detection of disease recurrence and predict therapy response[44 ]. In 2017 , Pavel et al[42 ] followed patients with GEP-NENs for a median of 4 years to compare NETest and CgA and found that NETest more accurately correlated with the clinical status and was able to identify those with progressive disease approximately one year before being detectable by imaging. In 2016 , Modlin et al[69 ,71 ] also found that the NETest risk score fell after tumor debulking, suggesting it can be used to identify residual disease after surgery[41 ]. A current clinical trial (NCT03012789 ) by Wren Laboratories investigates whether NETest accurately correlates with surgical excision, identifies residual tumor, and predicts early disease relapse[72 ].

    Although NETest is highly sensitive and has shown value in disease monitoring, studies on its use as a screening tool are less promising. Van Treijenet al[70 ] compared patients with diagnosed GEP-NENs to healthy patients and found that NETest was less specific than CgA (56 %-72 % vs 83 %, respectively).Al-Toubahet al[45 ] compared patients with metastatic GEP-NENs and bronchopulmonary NENs with a mixed group of healthy patients and patients with metastatic non-NEN gastrointestinal malignancies.Unlike the previous study, they found that NETest successfully ruled out 100 % of healthy patients, but specificity was only 67 % when compared to patients with non-NEN gastrointestinal malignancies[45 ].This is likely because NETest includes genes whose expression is associated with proliferation and metabolism which may be upregulated in non-NEN malignancies as well as nonspecific environments of stress and inflammation[70 ]. Additionally, studies have shown that NETest does not correlate with tumor grade[70 ].

    Overall, the sensitivity of NETest far exceeds that of other currently used biomarkers for GEP-NENs,while specificity has varied depending on the cohort[41 ,70 ]. Importantly, unlike current monoanalyte biomarkers, NETest is not affected by proton pump inhibitor use and diet[41 ]. Although it shows promise as a valuable biomarker for GEP-NENs, further studies are still warranted in nongastrointestinal NENs such as paragangliomas and malignancies with mixed epithelial or neuroendocrine phenotype, such as prostate cancer[43 ]. Wren Laboratories is conducting a clinical trial(NCT02270567 ) on patients with confirmed diagnoses of NENs to have a better overall understanding of NETest in clinical practice[73 ]. Another clinical trial (NCT02948946 ) by H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute to evaluate the NETest sensitivity and specificity in GEP-NENs and lung NENs recently concluded[74 ]. Currently, studies show that NETest has great promise in identifying early disease progression, assessing therapy response, and evaluating if the surgical tumor resection is complete[43 ]. NETest is currently available at select accredited laboratories in the United States and Europe[75 ].

    In addition to NETest, other multianalyte biomarkers are also being explored. MicroRNAs (miRNAs)are small non-coding RNAs that regulate gene expression at the post-transcriptional level and act as oncogenes or tumor suppressors[76 ]. They can be detected by PCR and have been investigated as a potential serum target. More than 100 miRNAs are differentially expressed in NENs[48 ,76 ]. About 10 %of these are nonspecific in terms of tumor location, such as miRNA-375 and miRNA-7 , while the remaining 90 % appear to be specific to the anatomic site[76 ]. For GEP-NENs, potential biomarker targets have been identified in the small intestine (miRNA-7 -75 -p, miRNA-182 , miRNA-183 , and miRNA-96 -5 p), stomach (miRNA-375 , miRNA-7 , miR-96 -5 p, and miRNA-222 ), and pancreas (miRNA-193 b, miRNA-144 /451 , miRNA-21 , miR-1290 , miRNA-103 , miRNA-107 , miRNA-155 , miRNA-204 , miR-328 , miRNA-642 , miRNA-3653 , miRNA-23 b, miRNA-137 , miRNA-196 a, and miRNA449 a)[76 ,77 ].Clinical applications of miRNAs have been challenging, and currently, there is no standardization of the process[41 ,78 ]. Existing studies have small sample sizes and inconsistent methodologies, making it difficult to draw conclusions[41 ,69 ].

    Another area of development in multianalyte analyses is next-generation sequencing (NGS) and other genetic analyses. These include studies on samples consisting of primary tumor tissue and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), the fraction of cell-free DNA that is released by dying tumor cells and can be detected in plasma for analysis[79 ,80 ]. Recent studies have been guided by the current understanding of genes implicated in GEP-NENs, includingMEN1, DAXX, ATRX, and mTOR pathway genes[31 ]. A 2017 study by Gleesonet al[81 ] used a 15 gene NGS panel to determine if any genes involved in commonly implicated pathways could be used as prognosticators in patients with pancreatic NENs. Only variants inTSC2, KRAS, and TP53were identified to have prognostic significance, and each of these variants was present in fewer than 10 % of samples examined[81 ]. Further, 40 % of tumors assessed were wild-type for all 15 genes assessed, and this set of patients did not demonstrate meaningful differences in tumor or clinical characteristics[81 ]. A 2018 study analyzed ctDNA in pancreatic NENs in 10 patients and showed a correlation with genetic characteristics of ctDNA and tumor tissue, suggesting a role for less invasive liquid biopsies in pancreatic NEN diagnosis and monitoring[82 ]. Zakka et al[83 ] performed a larger study in 2020 that further demonstrated the feasibility of NGS analysis of ctDNA in 320 patients with NENs, including those outside the gastrointestinal system. While their gene panel did not include implicated genes likeMEN1,ATRX, orDAXX, and they lacked data for clinical or histopathological correlation in many patients, the study further reinforced the promise and necessity of future studies on liquid biopsies, ctDNA, and NGS[83 ]. Another 2021 study on NENs of various origins identified actionable mutations in over 50 % of patients using NGS on liquid biopsies and formalin-fixed paraffinembedded tissue[84 ]. Studies to date on GEP-NEN ctDNA analysis through NGS and other methods are promising and offer proof-of-concept of feasibility, clinical applicability, and potential prognostication of disease progression and survival. However, larger-scale prospective studies correlating genetic,histopathologic, and clinical data are needed before the widespread use of these tests. Additionally, an increased understanding of molecular pathways underlying the development and progression of GEPNENs will refine genetic tests analyzing ctDNA and tumor tissue.

    Multianalyte analysis of neuroendocrine metabolites has also been explored as a diagnostic strategy for GEP-NENs. A 2021 study from Jiménez et al[85 ] used nuclear magnetic resonance to compare urine samples from patients with GEP-NENs and healthy controls and generated a model that could accurately discriminate between the two groups. The study suggests that nuclear magnetic resonance could be a useful clinical tool for diagnosing GEP-NENs[85 ]. They identified several metabolites that were either increased or decreased in GEP-NENs, including kynurenine, hippurate, and phenylacetylglutamine[85 ]. These novel biomarkers represent areas of future study and suggest that a multianalyte test involving multiple metabolites that are altered in GEP-NENs could be more effective than monoanalyte tests.

    lMAGlNG MODALlTlES

    Anatomic imaging

    Conventional cross-sectional imaging such as computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are critical diagnostic tools in localizing, characterizing, and staging GEP-NENs[9 ,86 ].MRI is used less commonly than CT due to increased cost, acquisition time, and potential for motion artifact[87 ]. Multiphasic CT with intravenous contrast is essential to increase diagnostic yield[87 ]. NENs are generally hypervascular and show enhancement in the late arterial phase, and NEN metastases are also hypervascular and best visualized in the arterial phase[87 ]. For detection of metastases to the liver,MRI is more sensitive than CT[88 ,89 ]. A 2003 study of different MRI techniques suggested that hepatic arterial phase and fast spin-echo T2 weighted images were most sensitive for hepatic metastases of NENs, further emphasizing the importance of multiphase imaging[89 ].

    Recent advances in conventional cross-sectional imaging of GEP-NENs include studies assessing hepatic metastases of GEP-NENs with contrast-enhanced MRI utilizing hepatocellular phase-contrast agents[90 ]. The most studied agent is gadoxetate disodium, a gadolinium-based contrast with hepatobiliary excretion[91 ]. A 2018 study from Tirumani et al[92 ] compared the ability of 6 MRI phases after gadoxetate disodium injection to assess hepatic metastases of GEP-NENs and found that the hepatocellular phase was superior to all other phases examined. Another study demonstrated that combining diffusion-weighted and hepatobiliary phases of gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI in patients with suspected neuroendocrine liver metastases had the best diagnostic yield, with a sensitivity of 86 % and a specificity of 94 %, compared to other combinations of contrast-enhanced phases[93 ]. These studies highlight an essential role for contrast-enhanced MRI with gadoxetate disodium or other liver-targeted contrast agents in the assessment of GEP-NENs with potential liver metastases and long-term surveillance of disease with known liver involvement.

    Functional imaging

    Somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS) has been used since the 1990 s to assess GEP-NENs. Studies from 1995 and 1996 showed that 111 In-pentetreotide, a radiolabeled somatostatin analog, could safely and effectively detect GEP-NENs more effectively than conventional imaging[94 ,95 ]. A 2001 study examined68 Ga-DOTATOC compared to older SRS techniques and found a higher diagnostic yield by 30 %[96 ]. More tracers for GEP-NENs have been developed over the years, including Ga-DOTANOC[68 ]and Ga-DOTATATE[97 -99 ]. Two 2016 studies compared 111 in-pentetreotide and 68 Ga-DOTATATE imaging for identification of primary tumor and metastatic lesions of NENs[98 ,100 ]. Both studies showed that68 Ga-DOTATATE had identified more lesions than 111 In-pentetreotide, and altered management in 33 %-36 % of patients with GEP-NENs[98 ,100 ]. An established principle of functional imaging for GEP-NENs is the distinction in imaging characteristics between low-grade NENsvshighgrade NENs and NECs. Low-grade NENs express high levels of somatostatin receptors and are less metabolically active, and thus,68 Ga-DOTATATE and other somatostatin analogs are superior to 18 Ffluorodeoxyglucose (18 F-FDG) as a tracer for functional imaging of grade 1 and 2 NENs[87 ,101 ,102 ].High-grade NENs and NECs tend to have higher rates of glucose metabolism and lower expression of somatostatin receptors. As a result,18 F-FDG is superior to somatostatin analogs for functional imaging of high-grade NENs[103 ,104 ].

    Recent studies have made advances in comparing head-to-head imaging modalities and tracers to determine which are optimal for functional imaging of GEP-NENs. A 2017 study compared positron emission tomography (PET)/CT and PET/MRI using68 Ga-DOTATOC and found that both imaging modalities performed comparably in identifying abdominal primary tumors and yield of lymph node metastases[105 ,106 ]. Sawicki et al[105 ] found that PET/CT performed better in identifying bone lesions,but PET/MRI with68 Ga-DOTATOC outperformed PET/CT in identifying hepatic lesions. However, the further identification of metastases did not alter the management of patients in this study, as most already had advanced stages of the disease[105 ]. Given the prevalence of liver metastases in GEP-NENs,these data suggest that there may be a valuable role for PET/MRI over or in conjunction with PET/CT in the diagnosis and staging of GEP-NENs[107 ]. A similar 2021 study of 11 patients with GEP-NENs prospectively compared PET/MRI with68 Ga-DOTATOC and PET/CT with 68 Ga-DOTATOC[88 ]. For detection of all lesions, PET/MRI with68 Ga-DOTATOC outperformed PET/CT with 68 Ga-DOTATOC[88 ]. Consistent with the 2017 study, 68 Ga-DOTATOC PET/MRI was superior to 68 Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT in detecting liver metastases[88 ]. These studies suggest that PET/MRI with 68 Ga-DOTATOC may be superior to PET/CT in guiding the management of GEP-NENs.

    Other recent studies have examined specific clinical scenarios when functional imaging is likely to influence the clinical management of patients with GEP-NENs. A 2017 study of 40 patients with metastatic NENs who had undergone CT or MRI but still had an unknown primary tumor location showed that68 Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT could effectively localize the primary tumor to facilitate treatment[108 ]. A meta-analysis of studies on 68 Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT identified that this imaging modality changed management when the patient had a known NEN around half of the time[109 ]. By contrast, in patients with symptoms consistent with a NEN and elevated biomarkers but no proven NEN, there was only a 13 % yield[109 ]. Notably, four studies included in this meta-analysis showed a 44 % yield for detection of primary tumor site in patients with metastatic disease[109 ].

    Finally, advances in the application of automation and artificial intelligence could improve diagnostic consistency and accuracy of functional imaging for GEP-NENs. This area has been more extensively studied for18 F-FDG PET/CT[110 ,111 ]. A retrospective 2021 study retrospectively demonstrated that deep learning could facilitate the automation of detection of hepatic metastases, though future studies with larger sample sizes are required for further validation[112 ]. Continued optimization of imaging techniques and development of more selective tracers will continue to improve diagnostic yield and ability of functional imaging to guide the management of GEP-NENs effectively.

    Ultrasound

    Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has been used for decades to assess gastrointestinal tract tumors,including GEP-NENs[113 ,114 ]. This technique combines endoscopy with ultrasound to image structures and can diagnose, stage, and sample malignancies[115 ]. EUS is especially useful for gastric, duodenal,pancreatic, and rectal NENs[116 ,117 ]. EUS is more sensitive than other modalities such as CT or MRI for pancreatic NENs and is the most sensitive method for detection of rectal NENs[118 -122 ]. It provides additional information on the depth of invasion and can assess local lymph node involvement. Further advantages of EUS include the ability to perform a fine needle aspiration (FNA) to obtain tissue for cytologic and molecular analysis and to place a radiofrequency ablation probe for poor surgical candidates[114 ,116 ,123 ]. Cytologic analysis of pancreatic NENs facilitated by EUS-FNA including Ki-67 index correlates with tumor grade confirmed after resection, influences management, and predicts survival, especially when sampling is sufficient[124 ,125 ]. Disadvantages include operator dependence and limited assessment beyond the local area compared to broader imaging techniques[116 ,117 ].

    Recent updates on EUS for the diagnosis of GEP-NENs include technical advances in ultrasonography and new histologic and molecular analyses of tissue obtained using EUS. A recent 2021 study compared the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA and EUS with fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) and found that EUS-FNB may be superior to EUS-FNA for pancreatic NENs, including a better correlation of Ki-67 proliferation index between EUS-FNB and the surgical specimen[126 ]. However, there was no difference in the accuracy of grade estimation between EUS-FNB and EUS-FNA[118 ].

    Immunocytochemical analysis can be performed on EUS-FNA samples for confirmation of the diagnosis of pancreatic NEN. A recent study immunocytochemically analyzed INSM1 expression in 14 EUS-FNA samples of pancreatic NENs and 15 pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDACs)[127 ]. All pancreatic NENs contained cells expressing INSM1 , and INSM1 was expressed at a higher rate in pancreatic NEN samples than PDAC samples[127 ]. Advances in molecular analysis of EUS-FNA samples can also improve diagnostic accuracy for pancreatic lesions. A 2020 study used digital droplet PCR to detectKRASmutations in EUS-FNA samples from PDAC, pancreatic NENs, and chronic pancreatitis. Combining molecular and cytologic analyses improved diagnostic accuracy from 74 % with cytology alone to 91 %[128 ]. Further technical advancement and refinement of molecular and cytologic analyses will continue to improve the efficacy of EUS and EUS-FNA.

    CONCLUSlON

    There are many new developments in the pathologic, molecular, and imaging diagnosis of GEP-NENs.The WHO classification of GEP-NENs has changed over the years, with the most recent significant update being the distinction between high-grade NETs and NECs. Due to the heterogeneity of GEPNENs, a multimodal approach to diagnosis and disease surveillance is necessary. A better understanding of the molecular biology of GEP-NENs has allowed for the distinction between highgrade NETs and NECs, the introduction of exciting new biomarker tests such as the NETest, and continued advances toward eventual validation and implementation of other multianalyte tests assessing biomarkers such as miRNA and ctDNA. Recent advances in imaging include the validation of improved PET tracers and determination of which imaging modalities are optimal for anatomic and functional imaging of primary GEP-NENs and metastases, especially to the liver. Updates to EUS and EUS-FNA include technological advances and improved molecular and cytological analysis of tissue obtained using EUS.

    FOOTNOTES

    Author contributions:Fang JM drafted the manuscript and prepared the figures and tables; Li J drafted the manuscript and provided input in the writing; Shi J formulated the idea, designed the outline, and edited the manuscript.

    Supported bythe National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health, No. K08 CA234222 (JS).

    Conflict-of-interest statement:Dr. Shi reports grants from NIH/NCI, during the conduct of the study.

    Open-Access:This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BYNC 4 .0 ) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is noncommercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4 .0 /

    Country/Territory of origin:United States

    ORClD number:Jiayun M Fang 0000 -0001 -9517 -297 X; Jay Li 0000 -0002 -8146 -4450 ; Jiaqi Shi 0000 -0003 -4893 -1587 .

    Corresponding Author's Membership in Professional Societies:United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, 28212 ;American Association for Cancer Research (AACR), 76093 ; Pancreatobiliary Pathology Society; Rodger C. Haggitt Gastrointestinal Pathology Society.

    S-Editor:Zhang H

    L-Editor:A

    P-Editor:Zhang H

    黑人巨大精品欧美一区二区mp4| 成人午夜高清在线视频| 国产成人欧美在线观看| 精品久久久久久久久久免费视频| 老熟妇乱子伦视频在线观看| 精品久久久久久,| videosex国产| 亚洲人与动物交配视频| 欧美一级a爱片免费观看看 | 国产精品九九99| 色播亚洲综合网| 亚洲成人久久爱视频| 日本三级黄在线观看| 老司机深夜福利视频在线观看| 好男人电影高清在线观看| 免费在线观看完整版高清| 中亚洲国语对白在线视频| 欧美一级毛片孕妇| 亚洲成av人片在线播放无| 黄色 视频免费看| 国产精品,欧美在线| 人成视频在线观看免费观看| 精品欧美一区二区三区在线| 欧美 亚洲 国产 日韩一| 波多野结衣高清无吗| 99精品欧美一区二区三区四区| 日本 欧美在线| 日本撒尿小便嘘嘘汇集6| 可以免费在线观看a视频的电影网站| 婷婷丁香在线五月| 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 久9热在线精品视频| 久久久精品国产亚洲av高清涩受| aaaaa片日本免费| 99久久综合精品五月天人人| 脱女人内裤的视频| 好看av亚洲va欧美ⅴa在| 成人国产综合亚洲| 久久香蕉精品热| 999久久久国产精品视频| 亚洲国产精品sss在线观看| 亚洲片人在线观看| 变态另类丝袜制服| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区黑人| 午夜精品在线福利| 色综合欧美亚洲国产小说| 国产熟女xx| 波多野结衣高清无吗| 亚洲av日韩精品久久久久久密| 欧美日韩一级在线毛片| 丁香六月欧美| 男人舔奶头视频| 国产亚洲欧美在线一区二区| 无人区码免费观看不卡| 久久久久久久久中文| 午夜两性在线视频| 久久国产精品影院| 午夜福利成人在线免费观看| 可以免费在线观看a视频的电影网站| 熟女少妇亚洲综合色aaa.| 中文字幕久久专区| 超碰成人久久| 欧美一区二区精品小视频在线| 国产亚洲精品第一综合不卡| 少妇人妻一区二区三区视频| 99精品欧美一区二区三区四区| videosex国产| 一级片免费观看大全| bbb黄色大片| 欧美极品一区二区三区四区| 国产精品电影一区二区三区| 国内精品一区二区在线观看| 老熟妇仑乱视频hdxx| 国产av一区二区精品久久| 欧美一区二区国产精品久久精品 | 18禁美女被吸乳视频| 男人的好看免费观看在线视频 | 999久久久精品免费观看国产| 97碰自拍视频| 亚洲国产看品久久| 十八禁网站免费在线| 极品教师在线免费播放| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影| 精品电影一区二区在线| 此物有八面人人有两片| 久久久国产成人精品二区| 久久久久久亚洲精品国产蜜桃av| 国产av一区在线观看免费| 成人精品一区二区免费| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看 | 国产精品久久视频播放| bbb黄色大片| 日本一本二区三区精品| 99国产精品一区二区三区| 欧美成人午夜精品| 久久99热这里只有精品18| 久久天躁狠狠躁夜夜2o2o| 伦理电影免费视频| 麻豆久久精品国产亚洲av| 国产精品九九99| 很黄的视频免费| 亚洲一区二区三区不卡视频| 在线观看一区二区三区| 久久精品91无色码中文字幕| 91老司机精品| 久久久久久九九精品二区国产 | 亚洲欧美精品综合一区二区三区| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 三级毛片av免费| 欧美乱码精品一区二区三区| 男女下面进入的视频免费午夜| 男女视频在线观看网站免费 | 欧美性猛交黑人性爽| 国产视频内射| 国产精品国产高清国产av| 免费av毛片视频| 又大又爽又粗| 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频| 在线视频色国产色| 啪啪无遮挡十八禁网站| 夜夜躁狠狠躁天天躁| 日本免费一区二区三区高清不卡| 亚洲九九香蕉| 国产精品 欧美亚洲| 亚洲电影在线观看av| АⅤ资源中文在线天堂| 亚洲免费av在线视频| 色老头精品视频在线观看| 香蕉av资源在线| 欧美成狂野欧美在线观看| 99国产精品99久久久久| 国产真人三级小视频在线观看| 麻豆av在线久日| 两个人看的免费小视频| 午夜免费成人在线视频| 色播亚洲综合网| xxx96com| 2021天堂中文幕一二区在线观| av视频在线观看入口| 精品久久久久久久久久久久久| 精品国产超薄肉色丝袜足j| 国产一区二区在线av高清观看| 精品一区二区三区四区五区乱码| 欧美日韩精品网址| 亚洲精品美女久久av网站| 亚洲欧美激情综合另类| 国产激情欧美一区二区| 搞女人的毛片| 国产aⅴ精品一区二区三区波| 久久热在线av| 国产亚洲精品av在线| 女同久久另类99精品国产91| 欧美日本亚洲视频在线播放| 九色成人免费人妻av| 这个男人来自地球电影免费观看| 久久久久国产一级毛片高清牌| 久久 成人 亚洲| 久久香蕉精品热| 亚洲美女视频黄频| 性色av乱码一区二区三区2| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站| 夜夜躁狠狠躁天天躁| 小说图片视频综合网站| 五月伊人婷婷丁香| 我要搜黄色片| 三级毛片av免费| 亚洲国产精品合色在线| 亚洲精品美女久久久久99蜜臀| 夜夜夜夜夜久久久久| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看 | 欧美另类亚洲清纯唯美| 三级国产精品欧美在线观看 | 99热6这里只有精品| 亚洲午夜理论影院| 国产真人三级小视频在线观看| 日韩高清综合在线| 好看av亚洲va欧美ⅴa在| 少妇被粗大的猛进出69影院| 99在线视频只有这里精品首页| 国产成人精品久久二区二区免费| 国产成人系列免费观看| 男人的好看免费观看在线视频 | 久久久国产精品麻豆| 又爽又黄无遮挡网站| 久热爱精品视频在线9| 国产一区二区激情短视频| aaaaa片日本免费| 白带黄色成豆腐渣| av有码第一页| 校园春色视频在线观看| 国产爱豆传媒在线观看 | 黄色丝袜av网址大全| 日本免费一区二区三区高清不卡| 大型av网站在线播放| 91老司机精品| 色噜噜av男人的天堂激情| 给我免费播放毛片高清在线观看| 看黄色毛片网站| 日韩精品免费视频一区二区三区| av福利片在线| 亚洲色图av天堂| 亚洲熟妇熟女久久| 成人亚洲精品av一区二区| 不卡一级毛片| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| 亚洲人成网站高清观看| 亚洲成人中文字幕在线播放| 久9热在线精品视频| 在线十欧美十亚洲十日本专区| 国产私拍福利视频在线观看| 首页视频小说图片口味搜索| 国产一级毛片七仙女欲春2| 91av网站免费观看| 人妻丰满熟妇av一区二区三区| 日本五十路高清| 麻豆av在线久日| 亚洲av片天天在线观看| 免费电影在线观看免费观看| 成人国语在线视频| 久久香蕉精品热| 变态另类成人亚洲欧美熟女| 男女床上黄色一级片免费看| 中出人妻视频一区二区| 欧美日韩黄片免| 51午夜福利影视在线观看| 亚洲av成人精品一区久久| 国产精品影院久久| 国产亚洲av嫩草精品影院| 久久 成人 亚洲| 国产免费av片在线观看野外av| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站| 亚洲成人免费电影在线观看| 香蕉丝袜av| 国产av一区在线观看免费| 女人高潮潮喷娇喘18禁视频| 欧美人与性动交α欧美精品济南到| 少妇熟女aⅴ在线视频| 久久精品影院6| 久久草成人影院| ponron亚洲| 日韩av在线大香蕉| 9191精品国产免费久久| 天堂动漫精品| 国产高清videossex| 午夜免费成人在线视频| 一级作爱视频免费观看| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av| 亚洲av电影在线进入| 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3| 午夜影院日韩av| 真人一进一出gif抽搐免费| 欧美精品啪啪一区二区三区| 成在线人永久免费视频| 看免费av毛片| 在线免费观看的www视频| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9| 我的老师免费观看完整版| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| 国产成人精品无人区| 一区二区三区国产精品乱码| 日本精品一区二区三区蜜桃| 美女扒开内裤让男人捅视频| 国产三级在线视频| bbb黄色大片| 亚洲成人免费电影在线观看| 日本a在线网址| 亚洲国产精品久久男人天堂| 欧美乱码精品一区二区三区| 国产片内射在线| 女同久久另类99精品国产91| 一进一出好大好爽视频| 男女之事视频高清在线观看| 少妇的丰满在线观看| 亚洲自偷自拍图片 自拍| 99re在线观看精品视频| 国产精品久久久久久人妻精品电影| 丰满人妻熟妇乱又伦精品不卡| 久久精品91蜜桃| 久久中文看片网| 高清毛片免费观看视频网站| 男女那种视频在线观看| 在线观看66精品国产| АⅤ资源中文在线天堂| 欧美日韩一级在线毛片| 黑人操中国人逼视频| 搡老岳熟女国产| 欧美黑人巨大hd| 9191精品国产免费久久| 黄色视频不卡| 亚洲人成伊人成综合网2020| 亚洲av成人精品一区久久| 女警被强在线播放| 在线播放国产精品三级| 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡| 男人舔女人下体高潮全视频| 男女视频在线观看网站免费 | 老熟妇仑乱视频hdxx| 久久中文看片网| 久99久视频精品免费| 欧美日本视频| 在线观看一区二区三区| www.www免费av| 丁香六月欧美| 91字幕亚洲| 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 久久香蕉激情| 日本在线视频免费播放| 久久 成人 亚洲| 在线视频色国产色| 两人在一起打扑克的视频| 亚洲成人久久性| 久久久久九九精品影院| 久热爱精品视频在线9| 男女之事视频高清在线观看| 欧美乱码精品一区二区三区| 午夜福利免费观看在线| 色综合婷婷激情| 日韩三级视频一区二区三区| 窝窝影院91人妻| 天堂动漫精品| 国产精品一区二区免费欧美| 国产私拍福利视频在线观看| 成人18禁高潮啪啪吃奶动态图| 国产不卡一卡二| 成年免费大片在线观看| 免费看a级黄色片| 久久久精品国产亚洲av高清涩受| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠躁躁| 1024手机看黄色片| 国产精品1区2区在线观看.| а√天堂www在线а√下载| 一本综合久久免费| 黄频高清免费视频| 亚洲va日本ⅴa欧美va伊人久久| 国产精品av久久久久免费| 成人精品一区二区免费| 精品久久久久久久毛片微露脸| 一级毛片精品| 色综合站精品国产| 亚洲午夜理论影院| 免费看美女性在线毛片视频| 免费在线观看视频国产中文字幕亚洲| 国产亚洲精品久久久久5区| 色综合婷婷激情| 色综合站精品国产| 男男h啪啪无遮挡| 国产黄a三级三级三级人| 两个人看的免费小视频| 亚洲精品美女久久久久99蜜臀| 国产av一区在线观看免费| 国产高清激情床上av| 美女扒开内裤让男人捅视频| 国产av一区二区精品久久| 欧洲精品卡2卡3卡4卡5卡区| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影| svipshipincom国产片| 国产主播在线观看一区二区| 99热这里只有精品一区 | 国产精品一及| 国产成人av激情在线播放| 亚洲av美国av| 99精品在免费线老司机午夜| 久久久国产精品麻豆| 一区二区三区国产精品乱码| 欧美性猛交╳xxx乱大交人| 国产亚洲精品综合一区在线观看 | 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看 | 悠悠久久av| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说| 国产亚洲精品一区二区www| 老司机深夜福利视频在线观看| 午夜福利高清视频| 欧美日韩亚洲综合一区二区三区_| 级片在线观看| 欧美一区二区精品小视频在线| 丝袜美腿诱惑在线| 午夜成年电影在线免费观看| 亚洲人成电影免费在线| 国产亚洲av高清不卡| a在线观看视频网站| 亚洲人成网站在线播放欧美日韩| 亚洲成av人片免费观看| 日韩欧美 国产精品| 久久久国产成人免费| 一区二区三区高清视频在线| 亚洲成人久久爱视频| 大型黄色视频在线免费观看| 久久香蕉激情| 神马国产精品三级电影在线观看 | 午夜视频精品福利| 国内精品久久久久久久电影| 亚洲欧美日韩无卡精品| 亚洲国产中文字幕在线视频| 亚洲成人国产一区在线观看| 啦啦啦韩国在线观看视频| 国产三级黄色录像| 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看 | 国产午夜精品久久久久久| 国产精品野战在线观看| 99国产综合亚洲精品| 欧美日韩国产亚洲二区| 久久精品国产亚洲av高清一级| 国产精品一区二区三区四区免费观看 | 国产午夜精品论理片| 免费观看人在逋| 免费在线观看视频国产中文字幕亚洲| 亚洲黑人精品在线| 小说图片视频综合网站| 久久久国产成人免费| 91字幕亚洲| 97超级碰碰碰精品色视频在线观看| 免费看a级黄色片| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9| 国产真人三级小视频在线观看| 99热这里只有精品一区 | 久久精品综合一区二区三区| 成人永久免费在线观看视频| 一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看 | 香蕉久久夜色| 国产精品久久久久久人妻精品电影| 亚洲专区国产一区二区| 欧美成狂野欧美在线观看| 国产精品综合久久久久久久免费| 在线看三级毛片| 美女免费视频网站| 国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 亚洲熟妇熟女久久| 国产伦在线观看视频一区| 一夜夜www| 亚洲一区中文字幕在线| 丝袜人妻中文字幕| 久久久久久九九精品二区国产 | 青草久久国产| 亚洲精品中文字幕在线视频| 老司机午夜十八禁免费视频| 中文字幕人成人乱码亚洲影| 亚洲欧洲精品一区二区精品久久久| 他把我摸到了高潮在线观看| 欧美最黄视频在线播放免费| 一个人免费在线观看的高清视频| 亚洲国产精品合色在线| 亚洲五月婷婷丁香| 国产精品久久久久久亚洲av鲁大| 免费看日本二区| 久久婷婷人人爽人人干人人爱| 久久国产精品人妻蜜桃| 国产一区二区激情短视频| 女人爽到高潮嗷嗷叫在线视频| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91| 久久国产精品影院| 在线观看免费午夜福利视频| 欧美av亚洲av综合av国产av| 欧美色欧美亚洲另类二区| 国产高清视频在线播放一区| 精华霜和精华液先用哪个| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| 精品高清国产在线一区| 亚洲成人国产一区在线观看| 91麻豆av在线| 亚洲成人久久性| 中国美女看黄片| 99久久99久久久精品蜜桃| 亚洲精品色激情综合| 国产片内射在线| 国产男靠女视频免费网站| 日韩高清综合在线| 欧美激情久久久久久爽电影| 黄色视频,在线免费观看| 国产激情偷乱视频一区二区| 亚洲精品色激情综合| www.精华液| 啦啦啦免费观看视频1| 两人在一起打扑克的视频| 999精品在线视频| 中亚洲国语对白在线视频| 国产免费男女视频| 视频区欧美日本亚洲| 国产探花在线观看一区二区| 听说在线观看完整版免费高清| 免费无遮挡裸体视频| 后天国语完整版免费观看| 久久欧美精品欧美久久欧美| 欧美极品一区二区三区四区| 十八禁网站免费在线| 中文资源天堂在线| av超薄肉色丝袜交足视频| 亚洲一区二区三区色噜噜| 很黄的视频免费| 亚洲美女视频黄频| 丁香六月欧美| 69av精品久久久久久| 妹子高潮喷水视频| 久久久久久亚洲精品国产蜜桃av| 午夜免费观看网址| 一区二区三区国产精品乱码| 一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看 | 高潮久久久久久久久久久不卡| 最近视频中文字幕2019在线8| 国产黄片美女视频| 免费在线观看黄色视频的| 美女免费视频网站| 午夜精品一区二区三区免费看| 丝袜美腿诱惑在线| 国产精品久久久久久久电影 | 好男人在线观看高清免费视频| 男女午夜视频在线观看| 亚洲欧洲精品一区二区精品久久久| 久久精品综合一区二区三区| 午夜激情av网站| 欧美日韩一级在线毛片| 亚洲国产看品久久| svipshipincom国产片| 免费看a级黄色片| 天堂动漫精品| 精品久久久久久久久久久久久| 国产精品av视频在线免费观看| 亚洲国产精品久久男人天堂| 18禁黄网站禁片免费观看直播| 亚洲欧美精品综合久久99| avwww免费| 国产片内射在线| 亚洲,欧美精品.| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看| 亚洲精品色激情综合| 亚洲欧美日韩高清在线视频| 日本精品一区二区三区蜜桃| 亚洲精品av麻豆狂野| 亚洲无线在线观看| 在线观看舔阴道视频| 黄色视频,在线免费观看| 一级毛片高清免费大全| 99在线人妻在线中文字幕| 国产精品电影一区二区三区| 女生性感内裤真人,穿戴方法视频| 国产1区2区3区精品| 久久香蕉国产精品| 日韩欧美在线乱码| 国产亚洲欧美在线一区二区| 日韩欧美在线乱码| 黄色视频,在线免费观看| 超碰成人久久| a级毛片在线看网站| 午夜两性在线视频| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看| 激情在线观看视频在线高清| 亚洲黑人精品在线| 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡| 久久精品91无色码中文字幕| 精品电影一区二区在线| 日本在线视频免费播放| 一个人免费在线观看的高清视频| 精品不卡国产一区二区三区| 亚洲欧美激情综合另类| 精品乱码久久久久久99久播| 熟妇人妻久久中文字幕3abv| 午夜精品在线福利| 午夜福利欧美成人| 久久 成人 亚洲| 中亚洲国语对白在线视频| 国产精品久久久久久亚洲av鲁大| 午夜久久久久精精品| 精品国产乱码久久久久久男人| 性欧美人与动物交配| 岛国视频午夜一区免费看| 亚洲va日本ⅴa欧美va伊人久久| 久9热在线精品视频| 午夜a级毛片| 色综合婷婷激情| a在线观看视频网站| 日韩欧美精品v在线| 免费观看精品视频网站| 男女视频在线观看网站免费 | 真人一进一出gif抽搐免费| 国产一区二区在线观看日韩 | 这个男人来自地球电影免费观看| 欧美日韩黄片免| 三级毛片av免费| 国产成人系列免费观看| 蜜桃久久精品国产亚洲av| 免费av毛片视频| 一级毛片女人18水好多| 亚洲人成77777在线视频| 超碰成人久久| 久久久久国内视频| 亚洲成人久久性| 亚洲免费av在线视频| 日韩精品免费视频一区二区三区| 国产在线精品亚洲第一网站| 久久精品综合一区二区三区| 91在线观看av| 国产精品 国内视频| 99久久久亚洲精品蜜臀av| 亚洲成a人片在线一区二区| 啦啦啦免费观看视频1| 久久久久精品国产欧美久久久| 老汉色av国产亚洲站长工具| 99久久99久久久精品蜜桃| 欧美zozozo另类| 日本成人三级电影网站| 国产熟女午夜一区二区三区| 无遮挡黄片免费观看| 中文在线观看免费www的网站 | 脱女人内裤的视频| 亚洲精品粉嫩美女一区| 色综合婷婷激情| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91| 亚洲中文字幕日韩| 成人av在线播放网站| 亚洲欧美日韩无卡精品| 亚洲欧洲精品一区二区精品久久久| 国产午夜精品久久久久久| 欧美日韩国产亚洲二区| 久久精品91无色码中文字幕| 日本免费一区二区三区高清不卡|