Joseph S K Au1, C K Law, W Foo, W H Lau. 1. Department of Clinical Oncology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Hong Kong, People's Republic of China. ska@netvigator.com
Abstract
PURPOSE: To critically evaluate the American Joint Commission on Cancer (AJCC)/International Union Against Cancer (UICC) 1997 staging system and look back on its achievements by comparing it with the AJCC/UICC 1992 and Ho 1978 staging systems. To identify areas for additional refinement, we analyzed the prognostic heterogeneity within each stage in depth, which provided important clues for the addition or better categorization of the different defining criteria. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We performed a retrospective review of the data from 1294 consecutive biopsy-proven nonmetastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients and staged the extent of disease according to the defining criteria of the three staging systems. All patients had undergone detailed pretreatment assessment by fiberoptic endoscopy and CT. Radical-intent radiotherapy was given using the Ho technique according to our standard protocol. RESULTS: The AJCC/UICC 1997 staging system was superior to the other two staging systems, because it assigned patients to more uniform-size stage groupings and correlated better with prognosis. Parapharyngeal space involvement was not an independent predictor for survival, local control, or metastasis. On the other hand, carotid space involvement correlated with a greater likelihood of metastasis. Prognostic heterogeneity was found. Those with orbit, cranial nerve, or intracranial involvement fared worse within Stage T4; those with a maximal lymph node size >3 cm fared worse within Stage N2; and those with bilateral lymph node metastasis fared worse within Stage N3. CONCLUSION: The prognostic accuracy of the AJCC/UICC 1997 staging system can be improved further by recategorization of the T, N, and group stage criteria.
PURPOSE: To critically evaluate the American Joint Commission on Cancer (AJCC)/International Union Against Cancer (UICC) 1997 staging system and look back on its achievements by comparing it with the AJCC/UICC 1992 and Ho 1978 staging systems. To identify areas for additional refinement, we analyzed the prognostic heterogeneity within each stage in depth, which provided important clues for the addition or better categorization of the different defining criteria. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We performed a retrospective review of the data from 1294 consecutive biopsy-proven nonmetastatic nasopharyngeal carcinomapatients and staged the extent of disease according to the defining criteria of the three staging systems. All patients had undergone detailed pretreatment assessment by fiberoptic endoscopy and CT. Radical-intent radiotherapy was given using the Ho technique according to our standard protocol. RESULTS: The AJCC/UICC 1997 staging system was superior to the other two staging systems, because it assigned patients to more uniform-size stage groupings and correlated better with prognosis. Parapharyngeal space involvement was not an independent predictor for survival, local control, or metastasis. On the other hand, carotid space involvement correlated with a greater likelihood of metastasis. Prognostic heterogeneity was found. Those with orbit, cranial nerve, or intracranial involvement fared worse within Stage T4; those with a maximal lymph node size >3 cm fared worse within Stage N2; and those with bilateral lymph node metastasis fared worse within Stage N3. CONCLUSION: The prognostic accuracy of the AJCC/UICC 1997 staging system can be improved further by recategorization of the T, N, and group stage criteria.