Dataset Information

Verification of the eighth edition of the UICC-TNM classification on surgically resected lung adenocarcinoma: Comparison with previous classification in a local center.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The UICC 8th TNM classification of lung cancer has been changed dramatically, especially in measuring methods of T-desriptors. Different from squamous- or small-cell carcinomas, in which the solid- and the invasive-diameter mostly agree with each other, the diameter of the radiological solid part and that of pathological invasive part in adenocarcinomas often does not match.

Aim

We aimed to determine radiological and pathological tumor diameters of pulmonary adenocarcinomas with clinicopathological factors and evaluate the validity of the 8th edition in comparison with the 7th edition.

Methods and results

We retrospectively analyzed clinicopathological factors of 429 patients with surgically resected pulmonary adenocarcinomas. The maximum tumor and their solid-part diameters were measured using thin-sectioned computed tomography and compared with pathological tumor and invasive diameters. Overall survival (OS) rate was determined using the Kaplan-Meier method for different subgroups of clinicopathological factors. Akaike's information criteria (AIC) was used as a discriminative measure for the univariate Cox model for the 7th and 8th editions. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed to explore independent prognostic factors. Correlation coefficients between radiological and pathological diameters in the 7th and 8th editions were 0.911 and 0.888, respectively, without a significant difference. The major reasons for the difference in the 8th edition were the presence of intratumoral fibrosis and papillary growth pattern. The weighted kappa coefficients in the 8th edition were superior those in the 7th edition for both the T and Stage classifications. In the univariate Cox model, AIC levels were the lowest in the 8th edition. Multivariate analysis revealed that age, lymphovascular invasion, pT(8th), and stage were the most important determinants for OS.

Conclusion

The UICC 8th edition is a more discriminative classification than the 7th edition. For subsolid nodules, continuous efforts are necessary to increase the universality of the measurement of solid and invasive diameters.

SUBMITTER: Minato H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8789611 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe recently released eighth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM staging system for pancreatic cancer seeks to improve prognostic accuracy but lacks international validation.ObjectiveTo validate the eighth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM staging system in an international cohort of patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.Design, setting, and participantsThis international multicenter cohort study took place in 5 tertiary centers in Europe and the United States from 2000 to 2015. Patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for nonmetastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma were eligible. Data analysis took place from December 2017 to April 2018.ExposuresPatients were retrospectively staged according to the seventh and eighth editions of the TNM staging system.Main outcomes and measuresPrognostic accuracy on survival rates, assessed by Kaplan-Meier and multivariate Cox proportional hazards analyses and concordance statistics.ResultsA total of 1525 consecutive patients were included (median [IQR] age, 66 (58-72) years; 802 (52.6%) male). Distribution among stages via the seventh edition was stage IA in 41 patients (2.7%), stage IB in 42 (2.8%), stage IIA in 200 (13.1%), stage IIB in 1229 (80.6%), and stage III in 12 (0.8%); this changed with use of the eighth edition to stage IA in 118 patients (7.7%), stage IB in 144 (9.4%), stage IIA in 22 (1.4%), stage IIB in 643 (42.2%), and stage III in 598 (39.2%). With the eighth edition, 774 patients (50.8%) migrated to a different stage; 183 (12.0%) were reclassified to a lower stage and 591 (38.8%) to a higher stage. Median overall survival for the entire cohort was 24.4 months (95% CI, 23.4-26.2 months). On Kaplan-Meier analysis, 5-year survival rates changed from 38.2% for patients in stage IA, 34.7% in IB, 35.3% in IIA, 16.5% in IIB, and 0% in stage III (log-rank P < .001) via classification with the seventh edition to 39.2% for patients in stage IA, 33.9% in IB, 27.6% in IIA, 21.0% in IIB, and 10.8% in stage III (log-rank P < .001) with the eighth edition. For patients who were node negative, the T stage was not associated with prognostication of survival in either edition. In the eighth edition, the N stage was associated with 5-year survival rates of 35.6% in N0, 20.8% in N1, and 10.9% in N2 (log-rank P < .001). The C statistic improved from 0.55 (95% CI, 0.53-0.57) for the seventh edition to 0.57 (95% CI, 0.55-0.60) for the eighth edition.Conclusions and relevanceThe eighth edition of the TNM staging system demonstrated a more equal distribution among stages and a modestly increased prognostic accuracy in patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma compared with the seventh edition. The revised T stage remains poorly associated with survival, whereas the revised N stage is highly prognostic.

Project description:BackgroundThe TNM staging criteria for gastric carcinoma have seen numerous revisions, the most recent of which are reflected in the seventh edition AJCC TNM cancer staging manual.MethodsA retrospective evaluation of the sixth and seventh TNM classification of gastric cancer on a prospective database, regarding patients operated on for primary gastric cancer, was conducted. The end point of the study was prognosis evaluation in terms of overall survival.Patients operated on for primary gastric cancer between September 2003 and March 2012 at our Department of Emergency and General Surgery, were consecutively retrieved in this study; a total of 114 patients were considered. Cardia gastric cancers, gastric lymphomas and gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) were excluded. Median and mean follow-up periods were 22.5 and 27.7 months (range 15 days to 5 years). Both TNM6 and TNM7 were used to evaluate our patients. Overall survival and survival rates at different stages were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and differences were determined using a log-rank test. Cox's proportional hazard model was used to identify significant factors related to prognosis in a multivariate analysis.ResultsOverall survival between the sixth and seventh TNM classification was not significantly different. Both the Kaplan-Meier analysis and the multivariate analysis showed that the major negative prognostic factor was lymphovascular invasion (P<0.001 in the univariate analysis and P=0.035 to 0.048 in the multivariate analysis). Stage distribution and stage-related survival changed from the sixth to the seventh edition, especially in T3 stage where median survival for the sixth edition was 720 days versus 1,200 days for the seventh edition. Moreover, differences were shown in the survival rate of N1 versus N2 stages within the seventh TNM.ConclusionsEven though further studies are needed in order to increase the number of patients studied, the seventh edition seems to provide a more accurate prognosis, especially regarding N1 and N2 tumors, showing that the most important prognostic factor is lymphovascular invasion.