The impact of multimodality integrated positron emission tomography-computed tomography on improving the staging and management of head and neck malignancy: a cross- sectional study

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Clinical assessment of head and neck cancers is highly challenging owing to the complexity of regional anatomy and wide range of lesions. The diagnostic evaluation includes detailed physical examination, biopsy and imaging modalities for disease extent and staging. Appropriate imaging is done to enable determination of precise tumor extent and involvement of lymph nodes, and detection of distant metastases and second primary tumors. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the initial staging discrepancy between conventional contrasted computed tomography (CT) and 18F-fluorodeoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) and its impact on management plans for head and neck malignancies. DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective cross-sectional study in two tertiary-level hospitals. METHODS: This study included 30 patients with primary head and neck malignant tumors who underwent contrasted computed tomography and whole-body 18F-FDG PET/CT assessments. The staging and treatment plans were compared with the incremental information obtained after 18F-FDG PET/CT. RESULTS: 18F-FDG PET/CT was found to raise the stage in 33.3% of the cases and the treatment intent was altered in 43.3% of them, while there was no management change in the remaining 56.7%. 18F-FDG PET/CT had higher sensitivity (96% versus 89.2%) and accuracy (93% versus 86.7%) than conventional contrast-enhanced computed tomography. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that 18F-FDG PET/CT had higher sensitivity and accuracy for detecting head and neck malignancy, in comparison with conventional contrast-enhanced computed tomography. 18F-FDG PET/CT improved the initial staging and substantially impacted the management strategy for head and neck malignancies.

Need to restage Korean melanoma patients following publication of the 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging manual

Background: The tumor, nodes and metastasis (TNM) classification and stage grouping have been updated in the 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) melanoma staging manual. However, restaging all the previous cases are not recommended. Aims: The aims of the study were to investigate the necessity of restaging Korean melanoma patients staged by the previous edition of the AJCC manual. Methods: Differences in the staging criteria of the 7th and 8th editions of the AJCC manual were identified. The staging of 276 primary melanomas from January 2011 to December 2018 was classified by both 7th and 8th editions of the manual and their differences were compared. Results: Staging by 7th and 8th edition of the AJCC manual differed in 64 cases (23.2%). The pathological prognostic staging changed in 35 (12.7%), and 29 (10.5%) had changes in only TNM classification but not the pathological staging. None of the patients needed additional sentinel lymph node biopsy or systemic treatment as a result of restaging. Additional counseling was needed for the patients, because melanoma-specific survival was increased in the 8th edition. Limitations: This is a retrospective study with relatively small number of patients at a single tertiary center in Korea. Conclusion: Assessment of the need for additional sentinel lymph node biopsy or systemic treatment is recommended because of the latest changes in the AJCC melanoma staging manual. Although the restaging of previously staged melanomas is not significantly needed in our patients, still the differences in TNM classification and/or pathological prognostic staging suggest the need to separately recognize the patients previously staged by 7th edition and recently staged by 8th edition. Careful counseling about melanoma-specific survival is needed for Asian patients

Prognostication of uveal melanoma is simple and highly predictive using The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) classification: A review

Purpose: The cancer genome atlas (TCGA) is a comprehensive project supported by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) in the United States to explore molecular alterations in cancer, including uveal melanoma (UM). This led to TCGA classification for UM. In this report, we review the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) classification and TCGA classification for UM from the NCI's Center for Cancer Genomics (NCI CCG) (based on enucleation specimens [n = 80 eyes]) and from Wills Eye Hospital (WEH) (based on fine needle aspiration biopsy [FNAB] specimens [n = 658 eyes]). We then compare accuracy and predictability of AJCC versus (vs.) TCGA. Methods: Review of published reports on AJCC and TCGA classification for UM was performed. Outcomes based on AJCC 7th and 8th editions were assessed. For TCGA, UM was classified based on chromosomes 3 and 8 findings including disomy 3 (D3), monosomy 3 (M3), disomy 8 (D8), 8q gain (8qG), or 8q gain multiple (8qGm) and combined into four classes including Class A (D3/D8), Class B (D3/8qG), Class C (M3/8qG), and Class D (M3/8qGm). Outcomes of metastasis and death were explored and a comparison (AJCC vs. TCGA) was performed. Results: In the NCI CCG study, there were 80 eyes with UM sampled by enucleation (n = 77), resection (n = 2), or orbitotomy (n = 1) and analysis revealed four distinct genetic classes. Metastasis and death outcomes were subsequently evaluated per class in the WEH study. The WEH study reviewed 658 eyes with UM, sampled by FNAB, and found Class A (n = 342, 52%), B (n = 91, 14%), C (n = 118, 18%), and D (n = 107, 16%). Comparison by increasing class (A vs. B vs. C vs. D) revealed older mean patient age (P < 0.001), worse entering visual acuity (P < 0.001), greater distance from the optic disc (P < 0.001), larger tumor diameter (P < 0.001), and greater tumor thickness (P < 0.001). Regarding outcomes, more advanced TCGA class demonstrated increased 5-year risk for metastasis (4% vs. 20% vs. 33% vs. 63%,P < 0.001) with corresponding increasing hazard ratio (HR) (1.0 vs. 4.1, 10.1, 30.0,P= 0.01 for B vs. A andP < 0.001 for C vs. A and D vs. A) as well as increased 5-year estimated risk for death (1% vs. 0% vs. 9% vs. 23%,P < 0.001) with corresponding increasing HR (1 vs. NA vs. 3.1 vs. 13.7,P= 0.11 for C vs. A andP < 0.001 for D vs. A). Comparison of AJCC to TCGA classification revealed TCGA was superior in prediction of metastasis and death from UM. Conclusion: TCGA classification for UM is simple, accurate, and highly predictive of melanoma-related metastasis and death, more so than the AJCC classification.

Impact of focality on prognostication of early and operable breast carcinomas of no special type

Background and Objectives: Multifocal/multicentric (MF/MC) breast carcinomas are not uncommon and its prognostic significance debated. We attempted to analyze the association of focality and prognostic factors in operated pT1 and pT2 breast carcinomas of no special type (NST). Materials and Methods: Retrospectively identified pathologically proven 124 unifocal (UF) and 49 MF/MC pT1 and pT2 breast carcinomas of NST over the past three years were compared in terms of clinical and pathological factors. Results: The patients with MF/MC NST tumors were more likely to undergo radical surgery (P = 0.028). The tumors showed higher incidence of lymphovascular invasion (P = 0.024), perineural invasion (P = 0.046), ductal carcinoma in situ component (P < 0.001), higher number of positive axillary lymph nodes (P < 0.001), and higher anatomical staging (P = 0.048) when compared to the UF counterparts. Morphological intertumoral heterogeneity was noted in MF/MC tumors in 16 of 49 cases (32.65%). Conclusion: Most published studies on MF breast cancers have included all histological types and varying definitions. We included only pathologically defined stages and a single histological type to ensure “purity” of the groups. Higher anatomic staging and morphological interlesional heterogeneity suggest that early MF/MC tumors represent multiple primaries with a different biology. Careful consideration of features of each focus needs to be considered when deciding appropriate adjuvant therapy and for accurately prognosticating these patients. Immunohistochemical and morphological (grade) heterogeneity between the different foci may pose problems with “prognostic stage grouping” these tumors according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system (8th edition).

The predicting value of the 8th edition of American Joint Committee on Cancer staging manual in mucinous breast cancer / 中华肿瘤杂志

Objective@#The current study aimed to evaluate the predictive performances of anatomic staging system (AS) and prognostic staging system (PS) proposed in the 8th edition American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging manual in patients with pure mucinous breast cancer (PMBC).@*Methods@#Clinicopathologic features and follow-up information were collected from a total of 3628 patients with PMBC. Breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) were compared among patients in different stage groups. Likelihood ratio (LR) χ2, Akaike information criterion (AIC) and Harrell′s concordance index (C-index) were used to evaluate the predictive performances of AS and PS in PMBC.@*Results@#In PMBC, BCSS was associated with tumor size (P=0.002), lymph node status (P=0.002), grade(P=0.003), PR status(P=0.017)and the receipt of radiation. Compared to AS, 1326 patients (37.54%) underwent stage change after applying PS, with 6.50% upstaged and 37.04% downstaged. There were significant differences in BCSS among patients of different stages under the AS and PS (P<0.001). However, PS was not superior to AS in predicting prognosis (AS vs PS, LR χ2: 16.41 vs 17.5; AIC: 357.44 vs 358.35; C-index, 0.72 vs 0.73, P=0.667).@*Conclusions@#Both of AS and PS proposed in the 8th edition American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging manual were predictive factors in patients with PMBC. Compared with AS, the PS did not show superiority in prognosis prediction among patients with PMBC.

Paranasal Sinus Invasion in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma after Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy / Journal of the Korean Cancer Association, 대한암학회지

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to evaluate the prognostic significance of paranasal sinus invasion for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) and its suitable position in the T classification. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of 695 patients with previously untreated, biopsy-proven, non-metastatic NPC that was treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) were reviewed retrospectively. RESULTS: The incidence of paranasal sinus invasion was 39.4% (274 of 695 patients). Multivariate analysis showed that paranasal sinus invasion was an independent negative prognostic factor for local failure-free survival (LFFS) (p < 0.05). According to the eighth American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system, 275 patients were classified as T3 classification. Of these, 78 patients (28.4%) developed paranasal sinus invasion (T3b) and 197 (71.6%) didn't (T3a). The estimated 5-year LFFS and overall survival (OS) rates for the patients with T3b and T3a classification were 88.6% versus 95.0% (p=0.047), and 84.5% versus 93.3% (p=0.183), respectively. The estimated 5-year LFFS and OS rates for the patientswith T4 classificationwere 89.5% and 83.2%,whichwere similarwith the outcomes of patients with T3b classification. CONCLUSION: MRI-determined paranasal sinus invasion is an independent prognostic factor of NPC treated by IMRT. Paranasal sinus invasion is recommended to classify as T4 classification in the 8th AJCC staging system for NPC.

Differences and comparison of prognostic evaluation between AJCC staging system 7th edition and 8th edition for gastric cancer (A report of 1 383 cases) / 中华消化外科杂志

Objective To compare the differences and clinical value of prognostic evaluation between American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition for gastric cancer (GC).Methods The retrospective case-control study was conducted.The clinicopathological data of 1 383 GC patients who were admitted to the First People's Hospital of Changzhou between January 2008 and August 2012 were collected.Distal gastrectomy,proximal gastrectomy + pyloroplasty or total gastrectomy were performed according to preoperative evaluation and intraoperative exploration.Observation indicators:(1) surgical and postoperative situations;(2) follow-up and survival situations;(3) T staging comparison between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition;(4) N staging comparison of AJCC TNM staging system 8th edition;(5) prognostic analysis in N staging of AJCC TNM staging system 8th edition;(6) TNM staging comparison between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition;(7) prognostic analysis in different TNM staging between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition.Follow-up using outpatient examination and telephone interview was performed to detect postoperative survival up to October 2017.Measurement data with normal distribution were represented as x ± s.Measurement data with skewed distribution were described as M (range).The survival curve and survival rate were respectively drawn and calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method,and the Log-rank test was used for survival analysis.Results (1) Surgical and postoperative situations:1 383 GC patients underwent successful radical gastrectomy,including 923 with distal gastrectomy,165 with proximal gastrectomy and 295 with total gastrectomy.Of 1 383 patients,115 with postoperative complications were improved by symptomatic treatment,including 87 with surgical complications and 28 with non-surgical complications.Postoperative pathological examinations:total number of intraoperative lymph node dissection and number of lymph node metastasis were 25± 12 and 7±4;577 didn't have lymph node metastasis and 806 had regional lymph node metastasis;308 were in early GC and 1 075 in advanced GC.(2) Follow-up and survival situations:1 383 patients were followed up for 1-117 months,with a median time of 34 months.The 1-,3-and 5-year survival rates of 1 383 patients were respectively 90.5％,71.9％ and 61.1％.(3) T staging comparison between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition:T staging definition between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition was identical.T staging of 1 383 patients:308,192,65,628 and 190 were respectively detected in T1,T2,T3,T4a and T4b stagings.(4) N staging comparison between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition:N staging definition between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition was identical.N staging of 1 383 patients:577,255,207,230 and 114 were respectively detected in N0,N1,N2,N3a and N3b stagings.N3a and N3b were classified as N3 staging of AJCC TNM staging system 7thedition,but they were classified as independent staging of AJCC TNM staging system 8th edition.(5) Prognostic analysis in N staging of AJCC TNM staging system 8th edition:5-year survival rate of patients in N0,N1,N2,N3a and N3b stagings was respectively 85.6％,76.5％,59.4％,45.2％ and 32.5％ based on AJCC TNM staging system 8th edition,with a statistically significant difference in survival (x2 =394.400,P＜0.05).There was a statistically significant difference between N0 and N 1 stagings (x2 =45.630,P＜0.05),between N 1 and N2 stagings (x2 =19.470,P＜0.05),between N2 and N3a stagings (x2 =7.602,P＜0.05) and between N3a and N3b stagings (x2=13.020,P＜0.05).(6) TNM staging comparison between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition:TNM staging of 366 patients had changes,including 2 in T1N3b staging,2 in T2N3b staging,18 in T3N3b staging,120 in T4aN2 staging,149 in T4aN3a staging,34 in T4bN0 staging and 41 in T4bN2 staging;364 were detected in staging Ⅲ in 7th edition and 8th edition,and sub-staging of staging Ⅲ had a change;2 in T1N3b of ⅡB staging were redistricted into Ⅲ B staging based on AJCC TNM staging system 8th edition.(7) Prognostic analysis in different TNM staging between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition:according to 7th edition,cases and 5-year survival rate were respectively 247,89.5％ in Ⅰ A staging and 147,83.7％ in Ⅰ B staging and 77,75.9％ in ⅡA staging and 207,70.5％ in ⅡB staging and 136,61.0％ in ⅢA staging and 236,37.5％ in Ⅲ B staging and 333,35.4％ in Ⅲ C staging,with a statistically significant difference in survival among sub-stagings (x2 =228.800,P＜0.05).There was a statistically significant difference in survival among Ⅰ,Ⅱ and Ⅲ stagings (x2=189.000,P＜0.05) and between ⅢA and ⅢB or ⅢC stagings (x2=22.710,18.010,P＜0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in survival between Ⅰ A and Ⅰ B stagings (x2=0.179,P＞0.05),between Ⅱ A and Ⅱ B stagings (x2 =0.265,P＞0.05),and between Ⅲ B and Ⅲ C stagings (x2 =1.550,P＞0.05).According to 8th edition,cases and 5-year survival rate were respectively 247,89.5％ in Ⅰ A staging and 147,83.7％ in Ⅰ B staging and 77,75.9％ in Ⅱ A staging and 205,70.7％ in Ⅱ B staging and 288,53.8％ in ⅢA staging and 258,37.3％ in ⅢB staging and 161,28.5％ in ⅢC staging,with a statistically significant difference in survival among sub-stagings (x2=234.900,P ＜ 0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in survival between Ⅰ A and Ⅰ B stagings (x2 =0.179,P＞0.05) and between Ⅱ A and ⅡB stagings (x2 =0.564,P＞0.05).There was statistically significant differences in survival between Ⅲ A and Ⅲ B or ⅢC stagings (x2 =29.790,43.060,P＜0.05) and between Ⅲ B and Ⅲ C stagings (x2 =7.494,P＜0.05).Further analysis showed that changes of TNM staging system between 7th edition and 8th edition were in T3N3b,T4aN2,T4aN3a,T4bN0 and T4bN2 stagings,5-year survival rate in above stagings was respectively 16.7％,35.8％,30.2％,47.1％ and 26.8％,with statistically significant differences in survival between T3N3b and T4aN2,T4aN3a,T4bN0 and T4bN2 stagings (x2 =19.590,8.039,12.070,3.853,P＜0.05),between T4aN2 and T4aN3a,T4bN2 stagings (x2 =6.529,3.859,P ＜ 0.05),between T4aN3a and T4bN0 stagings (x2 =10.400,P＜0.05) and between T4bN0 and T4bN2 stagings (x2=4.636,P＜0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in survival between T4aN2 and T4bN0 stagings (x2 =3.607,P＞0.05) and between T4aN3a and T4bN2 stagings (x2 =0.029,P＞0.05).Conclusions Compared with AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition,N3a and N3b stagings are classified as independent staging in AJCC TNM staging system 8th edition,and 8th edition is more accurate in prognostic evaluation of GC patients in stage Ⅲ.

Evaluating the Prediction of Breast Cancer Survival Using Lymph Node Ratio / 한국유방암학회지

PURPOSE: Previous oncological studies showed that lymph node ratio (LNR) (ratio of number of lymph nodes that tested positive for metastasis to the total number of lymph nodes examined) is a negative indicator of cancer survival. The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system incorporates tumor size, lymph node involvement, and metastasis in a comprehensive model of cancer progression, but LNR alone has been shown to outperform the AJCC system in prognostic and survival predictions for various types of cancer. The effectiveness of LNR has not been evaluated in breast cancer staging. Evaluating LNR for predicting cancer staging in breast cancer has the potential to improve treatment recommendations. METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results dataset was used to identify 10,655 breast cancer patients who underwent nodal evaluation from 2010 to 2013, and their LNRs were calculated. Descriptive statistics of lymph node evaluation in the patients are provided. Logistic regression with LNR as the continuous independent variable was conducted to determine whether LNR could predict cancer progression, coded as regional or distant. Analysis was conducted using SPSS version 24. RESULTS: Patient's mean age was 59.43±18.62. Logistic regression analysis revealed that for every 1.3% increase in LNR, the odds of falling into the distant stage of the TNM staging system increased by 13.7% (odds ratio, 14.73; 95% confidence interval, 12.00–18.08). CONCLUSION: LNR, while correlated with breast cancer staging, serves as a better predictor of survival. Precision staging can influence treatment modality, and improved treatments can significantly improve quality of life. Additional research and diagnostic examinations using LNR as a potential tool for accurate staging in breast cancer patients are warranted.

The clinical interpretation of modified staging system for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors / 中国癌症杂志

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor is a common pancreatic tumor with high heterogeneity and multiple management modalities. A standard and practical staging system for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors will be beneficial to clinical management and research. At present, there are two staging systems (ENETS and AJCC). Both of them have shortcomings which limit their clinical application. In addition, the coexistence of two staging systems is confusing to clinicians. We proposed a modified ENETS staging system by keeping the ENETS TNM definition and adopting the AJCC staging definition. The modified staging system can successfully distinguish patients with different prognosis and is helpful in establishing clinical standard. This study has been published in Journal of Clinical Oncology (JCO) and was selected as 2017 Best of JCO: Gastrointestinal edition. This paper was aimed to interpret the modified staging system in clinical practice.

Imaging understanding of the updates of the classification for pancreatic cancer in the American Joint Committee on Cancer cancer staging manual (8th edition) / 中华消化外科杂志

Pancreatic cancer is a highly malignant tumor with a high mortality.Surgery is the only potential hope of cure for patients with pancreatic cancer.Imaging examination plays an essential role in both the early diagnosis and preoperative assessment.Accurate tumor staging has guiding significance for clinical practice.Appropriate therapeutic schedule will be selected according to the tumor staging,and then patients' prognosis can be evaluated.Recently,the TNM staging systems for pancreatic cancer have been updated by American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC).Major changes were made in the T and N staging.This article will review the updates of the 8th edition of AJCC cancer staging for pancreatic cancer from radiography aspect.

Interpretation of the TNM classification for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma in the American Joint Committee on Cancer cancer staging manual (8th edition) / 中华消化外科杂志

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is the second most common primary liver cancer with a very poor prognosis.In order to guide better clinical management of ICC patients,the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) cancer staging manual (7th edition) have established a unique TNM staging scheme for separating ICC from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) for the first time,and reflected a difference between risk factor of ICC and HCC.This TNM staging system for ICC has been most recently updated by the AJCC cancer staging manual (8th edition),in which T staging has been redefined without gross features,and lymph node metastasis (N1) in N staging has been grouped as stage Ⅲ B,but not stage Ⅳ as required by the 7th edition of AJCC cancer staging manual.In addition,region lymphatic and distant metastases have been clearly redefined by the AJCC cancer staging manual (8th edition) that also requires recovering at least 6 lymph nodes for the N staging scheme.The apparent advantages of the AJCC cancer staging manual (8th edition) for ICC pathologic staging may better stratify the prognosis of ICC patients and provide an improved guidance in clinical practice.

Comparison of the Differences in Survival Rates between the 7th and 8th Editions of the AJCC TNM Staging System for Gastric Adenocarcinoma: a Single-Institution Study of 5,507 Patients in Korea

PURPOSE: The aims of this study were to compare the 7th and 8th editions of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging manuals on tumor, node, and metastasis (TNM) staging systems and to evaluate whether the 8th edition represents a better refinement of the 7th staging system, when applied for the classification of gastric cancers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 5,507 gastric cancer patients, who underwent treatment from January 1989 to December 2013 at a single institute, were included. We compared patient survival rates across the disease groups classified according to the 7th and 8th editions of the AJCC TNM staging systems. RESULTS: Stage migration was observed in 6.4% (n=355) of the patients. Of these, 3.5% (n=192) and 2.9% (n=158) of patients showed a higher stage and lower stage, respectively. According to the 8th edition of the AJCC TNM staging criteria, the 5-year overall survival rates of the patients with stage IIIB and IIIC showed a significant difference (40.8% vs. 20.2%, P<0.001) whereas no significant differences in the 5-year overall survival rates were observed according to the 7th edition criteria (37.6% vs. 33.2%, P=0.381). CONCLUSIONS: Restaging stage III cancers according to the 8th edition of the AJCC TNM classification criteria improved survival rate discrimination, particularly, in institutes where the stage III patients were not distinctly categorized.

Comparison of the 7th and 6th edition AJCC TNM staging systems for gastric cancer: Analysis of prognosis in a retrospective review of 918 patients at a single institution in China / 肿瘤

Objective: To evaluate the prognostic priority of the 7th edition AJCC (American Joint Committee on Cancer) TNM staging system for gastric carcinoma compared with the 6th edition in Chinese population. Methods: A total of 918 patients with gastric carcinoma from a single institution between January 2003 and December 2008 in China were staged using the 6th edition and the 7th edition AJCC TNM staging systems. The univariate and multivariate analyses were applied to evaluate the value of the two staging systems in prognostic prediction for gastric carcinoma. The AIC (Akaike's Information Criterion) was used to determine which is better between the two staging systems. Results: Significant differences in overall survival were observed according to the T, N and M substages using the 7th edition AJCC TNM staging system. The Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed a good discriminatory ability among stages I through IV in both the 6th and 7th edition staging systems (P = 0.000). There were similar survival curves between substages IA and IB (P = 0.643), IB and IIA (P = 0.267), IIB and IIIA (P = 0.534), IIIA and IIIB (P = 0.124), and IIIB and IIIC (P = 0.174) when the patients were classified into eight substages according to the 7th edition AJCC TNM staging system. The AIC value of the 7th edition staging system was smaller than the 6th edition staging system. Conclusion: The 7th edition AJCC TNM staging system is superior to the 6th edition staging system. But the advantage of the new 7th edition staging system is very limited and it presents some deficiencies. Copyright © 2012 by TUMOR.

The different impact of 7th ed AJCC cancer staging system on nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with conventional radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy / 中华放射肿瘤学杂志

Objective To compare the prognostic value of the 7th edition of AJCC cancer staging system in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients treated with conventional radiotherapy (CRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).Methods From January 2004 to December 2006,totally 1138 NPC patients were treated with CRT (790 patients) and IMRT (348 patients) in Cancer Hospital of Fujian province.The median ages were 47 and 45 years old for two groups ( x2 =1.49,P =0.222 ),respectively.There were 0,41,488,261 and 5,65,176,102 patients in stage Ⅰ,Ⅱ,Ⅲ,Ⅳ of the two groups after restaged with 7th edition of AJCC cancer staging system,respectively (x2 =64.78,P =0.001 ).The 3-year survival was analyzed according to T-category,N-category and overall stage.Results The follow-up rate at 3 years is 96.0％.The median follow-up were 32 months and 33 months for CRT and IMRT groups.N-category was found to be the prognostic factors for overall survival (OS,x2 =6.50,P =0.038 and x2 =13.60,P =0.004) and metastasis free survival ( MFS,x2 =7.78,P =0.009 and x2 =15.30,P =0.002) for CRT and IMRT groups.The clinical stage was prognostic factor for OS in conventional group ( x2 =6.70,P=0.035),and for MFS in IMRT group (x2 =9.12,P=0.028).Conclusions The T-calegory of 7th AJCC staging system shows poor predictive value for the long-term survival of NPC patients.The N-calegory of 7th AJCC staging system can well estimate the OS and MFS for NPC.

AJCC 6th and 7th TNM staging systems comparison in locally advanced gastric cancer / 中华放射肿瘤学杂志

ObjectiveTo compare the role of AJCC 6th and 7th TNM staging systems in predicting the long term survival of locally advanced gastric cancer patients after curative surgery. Methods All patients who met the following criteria were included for analyses: treated between January 2002 and December 2004, primary gastric or gastroesophageal cancer, underwent curative gastrectomy ( UICC R0 ) and at least more than D1 lymphadenectomy, pathologically staged as T3-4N0-1 M0, or any T, N2-3M0. Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival ( DFS), locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) were calculated and compared according to N and TNM stage of the two TNM staging systems (T stage were not analyzed due to its extremely unbalanced distribution). The N and TNM stage and other significant variables in univariate analyses were evaluated further for both OS and DFS by Cox regression. ResultsThe median follow-up time was 61 months. The follow-up rate was 92. 3％.Among the 297 enrolled patients, 56. 9％ of the patients had a stage migration between the two staging systems. According to 6th, no difference in DMFS was detected between different N and TNM stages (x2 =6. 65, P =0. 084 ; x2 =6. 61, P =0. 108 ). When using 7th, statistically significant difference was found in DMFS between different N stages ( x2 =9. 035,P =0. 029), and TNM stage also tended to have an influence on DMFS ( x2 =7.27,P =0. 064). The N and TNM stage had similar significant influence on OS, DFS and LRFS based on both staging systems ( x2 =9. 23 - 19. 00,P =0. 000 -0. 026 and x2 =11.67 - 19. 11 ,P =0. 000 -0. 009).In Cox regression, TNM stage was an independent prognostic variable for both OS and DFS based on these two staging systems (x2=9.05-25.51, P=0.000-0.003 ), but the 7thappeared to be a better predictor than the 6 th ( OS : RR =1.6 1 8 vs 1.4 9 6 ; DFS : RR =1.5 9 4 vs 1. 5 6 4 ).ConclusionsThe N and TNM stage in 7th TNM staging system are more predictive for DMFS than in 6th TNM staging system for locally advanced gastric cancer patients. The 7th TNM staging system provides a better prognostic estimation of both OS and DFS.