1. NET Registry in Greece Dr Kalliopi Pazaitou-Panayiotou, MD, PhD Departement of Endocrinology-Endocrine Oncology Theagenion Cancer Hospital Thessaloniki, Greece

2. NET Registry  The Neuroendocrine Tumor Registry was generated by specialists involved in the diagnosis and treatment of NET patients  The team included medical oncologists, endocrinologists and gastroenterologists working in academic and non academic tertiary hospitals with an established experience in the management of NET patients.

3. NET Registry  The registry was sponsored by IPSEN EPE, Greece  IPSEN had no influence on the setup of the database, data acquisition or data analysis and had no access to raw data  The design of the study was descriptive, multicenter, observational, prospective, open- ended, non interventional, surveillance registry

4. NET Registry  A dedicated database software, compliant with NIH criteria (TMS, Athens, Greece) was built with contribution by all authors during three specifically dedicated days  The items to be included were decided upon by all different specialists experienced in the care of patients with NET

5. NET Registry  This prospective survey was conducted in 8 Greek referral centers and recruitment of NET patients was started in November 2010

6. NET Registry  The feasibility and utility of the database was tested in a pre-test platform and necessary modifications were performed  The resulting database consisted of data fields divided in 18 sections including demographics, symptoms, tumor characteristics, diagnostic procedures, treatments modalities and outcome

7. NET Registry  Possible answers were either split into “yes” or “no” or selected from a drop-down menu  All physicians were trained and were responsible for the introduction of the studied features in the registry

8. WHO 2010 classification  Histological classification applied was the WHO 2010 classification staging was assessed according to the 7 th AJCC Staging system

9. NET Registry  All patients were entered in the database with their initials, date of birth and date of histopathology diagnosis  In the database inserted parameters included also details on the diagnostic procedures and therapies applied

10. NET Registry  data were specifically checked to avoid double insertions from different centers and in that case data were merged

11. NET Registry  One trained study monitor visited each center, reviewed the patients’ medical files provided by the institution and assessed the quality of data insertion to the database