Project description:ObjectiveWe assessed the changes that have resulted from the latest breast cancer staging guidelines and the potential impact on prognosis.BackgroundContemporary data suggest that combining anatomic staging and tumor biology yields a predictive synergy for determining breast cancer prognosis. This forms the basis for the American Joint Committee on Cancer's (AJCC) Staging Manual, 8th edition. We assessed the changes that have resulted from the new staging guidelines and the potential impact on prognosis.MethodsWomen with stages I to III breast cancer from 2010 to 2014 in the National Cancer Data Base were pathologically staged according to the 7th and 8th editions of the AJCC Staging Manual. Patient characteristics and restaging outcomes were summarized. Unadjusted overall survival (OS) was estimated, and differences were assessed. Cox proportional-hazards models were utilized to estimate the adjusted association of stage with OS.ResultsAfter restaging the 493,854 women identified, 6.8% were upstaged and 29.7% were downstaged. The stage changes varied by tumor histology, receptor status, tumor grade, and Oncotype DX scores (all P < 0.0001). Applying the 8th edition criteria yielded an incremental reduction in survival for each increase in stage, which was not consistently seen in the 7th edition. In a subgroup analysis based on hormone receptor (HR) status, those with stages II and III, and HR- disease had a worse OS than those with HR+ disease.ConclusionsApplying the 8th edition staging criteria resulted in a stage change for >35% of patients diagnosed with invasive breast cancer and refined OS estimates. Overall, the transition to the 8th edition is expected to better drive clinical care, treatment recommendations, and future research.
Project description:BACKGROUND:We retrospectively compared the prognostic value between the AJCC 8th edition anatomic (AS) and prognostic staging (PS) system for triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) in a cohort from two involved institutions and a large population database. METHODS:Clinicopathological data of TNBCs were identified in two involved institutions (SYSUCC-PWH cohort). Data from SEER database during 2010-2015 was also accessed. We restaged all cases into AS and PS group according to the AJCC 8th staging system. RESULTS:A total of 611 and 31,941 TNBCs were identified in two cohorts, with a median follow-up of 53.5 and 27 months respectively. PS upstaged 46.1% of patients in SYSUCC-PWH cohort, and 62.4% in SEER cohort. No significant difference was observed in C index between AS and PS models for disease-specific survival (DSS), progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) in either cohort. χ2 statistic and Hazard Ratio for PFS, DSS and OS showed better discrimination between IA and IB, IIB and IIIA, IIIA and IIIB in AS model than PS model. Besides, patients with IIIC unchanged stage showed worse PFS compared to those with AS IIIA or IIIB upstaged to PS IIIC in both cohorts(p = 0.049, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Our findings demonstrated that prognostic staging system did not provide better discriminatory ability in predicting TNBCs prognosis than anatomic staging system.
Project description:Background:Preoperative staging of pancreatic cancer determines the choice of treatment. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) plays an important role in preoperative staging of pancreatic cancer. The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM staging system was revised to its 8th version in 2016, there has been no report correlating the 8th edition of the AJCC TNM staging with preoperative MRI examinations and pathological findings. The purpose of our study is to determine the staging accuracy and evaluate the resectability by using MRI about pancreatic cancer compared with intraoperative or pathological findings according to the 8th edition of the AJCC TNM staging system. Methods:One hundred thirty-two patients with a pathological diagnosis of pancreatic cancer who underwent preoperative MRI were identified. The clinical data, MRI findings and pathological findings were analyzed. Preoperative MRI staging and resectability evaluation were compared with pathological findings. The accuracy of MRI for preoperative T and N staging was evaluated, and the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of MRI in evaluating the resectability were assessed. All the staging and resectability assessments were according to the 8th edition of the AJCC TNM staging system. Results:Analysis showed that the accuracy of MRI for evaluation of the T and N stages was 82.6% (109/132) and 74.2% (98/132), respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of MRI in assessing the resectability were 94.2% and 71.4%, respectively. Integrating the 8th edition of the AJCC TNM stage, no significant differences were identified between the preoperative MRI and pathological results for the staging of pancreatic cancer (P=0.805). Conclusions:MRI is highly accurate for T staging and moderately accurate for N staging. MRI provides important preoperative evaluation of the stage and resectability of pancreatic cancer based on the 8th edition of the AJCC TNM staging system.
Project description:BackgroundThe 8th edition UICC/AJCC TNM8 (Tumour, Nodes, Metastasis) melanoma staging system introduced several modifications from the 7th edition (TNM7), resulting in changes in survival and subgroup composition. We set out to address the limited validation of TNM8 (stages I-IV) in large population-based datasets.MethodsThis retrospective cohort-study included 6,414 patients from the population-based Ontario Cancer Registry diagnosed with cutaneous melanoma between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2012. Kaplan-Meier curves estimated the melanoma-specific survival (MSS) and overall survival (OS). Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios for MSS and OS across stage groups. The Schemper-Henderson measure was used to assess the variance explained in the Cox regression.ResultsIn our sample, 21.3% of patients were reclassified with TNM8 from TNM7; reclassifications in stage II were uncommon, and 44.1% of patients in stage III were reclassified to a higher subgroup. Minimal changes in MSS curves were observed between editions, but the stage IIB curve decreased and the stage IIIC curve increased. For TNM8, Stage I (n = 4,556), II (n = 1,206), III (n = 598), and IV (n = 54) had an estimated 5-year MSS of 98.4%, 82.5%, 66.4%, and 14.4%, respectively. Within stage III, IIIA 5-year MSS was 91.7% while stage IIID was 23.5%. HRs indicated that TNM8 more evenly separates subgroups once adjusted for patient- and disease-characteristics. The variance in MSS explained by TNM7 and TNM8 is 18.9% and 19.7%, respectively.ConclusionTNM8 performed well in our sample, with more even separation of stage subgroups and a modest improvement in predictive ability compared to TNM7.
Project description:We report analytic and consensus processes that produced recommendations for pathologic stage groups (pTNM) of esophageal and esophagogastric junction cancer for the AJCC/UICC cancer staging manuals, 8th edition. The Worldwide Esophageal Cancer Collaboration provided data for 22,654 patients with epithelial esophageal cancers; 13,300 without preoperative therapy had pathologic assessment after esophagectomy or endoscopic treatment. Risk-adjusted survival for each patient was developed using random survival forest analysis to identify data-driven pathologic stage groups wherein survival decreased monotonically with increasing group, was distinctive between groups, and homogeneous within groups. The AJCC Upper GI Task Force, by smoothing, simplifying, expanding, and assessing clinical applicability, produced consensus pathologic stage groups. For pT1-3N0M0 squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and pT1-2N0M0 adenocarcinoma, pT was inadequate for grouping; subcategorizing pT1 and adding histologic grade enhanced staging; cancer location improved SCC staging. Consensus eliminated location for pT2N0M0 and pT3N0M0G1 SCC groups, and despite similar survival, restricted stage 0 to pTis, excluding pT1aN0M0G1. Metastases markedly reduced survival; pT, pN, and pM sufficiently grouped advanced cancers. Stage IIA and IIB had different compositions for SCC and adenocarcinoma, but similar survival. Consensus stage IV subgrouping acknowledged pT4N+ and pN3 cancers had poor survival, similar to pM1. Anatomic pathologic stage grouping, based on pTNM only, produced identical consensus stage groups for SCC and adenocarcinoma at the cost of homogeneity in early groups. Pathologic staging can neither direct pre-treatment decisions nor aid in prognostication for treatment other than esophagectomy or endoscopic therapy. However, it provides a clean, single therapy reference point for esophageal cancer.
Project description:We report analytic and consensus processes that produced recommendations for clinical stage groups (cTNM) of esophageal and esophagogastric junction cancer for the AJCC/UICC cancer staging manuals, 8th edition. The Worldwide Esophageal Cancer Collaboration (WECC) provided data on 22,123 clinically staged patients with epithelial esophageal cancers. Risk-adjusted survival for each patient was developed using random survival forest analysis from which (1) data-driven clinical stage groups were identified wherein survival decreased monotonically and was distinctive between and homogeneous within groups and (2) data-driven anatomic clinical stage groups based only on cTNM. The AJCC Upper GI Task Force, by smoothing, simplifying, expanding, and assessing clinical applicability, produced (3) consensus clinical stage groups. Compared with pTNM, cTNM survival was "pinched," with poorer survival for early cStage groups and better survival for advanced ones. Histologic grade was distinctive for data-driven grouping of cT2N0M0 squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and cT1-2N0M0 adenocarcinoma, but consensus removed it. Grouping was different by histopathologic cell type. For SCC, cN0-1 was distinctive for cT3 but not cT1-2, and consensus removed cT4 subclassification and added subgroups 0, IVA, and IVB. For adenocarcinoma, N0-1 was distinctive for cT1-2 but not cT3-4a, cStage II subgrouping was necessary (T1N1M0 [IIA] and T2N0M0 [IIB]), advanced cancers cT3-4aN0-1M0 plus cT2N1M0 comprised cStage III, and consensus added subgroups 0, IVA, and IVB. Treatment decisions require accurate cStage, which differs from pStage. Understaging and overstaging are problematic, and additional factors, such as grade, may facilitate treatment decisions and prognostication until clinical staging techniques are uniformly applied and improved.
Project description:BACKGROUND:The incidence of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) has increased substantially in recent decades, particularly p16-positive human papillomavirus (HPV)-related OPSCC, which has risen by 50% in western countries. HPV-positivity is the most favourable non-anatomic predictor of oropharyngeal cancer outcomes, which underscores the importance of incorporating this variable into the cancer staging system. METHODS:In the present article, we review the differences between the 7th and 8th editions of the AJCC staging system, with particular focus on the role of HPV-positivity in patients with head and neck cancer. RESULTS:In the previous edition (7th edition) of the AJCC/UICC manual, HPV status and its correlation with nodal metastasis were not considered, thereby leading to incorrect lymph node (N) staging and, potentially, inadequate treatment and worse outcomes. The 8th edition of the AJCC manual addresses these issues, providing more accurate discrimination between groups and better risk stratification in patients with HPV-positive OPSCC. In the future, additional adjustments are likely to be needed, such as unification of the pathological and clinical staging models. CONCLUSIONS:The new staging system is substantially more accurate than the previous system and should be widely adopted in routine clinical practice.
Project description:We report analytic and consensus processes that produced recommendations for neoadjuvant pathologic stage groups (ypTNM) of esophageal and esophagogastric junction cancer for the AJCC/UICC cancer staging manuals, 8th edition. The Worldwide Esophageal Cancer Collaboration provided data for 22,654 patients with epithelial esophageal cancers; 7,773 had pathologic assessment after neoadjuvant therapy. Risk-adjusted survival for each patient was developed. Random forest analysis identified data-driven neoadjuvant pathologic stage groups wherein survival decreased monotonically with increasing group, was distinctive between groups, and homogeneous within groups. An additional analysis produced data-driven anatomic neoadjuvant pathologic stage groups based only on ypT, ypN, and ypM categories. The AJCC Upper GI Task Force, by smoothing, simplifying, expanding, and assessing clinical applicability, produced consensus neoadjuvant pathologic stage groups. Grade and location were much less discriminating for stage grouping ypTNM than pTNM. Data-driven stage grouping without grade and location produced nearly identical groups for squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma. However, ypTNM groups and their associated survival differed from pTNM. The need for consensus process was minimal. The consensus groups, identical for both cell types were as follows: ypStage I comprised ypT0-2N0M0; ypStage II ypT3N0M0; ypStage IIIA ypT0-2N1M0; ypStage IIIB ypT3N1M0, ypT0-3N2, and ypT4aN0M0; ypStage IVA ypT4aN1-2, ypT4bN0-2, and ypTanyN3M0; and ypStage IVB ypTanyNanyM1. Absence of equivalent pathologic (pTNM) categories for the peculiar neoadjuvant pathologic categories ypTisN0-3M0 and ypT0N0-3M0, dissimilar stage group compositions, and markedly different early- and intermediate-stage survival necessitated a unified, unique set of stage grouping for patients of either cell type who receive neoadjuvant therapy.
Project description:It has been recognized that systemic inflammatory markers (SIMs) are associated with patient survival in various types of cancer. This study aimed to determine the optimal cut-off values, and to evaluate the prognostic performance of SIMs for oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) within the framework of the American Joint Committee of Cancer (AJCC) cancer staging manual, 8th edition. Records were collected for a total 291 patients who had had a peripheral blood test within 1 week prior to surgery and had undergone the surgical resection of OSCC in a single institution between 2005 and 2018. The cut-off values of SIMs were obtained, and the survival analyses for overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were performed. Multivariate analyses incorporating other clinicopathologic factors were performed to verify the independent risk factors for survival. The cut-off values of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) were 2.23, 135.14 for OS and 2.16, 131.07 for DFS, respectively, demonstrating a significant association for OS and DFS in OSCC. AJCC pathologic regional lymph node category (pN) (P?<?0.001), perineural invasion (PNI) (P?<?0.001) and NLR (P?<?0.001) were independent predictors for OS. Meanwhile, for DFS, AJCC pN (P?=?0.018) and NLR (P?=?0.015) were shown to be independent predictors. Before the curative surgery, NLR and PLR could be auxiliary parameters for OS and DFS in OSCC. And based on the 8th edition of AJCC staging system, elevated NLR will be a potential indicator of the worse OS or DFS along with pN or PNI in OSCC.