Comparison of stage-specific outcome of breast cancer based on 5th and 6th AJCC staging system

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To investigate the appropriateness of the new staging system (AJCC 6th edition) for breast carcinoma. METHODS: We reviewed the clinicopathologic data of 1,768 breast cancer patients, and their disease stages were re-categorized by the new system. The overall survival (OS) and distant relapse free survival (DRFS) rates were compared between those patients whose stages by the old system (AJCC 5th edition) remained the same (the remainders) and those patients whose stages moved up (the upstaged cases) as well as between the subgroups in the new system. RESULTS: The 10-year DRFS rates of the upstaged cases in each stage were poorer than those of the remainders, and statistical significance was demonstrated for stage IIB and stage IIIA. The 10-year OS rates were also poorer in the upstaged cases, and statistical significance was demonstrated for stage IIIA. Subgroup analysis within the new system between the node-negative versus node-positive subgroups in stages IIA and IIB showed a significant OS difference. The DRFS difference was also shown between the subgroups in stage IIA. CONCLUSIONS: The new staging system seems to more accurately reflect disease outcome, however, a re-evaluation might be required to reflect the impact of nodal involvement upon the new staging system.     

调强放疗技术对鼻咽癌UICC/AJCC分期的影响

目的 探讨调强放疗(IMRT)技术的应用对鼻咽癌第六版UICC/AJCC分期系统的影响.方法 回顾分析2001-2007年间在本院接受IMRT的570例初诊鼻咽癌患者资料,比较不同T分期、N分期以及临床分期之间生存率的差异.结果 全组随访2～94个月,中位值42个月;随访满5年者为184例.全组5年局部无复发生存率、无远处转移生存率和总生存率分别为93.0%、85.4%和83.3%.T分期中T_1、T_(2a)与T_(2b)期间5年局部无复发生存率(100%、100%、94.5%)差异无统计学意义(χ~2=1.92,P=0.166;χ~2:035,P=0.555),T_(2b)与T_3、T_3和T_4期的差异亦无统计学意义(χ~2=2.62,P=0.106;χ~2=1.55,P=0.214).N分期中N_2与N_1、N_3期5年无远处转移生存率(80.2%、86.2%、61.4%)差异无统计学意义(χ~2=2.22,P=0.136;χ~2=1.92,P=0.165).临床分期中Ⅰ、Ⅱ_a、Ⅱ_b期间的5年总生存率(91.7%、100%、95.3%)差异无统计学意义(χ~2:0.32,P=0.574;χ~2=0.25,P=0.617),Ⅳ_a和Ⅳ_b期的差异亦无统计学意义(χ~2=0.25,P=0.616).结论 采用IMRT技术治疗鼻咽癌患者,目前的鼻咽癌第六版UICC/AJCC分期系统存在不同期别5年生存率差异不明显的现象.     

AJCC第7版与第6版胃癌TNM分期的比较:一项基于预后分析的918例中国胃癌人群的回顾性研究

目的:本研究旨在评价美国癌症联合会(American Joint Committee on Cancer,AJCC)第7版胃癌TNM分期系统在判断预后方面是否优于AJCC第6版胃癌TNM分期系统.方法:对2003年1月-2008年12月单一中心的918例胃癌患者分别采用AJCC第6版和第7版胃癌TNM分期系统进行重新分期,采用单因素和多因素分析评价这2种胃癌TNM分期系统在判断预后中的价值.采用Akaike信息标准(Akaike's Information Criterion,AIC)评价这2个分期系统的优劣.结果:AJCC第7版胃癌TNM分期系统中,T、N和M分期亚组的总生存时间差异有统计学意义.对患者进行Ⅰ～Ⅳ期临床分期,则无论是按照AJCC胃癌TNM分期系统第6版还是第7版,Ⅰ～Ⅳ期这4条生存曲线的差异均有统计学意义(P值均为0.000);按照AJCC第7版胃癌TNM分期系统的8个亚分期,ⅠA期和ⅠB期、ⅠB期和Ⅱ A期、Ⅱ B期和Ⅲ A期、Ⅲ A期和Ⅲ B期以及Ⅲ B期和Ⅲ C期的生存曲线差异均无统计学意义(P=0.643、P=0.267、P=0.534、P=0.124、P=0.174).AJCC第7版胃癌TNM分期系统的AIC值小于第6版.结论:AJCC第7版胃癌TNM分期系统在预测预后价值方面要优于第6版,但前者的优势十分有限,且存在一定缺陷.     

美国癌症研究联合会第七版肿瘤分期对鼻咽癌放疗预后的影响

目的 观察美国癌症研究联合会( AJCC)第7版肿瘤分期标准对鼻咽癌常规放疗(CRT)和凋强放疗(IMRT)预后的影响.方法 用AJCC第7版肿瘤TNM分期标准对本院2004-2006年接受CRT和IMRT的鼻咽癌患者重新分期和分析预后.共1138例患者入组,CRT 790例,IMRT 348例.CRT和IMRT患者中位年龄分别为47岁和45岁(x2 =1.49,P=0.222),男女比例分别为580∶210和266∶82(x2=1.15,P=0.303),Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ、Ⅳ期例数分别为0、41、488、261和5、65、176、102例(x2 =64.78,P=0.001).比较两种放疗的3年疗效,Kaplan-Meier法计算生存率并Logrank法检验.结果 3年随访率为96.0％.常规、IMRT患者中位随访时间分别为32、33个月,死亡例数分别为113、35例.N分期是影响常规、IMRT总生存和无远处转移生存的因素(x2 =6.50、13.60,P=0.038、0.004和X2=7.78、15.30,P=0.009、0.002),临床分期对CRT总生存有影响(x2=6.70,P=0.035)、对IMRT无远处转移生存有影响(x2=9.12,P=0.028).结论 第7版AJCCT分期仍不能满足准确判断鼻咽癌预后的需要,N分期是影响鼻咽癌总生存和无远处转移生存的重要预后因素.     

A retrospective prognostic evaluation analysis using the 8th edition of American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) cancer staging system for luminal A breast cancer

Objective:We retrospectively analyzed the clinical prognostic value of the 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system for luminal A breast cancer.Methods:Using both the anatomic and prognostic staging in the 8th edition of AJCC cancer staging system,we restaged patients with luminal A breast cancer treated at the Breast Disease Center,Peking University First Hospital from 2008 to 2014.Follow-up data including 5-year disease free survival (DFS),overall survival (OS) and other clinic-pathological data were collected to analyze the differences between the two staging subgroups.Results:This study included 421 patients with luminal A breast cancer (median follow-up,61 months).The 5-year DFS and OS rates were 98.3％ and 99.3％,respectively.Significant differences in 5-year DFS but not OS were observed between different anatomic disease stages.Significant differences were observed in both 5-year DFS and OS between different prognostic stages.Application of the prognostic staging system resulted in assignment of 175 of 421 patients (41.6％) to a different group compared to their original anatomic stages.In total,102 of 103 patients with anatomic stage ⅡA changed to prognostic stage ⅠB,and 24 of 52 patients with anatomic stage ⅡB changed to prognostic stage ⅠB,while 1 changed to prognostic stage ⅢB.Twenty-two of 33 patents with anatomic stage ⅢA were down-staged to ⅡA when staged by prognostic staging system,and the other 11 patients were down-staged to ⅡB.Two patients with anatomic stage ⅢB were down-staged to ⅢA.Among seven patients with anatomic stage ⅢC cancer,two were down-staged to ⅢA and four were down-staged to stage ⅢB.Conclusions:The 8th edition of AJCC prognostic staging system is an important supplement to the breast cancer staging system.More clinical trials are needed to prove its ability to guide selection of proper systemic therapy and predict prognosis of breast cancer.     

Comparison of AJCC 1988 and 1997 classifications for nasopharyngeal carcinoma

Purpose: A comparison of American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) 1988 and 1997 nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) classifications was made in terms of patient distribution and efficacy in predicting prognosis.

Methods and Materials: Between 1993–1997, 90 patients (64 M, 26 F) with non-metastatic NPC were treated. The mean age was 42.02 (range: 9–82) years old. Histopathological diagnosis was WHO 2 and 3 in 83 (92.2%) patients. All patients were prospectively staged using AJCC 1988 and modified Ho’s classifications (1989) and these data were stored in a computer database. Retrieval of this information enabled us to restage patients according to the AJCC 1997. Median follow-up was 38 months.

Results: According to the AJCC 1988 there were 2 (2.2%), 6 (6.7%), 13 (14.4%), and 69 (76.7%) patients in Stage I, II, III and IV, respectively. Same figures were 8 (8.8%), 21 (23.3%), 26 (28.9%), and 35 (38.8%), according to AJCC 1997. Three year overall survival (OS) rates were 100%, 100%, 67%, and 62% for patients Stage I, II, III, and IV according to the AJCC 1988 and 100%, 72%, 65%, and 55%, (I vs. IV; p = 0.03, I vs. III; p = 0.05) respectively, according to the AJCC 1997. Three year loco-regional relapse free survival (LRRFS) rates were 50%, 100%, 100%, and 83% (I vs. III; p = 0.03) for patients in Stage I, II, III, and IV according to the AJCC 1988. Same figures were 88%, 90%, 89%, and 85% according to the AJCC 1997. Three year distant metastasis free survival (DMFS) rates were 100%, 100%, 82%, and 67% for patients in Stage I, II, III, and IV according to the AJCC 1988. Same figures were 100%, 74%, 80%, and 57% (I vs. IV; p= 0.03) according to the AJCC 1997. We did not observe any significant difference in LRRFS among T stages for both staging system and the N stage was the primary determinant for DMFS in both systems.

Conclusions: We observed a better patient distribution with AJCC 1997 comparing to AJCC 1988. The new classification also attained better statistical significances among stages in the OS and DMFS rates.     

Is the 1997 AJCC staging system for nasopharyngeal carcinoma prognostically useful for Chinese patient populations?

The 5th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging manual defines new rules for classifying nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). The study was conducted to assess its effectiveness in predicting the prognosis for Chinese patient populations.

Between June 1993 and June 1994, 621 consecutively admitted patients with nondisseminated NPC were treated with definitive-intent radiation therapy alone. All had computed tomography of the nasopharynx, skull base, and the upper neck. A computer database containing all information for staging was formed on presentation. The extent of disease of each patient was restaged according to the 1997 AJCC system.

Of the 621 patients, The 5-year overall survival (OS) rate was 60%. The 1997 AJCC system creates subgroups (Stages I to IV) that are assigned to 38 (6.1%), 270 (43.5%), 157 (25.3%), and 156 (25.1%) patients, respectively. The incidence of parapharyngeal extension was 74.1% (460/621). Of these patients (460) with parapharyngeal extension, 310 (67.4%) patients were classified as T2b disease. The 1997 AJCC system showed highly significant differences between the overall stages for both OS and relapse-free survival (RFS). The 1997 AJCC T classifications showed significant correlation with local failure, and N classification was accurate in predicting FDM. Multivariate analysis showed that paraoropharyngeal involvement was an independently significant prognostic factor for OS, freedom from local recurrence (FLR), and freedom form distant metastasis (FDM).

The 1997 AJCC staging system for NPC is prognostically useful for Chinese patient populations. We proposed that subdivision of parapharyngeal extension should be included in future revisions of the staging system.     

Validation of the 6th edition AJCC Pancreatic Cancer Staging System: report from the National Cancer Database

BACKGROUND

With the development of stage‐specific treatments for pancreatic cancer, controversies exist concerning optimal clinical and pathologic staging. The most recent edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Cancer Staging Manual 6^th Edition included some notable modifications. In anticipation of the 7^th edition's publication, the authors evaluated the predictive ability of the current pancreatic adenocarcinoma staging system.

METHODS

By using the National Cancer Data Base (1992–1998), 121,713 patients were identified with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. All patients were restaged by AJCC 6^th edition guidelines. Stage‐specific overall survival was estimated by using the Kaplan‐Meier method and compared with log‐rank tests. Concordance indices were calculated to evaluate the discriminatory power of the staging system. Cox modeling was used to determine the relative impact of T, N, and M classification on survival.

RESULTS

For all patients, there was 5‐year survival discrimination by stage (P < .0001). For patients who underwent pancreatectomy, stage predicted 5‐year survival: stage IA, 31.4%; IB, 27.2%; IIA, 15.7%; IIB, 7.7%; III, 6.8%; IV, 2.8% (P < .0001). The concordance index for the staging system was 0.631 for all patients, 0.613 for those who underwent pancreatectomy, and 0.596 for patients who did not undergo resection. In patients who underwent pancreatectomy, tumor size, nodal status, and distant metastases were independent predictors of survival (P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first large‐scale validation of the pancreatic cancer staging system. AJCC 6^th edition staging guidelines are accurate with respect to survival. Further investigation is needed to integrate new molecular and biochemical markers into the staging scheme. Cancer 2007; 110:738–44. © 2007 American Cancer Society.     

AJCC第7版与第8版分期对乳腺癌患者预后预测的比较分析

背景与目的：美国癌症联合委员会（American Joint Committee on Cancer,AJCC）第8版乳腺癌分期在传统解剖因素基础上,结合生物标志物,建立了一种全新的乳腺癌预后分期系统。该研究旨在分析AJCC第8版乳腺癌分期的临床应用价值。方法：分析222例乳腺癌根治术后出现复发转移的患者,按照AJCC第7版解剖分期：肿瘤（tumor,T）分期、淋巴结（node,N）分期、转移（metastasis,M）分期,和第8版预后分期标准进行初诊状态再分期,比较不同标准分期的差异及与预后的关系,生存分析采用Kaplan-Meier方法,log-rank法检验无病生存期（disease-free survival,DFS）的差异。结果：按照AJCC第7版分期标准,ⅠA、ⅠB、ⅡA、ⅡB、ⅢA、ⅢB和ⅢC期的患者分别为34例（15.3%）、0例（0.0%）、73例（32.9%）、26例（11.7%）、45例（20.3%）、4例（1.8%）和40例（18.0%）;按照AJCC第8版预后分期标准,ⅠA、ⅠB、ⅡA、ⅡB、ⅢA、ⅢB和ⅢC期的患者分别为47例（21.2%）、35例（15.8%）、55例（24.8%）、17例（7.7%）、25例（11.3%）、30例（13.5%）和13例（5.9%）,差异有统计学意义（P=0.000）。分期变化主要有：第7版Ⅰ期细分为第8版ⅠA和ⅠB期;第7版ⅡA期细分为第8版ⅠA、ⅠB和ⅡA期;第7版ⅡB期细分为第8版ⅠA、ⅠB、ⅡA、ⅡB和ⅢA期;第7版ⅢA期细分为第8版ⅠB、ⅡA、ⅡB、ⅢA、ⅢB和ⅢC期;第7版ⅢB和ⅢC期细分为第8版ⅢA、ⅢB和Ⅲc期。AJCC第7版TNM分期和第8版预后分期与患者DFS比较差异均有统计学意义（P=0.002和0.001）,第8版预后分期ⅢB和ⅢC期亚组的DFS更为准确。结论： AJCC第8版预后分期能够准确预测乳腺癌患者的预后。     

美国癌症研究联合会两版临床分期标准对局部晚期胃癌疗后预测价值比较

目的 比较美国癌症研究联合会第6、7版分期对局部晚期胃癌根治术后的预后预测。方法 对2002-2004年在本院接受胃癌根治性手术(R0切除且＞D1淋巴结清扫)、病理诊断为T3-4N0～1M0、TxN2-3 M0期的297例患者分别按两版分期标准进行分期,比较两版分期的N、TNM分期中5年总生存(OS)、无瘤生存(DFS...     

基于MRI及IMRT下的鼻咽癌新T分期研究

目的 建立一个基于MRI并与IMRT相适应的鼻咽癌新T分期系统。方法 回顾分析2008—2010年我院基于MRI并接受IMRT的608例初治无转移鼻咽癌患者资料,按鼻咽癌第7版UICC/AJCC分期系统进行分期。Kaplan-Meier法计算相关生存率及Logrank检验,Cox法多因素分析。现行UICC/AJCC分期系统存在不足,在此基础上建立新鼻咽癌T分期系统,并对新T分期系统合理性进行评价。结果 5年随访率为94.5%,5年OS、DFS、LRFS、DMFS分别为81.5%、80.1%、86.0%、81.1%。单因素及多因素分析结果显示鼻咽、咽旁间隙、颅底解剖结构均为影响患者OS率因素(P=0.000—0.045)。根据风险差异性及生存曲线分布提出新T分期标准:T₁期:侵袭鼻咽、咽旁间隙、口咽、鼻腔、颅底、翼内肌;T₂期:侵袭翼外肌、鼻窦、眼眶、颅内、颞下窝、颅神经。推荐新T分期系统LRFS曲线及OS曲线均能很好地拉开。结论 推荐新T分期系统能较客观地预测鼻咽癌患者预后,可作为鼻咽癌临床新分期探索性的尝试。     

Survival comparison in gastric cancer patients between 7th and 8th edition of the AJCC TNM staging system: The first western single center experience

BackgroundThe objective of this study was to compare the 7th and the 8th edition of American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system (AJCC TNM) in terms of better stratification in our gastric cancer resected patients.Methods and materialsA retrospective analysis of a single western center series was made. Patients who underwent surgery from January 2004 to December 2016 were enrolled in the study. We compared survival rates across patients classified according to the 7th and the 8th AJCC TNM staging system.ResultsAmong 295 patients we observed 9.8% stage migration according the 8th edition. Of these 2.1% and 7.9% of patients showed respectively a higher and a lower stage.5 years Overall Survival (5Y-OS) according to the 8th edition for stage IIIB and IIIC were 32% versus 9% showing a better stratification compared to the 7th edition in which 5Y-OS were respectively 26% versus 22%.ConclusionRestaging system seems to improve survival rate discrimination in particular comparing stage IIIB and stage IIIC; whereas in stage IIIA this is not so clear.More studies are necessary to confirm these data.     

Validation of the American Joint Committee on Cancer 8th edition staging system for the pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Background & aimsThe American Joint Commission on Cancer (AJCC) 8th edition staging system for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) contains several significant changes. This study aimed to validate the AJCC 8th edition staging system of PDA.MethodsWe analyzed patients with resected PDA between 2001 and 2017 using the Korean Pancreatic Cancer (K-PaC) registry. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier survival curves and compared via the log-rank test.ResultsIn total, 701 resected PDA patients were identified. During a median follow-up of 24.5 months, the median OS was 21.7 months. Meanwhile, the median OS of each stage according to the AJCC 8th edition was 73.5 months (stage IA), 41.9 months (stage IB), 24.2 months (stage IIA), 18.3 months (stage IIB), and 16.8 months (stage III). However, the new N-category (pN1 vs. pN2) did not subdivide prognosis, although the lymph node ratio (i.e., the ratio of the number of LN involved to the number of examined LN) did. Although pT3 and pN2 belong under stage III, pN2 has a significantly longer median OS than pT3 (16.9 months vs 11.2 months; p < 0.01).ConclusionThe AJCC 8th edition staging system appropriately stratifies the prognosis of PDA patients. However, the cutoff of the N-category is not statistically valid, and the new stage III includes a heterogeneous category (pN2 and pT4). Therefore, we propose that stage III be divided into stage IIIA (Tany N2 M0) and stage IIIB (T4 Nany M0).     

External validation of a modified 8th AJCC TNM system for advanced gastric cancer: Long-term results in southern China

Background

The 8th edition of AJCC TNM staging manual for gastric cancer (GC) has been validated by several studies. A modified staging system based on it and total harvested number of lymph nodes (LNs; cutoff: 30) is suggested to improve predictive capacities for advanced GC. This study is designed to validate the modified method using a single-center database in Southern China.

鼻咽癌前瞻性多中心临床分期研究的初步结果

目的 通过比较鼻咽癌2008分期和第7版UICC或AJCC分期标准的病例分布和预后价值,探讨两种分期合理性。方法 分析2009—2010年全国9个肿瘤中心收治的 1508例无远处转移鼻咽癌首诊患者的临床资料,分别根据鼻咽癌2008分期与第7版UICC或AJCC分期进行分期,分析和评价两种分期病例分布的一致性及 3年LRFS、DMFS、OS率。采用Kaplan-Meier法计算LRFS、DMFS和OS率,Logrank检验差异。结果 两种分期的T期、N期、临床分期病例分布相似(Kappa=0.80、0.60、0.60),临床分期OS曲线和T分期LRFS曲线也较一致,但Ⅰ、Ⅱ期OS曲线相似,T₁—T₃期LRFS曲线出现靠拢或重叠。2008分期N₀与N₁期曲线相似,而UICC或AJCC分期N₁与N₂期曲线相似。结论 两种分期病例分布、临床分期及T分期预后相似,但N分期预后不同。两种分期中临床分期、T分期、N分期的预后需进一步完善。     

第7版UICC或AJCC鼻咽癌分期的IMRT验证研究

目的 验证第7版 UICC或AJCC 鼻咽癌分期系统在以MR为分期手段、IMRT为基础综合治疗策略下的合理性及适用性。方法 回顾分析2007—2011年间在本院经MRI分期和IMRT治疗的 720例初诊M₀期鼻咽癌患者的生存及失败情况,评价T、N分期对预测患者生存及失败的可靠性。Kaplan-Meier计算生存率,Logrank法检验差异,Cox模型多因素预后分析。结果 第7版 UICC或AJCC 鼻咽癌T分期是OS、CSS、DFS和DMFS的影响因素(P=0.013、0.025、0.001、0.002),但T₁、T₂、T₃期间相近(P=0.054~0.626)。从局部复发和远转风险来看,T₃与T₂期非常接近(P=0.796)。N分期是DFS、DMFS的影响因素(P=0.005,0.000)。但N₀和N₁期间相近(P=0.549、0.707)。在N₀—N₁期中也未发现单纯咽后淋巴结转移对OS、DFS和DMFS有影响(P=0.360、0.083、0.062)。结论 第7版UICC或AJCC鼻咽癌分期系统对经MRI分期和IMRT的鼻咽癌患者预后仍有较好预测价值,但有进一步优化的空间。     

基于IMRT时代的第八版AJCC/UICC鼻咽癌临床分期建议

本文首次发表在Cancer,2016,122(4):546-558.

目的 准确的分期系统对癌症的治疗至关重要。随着癌症分期和治疗方法的演变,需要不断评价分期的适用性和改进性。方法 基于第7版AJCC/UICC分期回顾性分析香港和中国大陆2个肿瘤中心收治的 1609例接受调强放射治疗的首诊无转移鼻咽癌患者临床资料,所有患者治疗前均行核磁共振分期评估。结果 无其他T₃、T₄期解剖结构受侵患者中,伴有咀嚼肌间隙(翼内肌和/或翼外肌)侵犯、椎前肌侵犯及咽旁间隙侵犯的三组患者之间OS相近。伴广泛软组织(上述侵犯结构以外的软组织)受侵患者OS与伴有颅内侵犯或颅神经侵犯相似。仅2%患者锁骨上窝以上淋巴结转移者直径>6 cm,其OS率与下颈淋巴结转移者类似。用下颈(环状软骨尾侧缘水平以下)代替锁骨上窝并不影响N分期之间的风险差异性。采用推荐的T、N分期,T₄N_0-2、T_1-4N₃期OS相近。结论 经AJCC/UICC分期筹备委员会审阅后,建议第8版分期应将翼内肌/翼外肌从T₄降到T₂期,增加椎前肌为T₂期,用下颈取代锁骨上窝,将淋巴结最大直径>6 cm合并归为N₃期,将T₄、N₃期统一归为Ⅳ_A期。这些改变不仅使得相邻分期间风险差异性更好,而且使得临床实践性与全球适用性之间达到最佳平衡。     

AJCC 7th edition of TNM staging accurately discriminates outcomes of patients with resectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: By the AFC-IHCC-2009 study group

BACKGROUND:

This year, the 7th edition of the AJCC staging manual has for the first time attributed a unique pTNM staging to intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHCC) that is intended to replace the 2 Western and ideally also the 2 Eastern systems currently in use. This proposal, which has not yet been validated, was tested in the current study.

METHODS:

Among 522 patients operated on with curative intent for an IHCC between 1994 and 2008 in tertiary hepatobiliary centers, those with mass‐forming‐type IHCCs, an R0 resection, and accurate pathological node staging were retained for evaluation. The distribution of these patients and their actuarial survival in the new TNM stages (as well as in the 4 previous ones) were compared.

RESULTS:

Only 163 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria, mainly because of the lack of routine lymphadenectomy, but patients and tumors characteristics of this population were representative. These patients were evenly distributed between AJCC 7th edition stages (stage I, 28%; stage II, 32%; stage III, 35%), which was not the case for the other systems. With an average follow‐up of 34 months in survivors, the AJCC 7th edition was more discriminating than the others in predicting survival (median for stage I not reached; for stage II, 53 months, P = .01; for stage III, 16 months, P < .0001). Survival of these patients according to the 2 Japanese classifications was identical to that anticipated.

CONCLUSIONS:

The 7th edition is clinically relevant and may be applicable worldwide, provided routine lymphadenectomy at the time of surgery for IHCC becomes the standard of care. Cancer 2011. © 2010 American Cancer Society.     

食管癌新旧分期系统预后价值的比较

目的:比较第7 版和第6 版AJCC食管癌分期系统对可切除的食管鳞癌患者的预后评估的差异。方法:选取天津医科大学附属肿瘤医院1999年1 月至2004年12月间398 例食管鳞状细胞癌术后有完整资料患者的临床病理和5 年随访资料,通过Kaplan-Meier 生存曲线法描述生存过程,Log-Rank检验不同分期的生存率的差异,χ2检验比较组间差异。结果:按照AJCC第6 版及第7 版两种不同的TNM分期方法对398 例患者的临床病理结果进行分期,总的5 年生存率为26.9% 。新分期后,由于转移淋巴结数目和肿瘤分化程度的标准不同,Ⅰ期及Ⅳ期的例数均有所增加,各期别生存差异较第6 版更加显著。其5 年生存率分别为62.5% ,33.9% ,15% ,3.4% 。结论:AJCC食管癌第7 版分期能够更好的反映食管癌术后患者的预后,转移淋巴结数目的对预后的影响更显重要。