BACKGROUND: Given the rarity of esthesioneuroblastoma, it is difficult to validate a staging system. The purpose of this study was to investigate the utility of the Kadish staging system in esthesioneuroblastoma using the National Cancer Database (NCDB). METHODS: One thousand one hundred sixty-seven patients with esthesioneuroblastoma were identified from the NCDB. RESULTS: Five-year survival was 80.0% for Kadish A, 87.7% for Kadish B, 77.0% for Kadish C, and 49.5% for Kadish D. Kadish B had higher survival than Kadish A. More Kadish B patients received surgery with adjuvant therapy than Kadish A patients (41.6% vs 32.5%; P = .0038) and also had more positive margins (21.6% vs 11.3%; P = .03). There was no difference in age distribution, sex, race, or neck dissection status between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Kadish B had greater survival than Kadish A, but the treatment characteristics could not account for this difference. The utility of early-stage Kadish staging is uncertain and requires further study.
BACKGROUND: Given the rarity of esthesioneuroblastoma, it is difficult to validate a staging system. The purpose of this study was to investigate the utility of the Kadish staging system in esthesioneuroblastoma using the National Cancer Database (NCDB). METHODS: One thousand one hundred sixty-seven patients with esthesioneuroblastoma were identified from the NCDB. RESULTS: Five-year survival was 80.0% for Kadish A, 87.7% for Kadish B, 77.0% for Kadish C, and 49.5% for Kadish D. Kadish B had higher survival than Kadish A. More Kadish B patients received surgery with adjuvant therapy than Kadish A patients (41.6% vs 32.5%; P = .0038) and also had more positive margins (21.6% vs 11.3%; P = .03). There was no difference in age distribution, sex, race, or neck dissection status between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Kadish B had greater survival than Kadish A, but the treatment characteristics could not account for this difference. The utility of early-stage Kadish staging is uncertain and requires further study.
Authors: J R Austin; H Cebrun; M M Kershisnik; A K El-Naggar; A S Garden; F Demonte; L E Ginsberg; S M Lippman; H Goepfert Journal: Skull Base Surg Date: 1996
Authors: Eduardo M Diaz; Richard H Johnigan; Colin Pero; Adel K El-Naggar; Dianna B Roberts; James L Barker; Franco DeMonte Journal: Head Neck Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 3.147
Authors: Mahmut Ozsahin; Guenther Gruber; Olimpia Olszyk; Omur Karakoyun-Celik; Berrin Pehlivan; David Azria; Martine Roelandts; Johannes H A M Kaanders; Mustafa Cengiz; Marco Krengli; Oscar Matzinger; Abderrahim Zouhair Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-03-16 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Gabriel G Malouf; Odile Casiraghi; Eric Deutsch; Joel Guigay; Stéphane Temam; Jean Bourhis Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2013-01-10 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: J Nicolas McLean; Sunjay R Nunley; Carmen Klass; Charles Moore; Susan Müller; Peter A S Johnstone Journal: Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 3.497
Authors: Jakob Liermann; Mustafa Syed; Thomas Held; Denise Bernhardt; Peter Plinkert; Christine Jungk; Andreas Unterberg; Stefan Rieken; Jürgen Debus; Klaus Herfarth; Sebastian Adeberg Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2018-11-20 Impact factor: 6.639
Authors: Khodayar Goshtasbi; Jack L Birkenbeuel; Mehdi Abouzari; Brandon M Lehrich; Tyler M Yasaka; Arash Abiri; Ethan G Muhonen; Frank P K Hsu; Edward C Kuan Journal: Am J Rhinol Allergy Date: 2020-10-29 Impact factor: 2.467