Literature DB >> 19517467

Tumor border configuration added to TNM staging better stratifies stage II colorectal cancer patients into prognostic subgroups.

Inti Zlobec1, Kristi Baker, Parham Minoo, Shinichi Hayashi, Luigi Terracciano, Alessandro Lugli.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Reproducible and well characterized prognostic histomorphologic criteria added to current pathological staging could have an immediate effect on refining prognosis in colorectal cancer. The aim of this study was to determine the additive effect of tumor border configuration and peritumoral lymphocytic infiltration on the selection of patients for adjuvant therapy classified by TNM.
METHODS: A total of 1420 primary colorectal cancers with complete clinicopathological data from multiple treatment centers were analyzed. The prognostic effect of tumor border configuration (pushing or infiltrating) and peritumoral lymphocytic infiltration was assessed, validated by resampling of the data, and compared with TNM staging. All P values were 2-sided.
RESULTS: Multivariate analysis confirmed the adverse prognostic value of the tumor border configuration (P < .001), but not of peritumoral lymphocytic infiltration. The addition of tumor border configuration to T and N category identified 2 major prognostic subgroups (relative risk of death, 4.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.53-8.94). Moreover, stage II patients with a pushing border had a 5-year survival rate of 82.1% (95% CI, 71.8%-90.3%), whereas an infiltrating border resulted in a significantly more adverse outcome (5-year survival rate, 62.7%; 95% CI, 48.0-76.2%), closely resembling that of stage III patients. Similar results were obtained after adjusting for adjuvant therapy (P < .001).
CONCLUSIONS: The classification of patients into prognostic subgroups is improved with the addition of tumor border configuration to TNM stage. In particular, patients with stage II disease characterized by an infiltrating tumor border have poor clinical outcome and represent a subset of lymph node-negative patients who could be considered for adjuvant therapy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19517467     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.24450

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  15 in total

Review 1.  [Digital pathology in immuno-oncology-current opportunities and challenges : Overview of the analysis of immune cell infiltrates using whole slide imaging].

Authors:  N Grabe; W Roth; S Foersch
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 1.011

2.  Prognostic significance and molecular associations of tumor growth pattern in colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Teppei Morikawa; Aya Kuchiba; Zhi Rong Qian; Mari Mino-Kenudson; Jason L Hornick; Mai Yamauchi; Yu Imamura; Xiaoyun Liao; Reiko Nishihara; Jeffrey A Meyerhardt; Charles S Fuchs; Shuji Ogino
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2011-12-22       Impact factor: 5.344

3.  Defining Cancer Subpopulations by Adaptive Strategies Rather Than Molecular Properties Provides Novel Insights into Intratumoral Evolution.

Authors:  Arig Ibrahim-Hashim; Mark Robertson-Tessi; Pedro M Enriquez-Navas; Mehdi Damaghi; Yoganand Balagurunathan; Jonathan W Wojtkowiak; Shonagh Russell; Kam Yoonseok; Mark C Lloyd; Marilyn M Bui; Joel S Brown; Alexander R A Anderson; Robert J Gillies; Robert A Gatenby
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 12.701

4.  Role of the VEGF ligand to receptor ratio in the progression of mismatch repair-proficient colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Manuela Eppenberger; Inti Zlobec; Daniel Baumhoer; Luigi Terracciano; Alessandro Lugli
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2010-03-11       Impact factor: 4.430

5.  A clinical model for predicting lymph node metastasis in submucosal invasive (T1) colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Fernando Macias-Garcia; Catuxa Celeiro-Muñoz; Lucia Lesquereux-Martinez; Francisco Gude-Sampedro; Laura Uribarri-Gonzalez; Ihab Abdulkader; Ana Alvarez-Castro; J Enrique Dominguez-Muñoz
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2015-02-21       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Invasive front of colorectal cancer: dynamic interface of pro-/anti-tumor factors.

Authors:  Inti Zlobec; Alessandro Lugli
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-12-21       Impact factor: 5.742

7.  Histopathological features predict metastatic potential in locally advanced colon carcinomas.

Authors:  Caren Jayasinghe; Nektaria Simiantonaki; Charles James Kirkpatrick
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2015-01-21       Impact factor: 4.430

Review 8.  The tumor border configuration of colorectal cancer as a histomorphological prognostic indicator.

Authors:  Viktor H Koelzer; Alessandro Lugli
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2014-02-18       Impact factor: 6.244

9.  Management of stage II colon cancer - the use of molecular biomarkers for adjuvant therapy decision.

Authors:  Marisa Donada; Serena Bonin; Renzo Barbazza; Daniel Pettirosso; Giorgio Stanta
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-02-27       Impact factor: 3.067

10.  ERBB4 confers metastatic capacity in Ewing sarcoma.

Authors:  Ariadna Mendoza-Naranjo; Amal El-Naggar; Daniel H Wai; Priti Mistry; Nikola Lazic; Fernanda Rocha Rojas Ayala; Isabela Werneck da Cunha; Pablo Rodriguez-Viciana; Hongwei Cheng; Jose H Tavares Guerreiro Fregnani; Patrick Reynolds; Robert J Arceci; Andrew Nicholson; Timothy J Triche; Fernando A Soares; Adrienne M Flanagan; Yuzhuo Z Wang; Sandra J Strauss; Poul H Sorensen
Journal:  EMBO Mol Med       Date:  2013-05-16       Impact factor: 12.137

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.