OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to evaluate the clinical relevance of the World Health Organization (WHO) and tumor node metastasis (TNM) classifications in patients affected by pancreatic endocrine tumors. METHODS: Data from 76 consecutive patients with pancreatic endocrine tumors who underwent surgery were analyzed. RESULTS: Well-differentiated tumors were observed more frequently (57.9%) than well or poorly differentiated carcinomas (26.3% and 15.8%, respectively). The TNM stage was I in 27.6%, II in 39.5%, III in 19.7%, and IV in 13.2%. Univariate analysis of disease-specific survival showed that patients with stages I-II had a significantly better survival rate than those with stages III-IV (hazard ratio (HR), 12.46; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.53-101.32; P = 0.018; HR, 25.74; 95% CI, 3.07-216.07; P = 0.003, respectively). Regarding the WHO classification, poorly differentiated carcinomas had the worst prognosis (HR, 79.13; 95% CI, 9.99-626.60; P < 0.001). Multivariate Cox regression analysis of disease-specific survival showed that the WHO classification is the only independent factors of improved survival: both poorly and well-differentiated carcinomas had an increased risk of death compared with WDTs (HR, 100.42; 95% CI, 12.16-829.40; P < 0.001; HR, 10.73; 95% CI, 1.12-104.17; P = 0.040, respectively). TNM classification and the WHO system are highly correlated (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: TNM stage and the WHO classification seems to be equally reliable, even if TNM classification tends to understage the patients classified using the WHO system.
OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to evaluate the clinical relevance of the World Health Organization (WHO) and tumor node metastasis (TNM) classifications in patients affected by pancreatic endocrine tumors. METHODS: Data from 76 consecutive patients with pancreatic endocrine tumors who underwent surgery were analyzed. RESULTS: Well-differentiated tumors were observed more frequently (57.9%) than well or poorly differentiated carcinomas (26.3% and 15.8%, respectively). The TNM stage was I in 27.6%, II in 39.5%, III in 19.7%, and IV in 13.2%. Univariate analysis of disease-specific survival showed that patients with stages I-II had a significantly better survival rate than those with stages III-IV (hazard ratio (HR), 12.46; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.53-101.32; P = 0.018; HR, 25.74; 95% CI, 3.07-216.07; P = 0.003, respectively). Regarding the WHO classification, poorly differentiated carcinomas had the worst prognosis (HR, 79.13; 95% CI, 9.99-626.60; P < 0.001). Multivariate Cox regression analysis of disease-specific survival showed that the WHO classification is the only independent factors of improved survival: both poorly and well-differentiated carcinomas had an increased risk of death compared with WDTs (HR, 100.42; 95% CI, 12.16-829.40; P < 0.001; HR, 10.73; 95% CI, 1.12-104.17; P = 0.040, respectively). TNM classification and the WHO system are highly correlated (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: TNM stage and the WHO classification seems to be equally reliable, even if TNM classification tends to understage the patients classified using the WHO system.
Authors: R Casadei; N Zanini; A M Morselli-Labate; L Calculli; R Pezzilli; O Potì; T Grottola; C Ricci; F Minni Journal: World J Surg Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: R Bettini; L Boninsegna; W Mantovani; P Capelli; C Bassi; P Pederzoli; G F Delle Fave; F Panzuto; A Scarpa; M Falconi Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2008-01-21 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Thorvardur R Halfdanarson; Joseph Rubin; Michael B Farnell; Clive S Grant; Gloria M Petersen Journal: Endocr Relat Cancer Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 5.678
Authors: Karl Y Bilimoria; Mark S Talamonti; James S Tomlinson; Andrew K Stewart; David P Winchester; Clifford Y Ko; David J Bentrem Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: G Rindi; G Klöppel; H Alhman; M Caplin; A Couvelard; W W de Herder; B Erikssson; A Falchetti; M Falconi; P Komminoth; M Körner; J M Lopes; A-M McNicol; O Nilsson; A Perren; A Scarpa; J-Y Scoazec; B Wiedenmann Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2006-09-12 Impact factor: 4.064
Authors: Resit Demir; Johann Pohl; Abbas Agaimy; Georgios Peros; Aristoteles Perrakis; Susanne Merkel; Werner Hohenberger; Peter Klein Journal: World J Surg Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Masayuki Tanaka; Max Heckler; André L Mihaljevic; Pascal Probst; Ulla Klaiber; Ulrike Heger; Simon Schimmack; Markus W Büchler; Thilo Hackert Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2020-07-27 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Emma Elizabeth Ilett; Seppo W Langer; Ingrid Holst Olsen; Birgitte Federspiel; Andreas Kjær; Ulrich Knigge Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) Date: 2015-04-08
Authors: Robert T Jensen; Guillaume Cadiot; Maria L Brandi; Wouter W de Herder; Gregory Kaltsas; Paul Komminoth; Jean-Yves Scoazec; Ramon Salazar; Alain Sauvanet; Reza Kianmanesh Journal: Neuroendocrinology Date: 2012-02-15 Impact factor: 4.914