Literature DB >> 28487613

Outcomes and prognostic factors of patients with stage IB and IIA pancreatic cancer according to the 8th edition American Joint Committee on Cancer criteria.

Yang Li1, Chuan-Gang Tang1, Yu Zhao1, Wu-You Cao1, Guo-Feng Qu1.   

Abstract

AIM: To evaluate the changes in the 8th edition American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) for defining stage IB and IIA pancreatic cancer and identify their prognostic factors.
METHODS: Pancreatic cancer patients were selected from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database (1973-2013). The enrolled patients were divided into IB and IIA groups based on tumor size according to the 8th edition AJCC criteria. Clinical characteristics, including age, gender, race, tumor size, primary site, and grade were summarized. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to explore the prognostic factors of the IB and IIA stages of pancreatic cancer under new criteria.
RESULTS: A total of 1349 pancreatic cancer patients were included. More patients had stage IB rather than stage IIA. Stage IB tumors (54.85%) were mainly located in the head of the pancreas, while stage IIA tumors were more often located in the tail and head of the pancreas (35.21% and 31.75%, respectively). The survival time of stage IB and IIA patients had no significant difference. Univariate and multivariate analyses indicated that the prognostic factors of survival for stage IB and IIA patients were different. For stage IB patients, age and primary site were the independent prognostic factors; for stage IIA patients, age and grade were the independent prognostic factors. The risk of death was lower among patients aged ≤ 65 years than those aged > 65 years.
CONCLUSION: The prognostic factors for stage IB and IIA patients are different, but age is the independent prognostic factor for all patients. The survival time of stage IB and IIA patients has no significant difference.

Entities:  

Keywords:  8th American Joint Committee on Cancer; Pancreatic cancer; Prognostic factor; TNM; Tumor size

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28487613      PMCID: PMC5403755          DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i15.2757

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 1007-9327            Impact factor:   5.742


Core tip: The 8th edition American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM criteria for pancreatic cancer emphasize the tumor size cutoff point of 4 cm for the first time. Thus we used the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database, a population-based database, to evaluate the new changes in pancreatic cancer staging and the prognostic factors of stage IB and IIA pancreatic cancer.

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic cancer is an aggressive and devastating disease, which is characterized by invasiveness, rapid progression, and profound resistance to treatment[1-3]. The incidence of pancreatic cancer in the United States and western Europe is 10/100000 per year and almost approaches mortality[4]. The overall survival rate at 5 years is less than 5%[5,6]. Surgical resection is still the only treatment providing prolonged survival; however, even after a curative resection, the 5-year survival rate remains low[7]. Tumor size is the basis of cancer staging, which is one of the strongest prognostic factors in various cancers, including pancreatic cancer[8-10]. Compared with the 6th and 7th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) system for defining stage IB pancreatic cancer (IB: tumor diameter > 2 cm, no regional lymph node metastasis, no distant metastasis)[11], the 8th edition AJCC criteria emphasize the cutoff point of 4 cm (IB: tumor diameter > 2 but ≤ 4 cm; IIA: tumor diameter > 4 cm, both with no regional lymph node metastasis and no distant metastasis)[12,13]. Clinically, the size and location of pancreatic tumor determine the type of surgical resection[14-16], which suggests the important role of tumor size and location. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the changes in the AJCC system for defining stage IB and IIA pancreatic cancer and identify their prognostic factors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients

The Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database (1973-2013) was used for the study. The National Cancer Institute’s SEER*Stat software (Version 8.2.0) was used to identify patients. All patients underwent surgical treatment and had a pathologically confirmed diagnosis of stage IB pancreatic tumor according to the 6th and 7th edition of the AJCC criteria. Patients with unknown tumor size were excluded. Demographics, including age, gender, and race, were retrieved. Tumor variables included location of the primary tumor, tumor size, and grade. Survival data were extracted at 1 mo intervals for a follow-up period between 1 mo and 110 mo.

Statistical analysis

The enrolled patients were divided into two groups based on tumor size according to the 8th edition AJCC criteria (IB: tumor diameter > 2 but ≤ 4 cm, IIA: tumor diameter > 4 cm). The independent t-test and the χ2 test were used for the difference analysis between the two groups. Univariate analysis with the log-rank test and multivariate analysis with the Cox proportional hazards regression model were performed to explore the difference in prognostic factors between the two groups, with P values < 0.05 considered statistically significant. All analyses were performed using SPSS software, version 13.0 for Windows.

RESULTS

A total of 1349 pancreatic cancer patients were selected from the SEER database. The age of the patients ranged from 18 to 90 years, with a median age of 65 years. There were 626 male patients and 723 female patients. The median tumor diameter was 43.4 mm (range, 21-540 mm). The pathological stage was classified as IB in 886 patients and IIA in 463 patients, according to the AJCC 8th criteria. The total median survival of these patients was 62 mo, and their 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were 83.8%, 58.9%, and 50.6%, respectively. The patients’ clinical characteristics are presented in Table 1.
Table 1

Clinical characteristics of the entire patient cohort1 n (%)

CharacteristicEntire cohortStage IBStage IIAP value
Number of patients1349886463
Age (yr), median (range)65 (18-90)65 (18-90)63 (18-90)0.000
Tumor size (mm), mean (range)43.4 (21-540)29.5 (21-40)70.0 (41-540)0.000
Gender
Male626 (46.40)405 (45.71)221 (47.73)0.480
Female723 (53.60)481 (54.29)242 (52.27)
Primary site
Head633 (46.9)486 (54.85)147 (31.75)0.000
Body165 (12.23)103 (11.6)62 (13.39)
Tail350 (25.95)186 (20.99)164 (35.21)
Other201 (14.90)111 (12.53)90 (19.44)
Grade
I348 (25.80)221 (24.94)127 (27.43)0.006
II484 (35.88)335 (37.81)149 (32.18)
III230 (17.05)164 (18.52)66 (14.25)
IV17 (1.26)10 (1.13)7 (1.51)
Unknown270 (20.01)156 (17.61)114 (24.62)
Race
White1060 (78.58)694 (78.33)366 (79.05)0.760
Other289 (21.42)192 (21.67)97 (20.95)

Factors were compared by independent t test and χ2 test for continuous and categorical variables, respectively.

Clinical characteristics of the entire patient cohort1 n (%) Factors were compared by independent t test and χ2 test for continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Under the new criteria, the median tumor diameter of stage IB patients was 29.5 mm, while the median tumor diameter of stage IIA patients was 70.0 mm. The primary site of 54.85% of stage IB tumors was the head of the pancreas, while the primary site of stage IIA tumors was mainly the tail and head of the pancreas (35.21% and 31.75%, respectively). Among both stage IB and IIA patients, the majority (approximately 60%) were in grade I and II. Univariate survival analysis of clinical characteristics was evaluated with a log-rank test (Table 2). Age, grade and primary site were significantly associated with the overall survival of stage IB patients (P < 0.05), while gender and race showed no significant association with survival (P > 0.05). For stage IIA patients, age, gender, grade, and primary site were significantly associated with overall survival (P < 0.05), but race showed no significant association with survival (P > 0.05). Multivariate analyses for stage IB and IIA patients were performed with the Cox regression model (Table 3). The results indicated that for stage IB patients, age and primary site were the independent prognostic factors; for stage IIA patients, age and grade were the independent prognostic factors (P < 0.05). Overall, the survival time of stage IB and IIA patients had no significant difference (Figure 1A); whereas, for both stage IB and IIA, the risk of death was lower for patients aged ≤ 65 years than those aged > 65 years (Figure 1B).
Table 2

Prognostic significance for overall survival by univariate analysis of variables for stage IB and IIA patients1

VariableStage IB
Stage IIA
nLog-ranknLog-rank
Age (yr)
≤ 654440.0002700.000
> 65442193
Gender
Male4050.1622210.002
Female481242
Tumor size (mm)
21-305840.258
31-40302
41-703320.013
> 70131
Primary site
Head4860.0001470.004
Body10362
Tail186164
Other11190
Grade
I2210.0001270.000
II335149
III16466
IV107
Unknown156114
Race
White6940.1483660.685
Other19297

Univariate analysis was done by Kaplan-Meier method.

Table 3

Prognostic significance for overall survival by multivariate analysis of variables for stage IB and IIA patients1

VariableStage IB
Stage IIA
RR95%CIP valueRR95%CIP value
Age1.0371.025-1.0490.0001.0451.029-1.0620.000
Gender (male vs female)1.1280.887-1.4340.3271.2350.852-1.7900.265
Tumor size1.0180.996-1.0390.0001.0030.999-1.0080.173
Primary site (head vs body-tail)1.7341.311-2.2940.0001.1970.825-1.7360.345
Grade (I + II vs III + IV)0.5700.443-0.7340.1040.4900.333-0.7210.000

Multivariate analysis was done with Cox proportional hazard regression model.

Figure 1

Kaplan-Meier analysis of overall survival. A: Among 1349 patients, the survival time of stage IB and IIA patients had no significant difference (P > 0.05); B: For both stage IB and IIA, death risk was lower in patients aged ≤ 65 yr than those aged > 65 yr.

Kaplan-Meier analysis of overall survival. A: Among 1349 patients, the survival time of stage IB and IIA patients had no significant difference (P > 0.05); B: For both stage IB and IIA, death risk was lower in patients aged ≤ 65 yr than those aged > 65 yr. Prognostic significance for overall survival by univariate analysis of variables for stage IB and IIA patients1 Univariate analysis was done by Kaplan-Meier method. Prognostic significance for overall survival by multivariate analysis of variables for stage IB and IIA patients1 Multivariate analysis was done with Cox proportional hazard regression model.

DISCUSSION

As one of the most lethal human cancers, pancreatic cancer staging is of important significance clinically. Regardless of how the AJCC definitions of pancreatic cancer staging change, the diameter of the tumor has been shown to be a strong predictor of prognosis. The current cutoff points of > 2 but ≤ 4 and > 4 cm have been proposed to be the sole factor governing the IB and IIA stages in pancreatic cancer. However, the results from the current study suggest that they are not statistically sound, since the patients with stage IB and IIA cancer had similar outcomes (P > 0.05). The findings reported by Burcu[17] contradicts our findings. Thus, further studies or more clinical data are required to evaluate the cutoff point of 4 cm tumor diameter. In addition, moving to a different staging system has implications and comes with its challenges, such as hampered comparison with earlier data. In this study, all patients were pathologically diagnosed with stage IB pancreatic tumor according to the 6th and 7th edition AJCC criteria, which means the data were discrete over past decades. Therefore, further work needs to be done to evaluate the quality of the data. Pancreatic cancer can be divided into head and body/tail cancers according to the anatomy. In this study, we found that stage IB tumors were mainly located in the head of the pancreas, while stage IIA tumors were more often located in both the tail and head of the pancreas (35.21% and 31.75%, respectively). Generally, pancreatic development begins with the formation of a ventral and a dorsal bud, which become the ventral head (lower head and uncinate process) and dorsal pancreas (upper head, body, and tail), respectively. This difference in ontogeny leads to significant differences in cell composition, blood supply, lymphatic and venous backflow, and innervations between the head and body/tail of the pancreas[18]. For instance, the number of islets of Langerhans is greater in the body and tail. There have been some reports showing the significance of tumor location in terms of the prognosis of pancreatic tumor. For example, in pancreatic serous cystic neoplasms and intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms, tumor location in the head of the pancreas was independently associated with local invasiveness and recurrence[19,20], while in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, tumors located at the body/tail of the pancreas were more likely to be associated with shorter progression-free survival[21]. Our analysis indicates that tumor location has a correlation with the prognosis in stage IB pancreatic cancer patients. Prognostic factors combining clinical and laboratory variables with physician’s estimates have been developed in recent years[22]. However, in this study, we just selected patients from the SEER database to analyze the prognostic factors. It is necessary for us to include more variables using our own patient database to verify the new TNM staging system. In conclusion, our analysis demonstrates that more patients tend to be stage IB rather than stage IIA when they are diagnosed. Overall survival is mainly associated with age and primary site for stage IB patients, while for stage IIA patients, age and grade are the independent prognostic factors. The common independent prognostic factor for both patient groups is age. However, the survival time of stage IB and IIA patients has no significant difference. The results suggest that the new AJCC criteria need further evaluation.

COMMENTS

Background

Compared with the 6th and 7th edition American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) system for TNM staging of pancreatic cancer, the 8th edition AJCC criteria emphasize the cutoff point of 4 cm.

Research frontiers

AJCC TNM staging of pancreatic cancer has just been updated to the 8th edition. The aim of our study was to evaluate the changes in the AJCC system for defining stage IB and IIA pancreatic cancer - the cutoff point of 4 cm and to identify their prognostic factors.

Innovations and breakthroughs

The prognostic factors for stage IB and IIA patients are different, and age is the common factor. But the survival time of stage IB and IIA patients has no significant difference.

Applications

The new AJCC criteria need further evaluation.

Peer-review

This is a large retrospective study of patients undergoing resection for pancreatic cancer. The authors have chosen to look at tumor size as an absolute value for determining survival in patients having resection for pancreatic cancer. The manuscript is succinct and reasonably well written. The figures and tables are appropriate.
  22 in total

Review 1.  Pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Manuel Hidalgo
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2010-04-29       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Recurrence and Survival After Resection of Small Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasm-associated Carcinomas (≤20-mm Invasive Component): A Multi-institutional Analysis.

Authors:  Jordan M Winter; Wei Jiang; Olca Basturk; Mari Mino-Kenudson; Zhi Ven Fong; Wei Phin Tan; Harish Lavu; Charles M Vollmer; Emma E Furth; Dana Haviland; David S Klimstra; William R Jarnagin; Keith D Lillemoe; Charles J Yeo; Carlos Fernandez-Del Castillo; Peter J Allen
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 12.969

3.  Tumor size and location correlate with behavior of pancreatic serous cystic neoplasms.

Authors:  Mouen A Khashab; Eun Ji Shin; Stuart Amateau; Marcia Irene Canto; Ralph H Hruban; Elliot K Fishman; John L Cameron; Barish H Edil; Christopher L Wolfgang; Richard D Schulick; Samuel Giday
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-04-05       Impact factor: 10.864

Review 4.  Prognostic factors in patients with recently diagnosed incurable cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  Catherine A Hauser; Martin R Stockler; Martin H N Tattersall
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2006-05-18       Impact factor: 3.603

5.  Pancreatic Cancer Registry in Japan: 20 years of experience.

Authors:  Seiki Matsuno; Shinichi Egawa; Shoji Fukuyama; Fuyuhiko Motoi; Makoto Sunamura; Shuji Isaji; Toshihide Imaizumi; Shuichi Okada; Hiroyuki Kato; Kouichi Suda; Akimasa Nakao; Takehisa Hiraoka; Ryo Hosotani; Kazunori Takeda
Journal:  Pancreas       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 3.327

6.  Incidence and survival of pancreatic head and body and tail cancers: a population-based study in the United States.

Authors:  Melvin K Lau; Jessica A Davila; Yasser H Shaib
Journal:  Pancreas       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 3.327

Review 7.  Pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Donghui Li; Keping Xie; Robert Wolff; James L Abbruzzese
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2004-03-27       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 8.  The diversity between pancreatic head and body/tail cancers: clinical parameters and in vitro models.

Authors:  Qi Ling; Xiao Xu; Shu-Sen Zheng; Holger Kalthoff
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int       Date:  2013-10

9.  Prognostic factors after resection of pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Michio Ueda; Itaru Endo; Masayuki Nakashima; Yuta Minami; Kazuhisa Takeda; Kenichi Matsuo; Yasuhiko Nagano; Kuniya Tanaka; Yasushi Ichikawa; Shinji Togo; Chikara Kunisaki; Hiroshi Shimada
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 3.352

10.  Validation of the 6th edition AJCC Pancreatic Cancer Staging System: report from the National Cancer Database.

Authors:  Karl Y Bilimoria; David J Bentrem; Clifford Y Ko; Jamie Ritchey; Andrew K Stewart; David P Winchester; Mark S Talamonti
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2007-08-15       Impact factor: 6.860

View more
  2 in total

1.  Evaluation of the 8th Edition AJCC Staging System for the Clinical Staging of Pancreatic Cancer.

Authors:  Huapyong Kang; Seung-Seob Kim; Min Je Sung; Jung Hyun Jo; Hee Seung Lee; Moon Jae Chung; Jeong Youp Park; Seung Woo Park; Si Young Song; Mi-Suk Park; Seungmin Bang
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-09-26       Impact factor: 6.575

2.  Assessment of the American Joint Commission on Cancer 8th Edition Staging System for Patients with Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results analysis.

Authors:  Xiaogang Li; Shanmiao Gou; Zhiqiang Liu; Zeng Ye; Chunyou Wang
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2018-01-29       Impact factor: 4.452

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.