Literature DB >> 10421542

Comparison of AJCC 1988 and 1997 classifications for nasopharyngeal carcinoma. American Joint Committee on Cancer.

E Ozyar1, F Yildiz, F H Akyol, I L Atahan.   

Abstract

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.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10421542     DOI: 10.1016/s0360-3016(99)00098-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


  5 in total

Review 1.  The evolution of nasopharyngeal carcinoma staging.

Authors:  Rui Guo; Yan-Ping Mao; Ling-Long Tang; Lei Chen; Ying Sun; Jun Ma
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-07-12       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Challenges in the management of nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a review.

Authors:  Baharudin Abdullah; Azila Alias; Shahid Hassan
Journal:  Malays J Med Sci       Date:  2009-10

3.  Current management strategy of nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Authors:  William I Wei; Dora L W Kwong
Journal:  Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2010-03-30       Impact factor: 3.372

4.  Clinical application of tumor volume in advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma to predict outcome.

Authors:  Ching-Chih Lee; Tze-Ta Huang; Moon-Sing Lee; Shih-Hsuan Hsiao; Hon-Yi Lin; Yu-Chieh Su; Feng-Chun Hsu; Shih-Kai Hung
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2010-03-11       Impact factor: 3.481

5.  Anti-tumor effect of oncolytic herpes simplex virus G47delta on human nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Authors:  Jia-Ni Wang; Pan Hu; Mu-Sheng Zeng; Ren-Bin Liu
Journal:  Chin J Cancer       Date:  2011-11-04
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.