Matthias Kreppel1, Martin Scheer2, Moritz Meyer3, Markus Stenner3, Inga Wedemeyer4, Uta Drebber4, Robert Semrau5, Margarete Odenthal4, Joachim E Zöller2, Orlando Guntinas-Lichius6, Reinhard Büttner4, Dirk Beutner3. 1. Department for Oral and Maxillofacial Plastic Surgery, University of Cologne, Germany; Center of Integrated Oncology (CIO), Cologne-Bonn, Germany. Electronic address: mattheskreppel@yahoo.de. 2. Department for Oral and Maxillofacial Plastic Surgery, University of Cologne, Germany; Center of Integrated Oncology (CIO), Cologne-Bonn, Germany. 3. Department for Otorhinolaryngology and Head Neck Surgery, University of Cologne, Germany; Center of Integrated Oncology (CIO), Cologne-Bonn, Germany. 4. Department of Pathology, University of Cologne, Germany; Center of Integrated Oncology (CIO), Cologne-Bonn, Germany. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Cologne, Germany; Center of Integrated Oncology (CIO), Cologne-Bonn, Germany. 6. Department for Otorhinolaryngology and Head Neck Surgery, Jena University Hospital, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although the UICC/AJCC's TNM staging of the 7th edition was improved in 2002, there are still shortcomings concerning the prognostic quality. Alternative TNM-based stage-groupings such as the T and N Integer Score (TANIS) where shown to have a better prognostic quality for various kinds of head and neck tumors in the past. The aim of the study was to compare the prognostic value of the 7th edition of the UICC/AJCC TNM-classification for carcinoma of the parotid gland with different TNM-based stage groupings. METHODS: The retrospective analysis included 180 patients with carcinoma of the parotid gland diagnosed between 1986 and 2007. The stage grouping system of the 7th edition of the UICC/AJCC and TNM-based stage-groupings (TANIS-3, TANIS-8, Snyderman, Berg and Hart) were tested for their prognostic significance. Overall survival (OS) was plotted by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Prognostic factors were identified through univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: In univariate analysis all stage-groupings had a highly significant impact on overall survival (p<0.05), however in multivariate analysis, only the TANIS-8 scheme (p=0.008) and Snyderman scheme (p=0.047) predicted OS, while the UICC/AJCC-classification did not predict OS significantly (p=0.381). CONCLUSION: In comparison to other TNM-based stage groupings the UICC/AJCC-classification did not provide significant prediction of OS, while alternative stage-groupings such as the TANIS-8 had a higher prognostic value.
BACKGROUND: Although the UICC/AJCC's TNM staging of the 7th edition was improved in 2002, there are still shortcomings concerning the prognostic quality. Alternative TNM-based stage-groupings such as the T and N Integer Score (TANIS) where shown to have a better prognostic quality for various kinds of head and neck tumors in the past. The aim of the study was to compare the prognostic value of the 7th edition of the UICC/AJCC TNM-classification for carcinoma of the parotid gland with different TNM-based stage groupings. METHODS: The retrospective analysis included 180 patients with carcinoma of the parotid gland diagnosed between 1986 and 2007. The stage grouping system of the 7th edition of the UICC/AJCC and TNM-based stage-groupings (TANIS-3, TANIS-8, Snyderman, Berg and Hart) were tested for their prognostic significance. Overall survival (OS) was plotted by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Prognostic factors were identified through univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: In univariate analysis all stage-groupings had a highly significant impact on overall survival (p<0.05), however in multivariate analysis, only the TANIS-8 scheme (p=0.008) and Snyderman scheme (p=0.047) predicted OS, while the UICC/AJCC-classification did not predict OS significantly (p=0.381). CONCLUSION: In comparison to other TNM-based stage groupings the UICC/AJCC-classification did not provide significant prediction of OS, while alternative stage-groupings such as the TANIS-8 had a higher prognostic value.
Authors: Orlando Guntinas-Lichius; Thomas G Wendt; Jens Buentzel; Dirk Esser; Daniel Böger; Andreas H Mueller; Jörn-Uwe Piesold; Stefan Schultze-Mosgau; Peter Schlattmann; Harald Schmalenberg Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2015-03-24 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Małgorzata Wierzbicka; Kazimierz Niemczyk; Antoni Bruzgielewicz; Marcin Durko; Janusz Klatka; Tomasz Kopeć; Ewa Osuch-Wójcikiewicz; Wioletta Pietruszewska; Marcin Szymański; Witold Szyfter Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-02-22 Impact factor: 3.240