Qifeng Wang1, Wencheng Zhang1, Xiao Liu1, Xun Zhang2, Jie He3, Qinfu Feng1, Zongmei Zhou1, Lvhua Wang1, Weibo Yin1, Zefen Xiao1. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Institute and Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Beijing, China. 2. Department of Pathology, Cancer Institute and Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Beijing, China. 3. Department of Thoracic Surgery, Cancer Institute and Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Beijing, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The 7th edition American Joint Committee on Cancer tumor-node-metastasis (AJCC TNM) staging system was published in 2010. Here we evaluate its predictive ability and compare the 6th and 7th editions of the AJCC TNM staging systems in esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC) with preoperative radiotherapy. METHODS: A total of 296 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients receiving preoperative radiotherapy between 1980 and 2007 were included. Patients were staged using the 6th and 7th edition staging systems. Survival analyses were performed using Cox regression models. The homogeneity, discriminatory ability, and monotonicity of gradients of the two staging systems were compared using linear trend χ(2), likelihood ratio statistics, and Akaike information criterion calculation. RESULTS: The overall five-year survival rate for the entire cohort was 27.1%. Female gender, length, "T," and "N," classifications according to the 7th edition staging system were the prognostic factors in univariate analyses. However, tumor histological grade and cancer location did not significantly influence patient survival. The 7th edition staging system has the highest linear trend χ(2)and likelihood ratio χ(2)scores. Compared to the 6th edition, the 7th edition staging system also has a smaller Akaike information criterion value, which represents the optimum prognostic stratification. CONCLUSIONS: The strength of the 7th edition AJCC TNM staging system lies in the new descriptors for "T" and "N" classifications. However, we did not find cancer location to be a significant prognostic factor in our cohort. Overall, the 7th edition AJCC TNM staging system performed better than the previous edition.
BACKGROUND: The 7th edition American Joint Committee on Cancer tumor-node-metastasis (AJCC TNM) staging system was published in 2010. Here we evaluate its predictive ability and compare the 6th and 7th editions of the AJCC TNM staging systems in esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC) with preoperative radiotherapy. METHODS: A total of 296 esophageal squamous cell carcinomapatients receiving preoperative radiotherapy between 1980 and 2007 were included. Patients were staged using the 6th and 7th edition staging systems. Survival analyses were performed using Cox regression models. The homogeneity, discriminatory ability, and monotonicity of gradients of the two staging systems were compared using linear trend χ(2), likelihood ratio statistics, and Akaike information criterion calculation. RESULTS: The overall five-year survival rate for the entire cohort was 27.1%. Female gender, length, "T," and "N," classifications according to the 7th edition staging system were the prognostic factors in univariate analyses. However, tumor histological grade and cancer location did not significantly influence patient survival. The 7th edition staging system has the highest linear trend χ(2)and likelihood ratio χ(2)scores. Compared to the 6th edition, the 7th edition staging system also has a smaller Akaike information criterion value, which represents the optimum prognostic stratification. CONCLUSIONS: The strength of the 7th edition AJCC TNM staging system lies in the new descriptors for "T" and "N" classifications. However, we did not find cancer location to be a significant prognostic factor in our cohort. Overall, the 7th edition AJCC TNM staging system performed better than the previous edition.
Authors: S Ueno; G Tanabe; K Sako; T Hiwaki; H Hokotate; Y Fukukura; Y Baba; Y Imamura; T Aikou Journal: Hepatology Date: 2001-09 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: P van Hagen; M C C M Hulshof; J J B van Lanschot; E W Steyerberg; M I van Berge Henegouwen; B P L Wijnhoven; D J Richel; G A P Nieuwenhuijzen; G A P Hospers; J J Bonenkamp; M A Cuesta; R J B Blaisse; O R C Busch; F J W ten Kate; G-J Creemers; C J A Punt; J T M Plukker; H M W Verheul; E J Spillenaar Bilgen; H van Dekken; M J C van der Sangen; T Rozema; K Biermann; J C Beukema; A H M Piet; C M van Rij; J G Reinders; H W Tilanus; A van der Gaast Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-05-31 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Yun Ku Cho; Jin Wook Chung; Jae Kyun Kim; Yong Sik Ahn; Mi Young Kim; Yoon Ok Park; Wan Tae Kim; Jong Hoon Byun Journal: Cancer Date: 2008-01-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Lucian R Chirieac; Stephen G Swisher; Jaffer A Ajani; Ritsuko R Komaki; Arlene M Correa; Jeffrey S Morris; Jack A Roth; Asif Rashid; Stanley R Hamilton; Tsung-Teh Wu Journal: Cancer Date: 2005-04-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Nabil P Rizk; Ennapadam Venkatraman; Manjit S Bains; Bernard Park; Raja Flores; Laura Tang; David H Ilson; Bruce D Minsky; Valerie W Rusch Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-02-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: F Fiorica; D Di Bona; F Schepis; A Licata; L Shahied; A Venturi; A M Falchi; A Craxì; C Cammà Journal: Gut Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: T W Rice; V W Rusch; C Apperson-Hansen; M S Allen; L-Q Chen; J G Hunter; K A Kesler; S Law; T E M R Lerut; C E Reed; J A Salo; W J Scott; S G Swisher; T J Watson; E H Blackstone Journal: Dis Esophagus Date: 2009 Impact factor: 3.429