IMPORTANCE: This study proposes an alternative tumor staging system for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) that more precisely defines the small subset of tumors with a high risk of metastasis and death. OBJECTIVE: To identify risk factors for poor outcomes in CSCC and evaluate the 2010 American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) tumor (T) staging system's ability to stratify occurrence of these outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A single academic hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Study participants were identified via a pathology and dermatopathology database search for patients diagnosed as having high-risk CSCC. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-six primary high-risk CSCCs were included. Outcomes for AJCC tumor stages T2 to T4 were statistically indistinguishable because only 4 cases (<2% of the cohort) were AJCC stages T3 or T4, which require bone invasion. Subsequently, the bulk of poor outcomes (83% of nodal metastases, 92% of deaths from CSCC) occurred in AJCC stage T2 cases. An alternative tumor staging system was developed with the aim of better stratifying this stage T2 group. Four risk factors were found to be statistically independent prognostic factors for at least 2 outcomes of interest in multivariate modeling. These factors (poor differentiation, perineural invasion, tumor diameter ≥2 cm, invasion beyond subcutaneous fat) were incorporated in the alternative staging with 0 factors indicating T1, 1 factor indicating T2a; 2 to 3 factors, T2b; and 4 factors or bone invasion, T3. Stages T2a and T2b significantly differed in incidences of all 4 end points. Stage T2b tumors comprised only 19% of the cohort but accounted for 72% of nodal metastases and 83% of deaths from CSCC. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The proposed alternative tumor staging system offers improved prognostic discrimination via stratification of stage T2 tumors. Validation in other cohorts is needed. Meanwhile, stage T2b tumors are responsible for most poor outcomes and may be a focus of high-risk CSCC study.
IMPORTANCE: This study proposes an alternative tumor staging system for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) that more precisely defines the small subset of tumors with a high risk of metastasis and death. OBJECTIVE: To identify risk factors for poor outcomes in CSCC and evaluate the 2010 American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) tumor (T) staging system's ability to stratify occurrence of these outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A single academic hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Study participants were identified via a pathology and dermatopathology database search for patients diagnosed as having high-risk CSCC. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-six primary high-risk CSCCs were included. Outcomes for AJCC tumor stages T2 to T4 were statistically indistinguishable because only 4 cases (<2% of the cohort) were AJCC stages T3 or T4, which require bone invasion. Subsequently, the bulk of poor outcomes (83% of nodal metastases, 92% of deaths from CSCC) occurred in AJCC stage T2 cases. An alternative tumor staging system was developed with the aim of better stratifying this stage T2 group. Four risk factors were found to be statistically independent prognostic factors for at least 2 outcomes of interest in multivariate modeling. These factors (poor differentiation, perineural invasion, tumor diameter ≥2 cm, invasion beyond subcutaneous fat) were incorporated in the alternative staging with 0 factors indicating T1, 1 factor indicating T2a; 2 to 3 factors, T2b; and 4 factors or bone invasion, T3. Stages T2a and T2b significantly differed in incidences of all 4 end points. Stage T2b tumors comprised only 19% of the cohort but accounted for 72% of nodal metastases and 83% of deaths from CSCC. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The proposed alternative tumor staging system offers improved prognostic discrimination via stratification of stage T2 tumors. Validation in other cohorts is needed. Meanwhile, stage T2b tumors are responsible for most poor outcomes and may be a focus of high-risk CSCC study.
Authors: Gino K In; Poorva Vaidya; Alexandra Filkins; David J Hermel; Kevin G King; Omar Ragab; William W Tseng; Mark Swanson; Niels Kokot; Julie E Lang; Lawrence Menendez; Brittney DeClerck; Gene Kim; Jenny C Hu; Alicia Terando; Hossein Jadvar; Charité Ricker; Kimberly A Miller; David H Peng; Ashley Wysong Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2020-11-18 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Kristin Bibee; Andrew Swartz; Shaum Sridharan; Cornelius H L Kurten; Charles B Wessel; Heath Skinner; Dan P Zandberg Journal: Oral Oncol Date: 2020-02-14 Impact factor: 5.337
Authors: Pritesh S Karia; Anokhi Jambusaria-Pahlajani; David P Harrington; George F Murphy; Abrar A Qureshi; Chrysalyne D Schmults Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-12-23 Impact factor: 44.544