Si Shi1,2,3, Jie Hua1,2,3, Chen Liang1,2,3, Qingcai Meng1,2,3, Dingkong Liang1,2,3, Jin Xu1,2,3, Quanxing Ni1,2,3, Xianjun Yu1,2,3. 1. Department of Pancreatic Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China. 2. Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, China. 3. Shanghai Pancreatic Cancer Institute, Shanghai, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to improve the 8th edition (8th) of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). BACKGROUND: The new 8th AJCC staging system for PDAC was released in October, 2016, and will be applied in clinical practice in 2018. METHODS: Two large cohorts were included in this analysis. One consisted of 45,856 PDAC patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (2004-2014), and the other consisted of 3166 PDAC patients in the Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center (FUSCC) database (2005-2015). RESULTS: Using the 8th AJCC staging system, the median overall survival of the patients in the same stage varied widely among the different substages. We proposed a modified staging system based on median OS in which we maintained the T, N, and M definitions, but regrouped the substages. In the SEER cohort, the concordance index was higher for local disease with the modified staging system [0.637; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.631-0.642] than with the 8th AJCC staging system (0.620, 95% CI 0.615-0.626). Similar findings were also observed in the FUSCC cohort. In addition, we verified the reliability of the modified staging system in an analysis of patients with different examined lymph node counts (≥15 or 1-14). CONCLUSIONS: The modified 8th AJCC staging system for PDAC proposed in this study provides improvements and may be evaluated for potential adoption in the next edition.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to improve the 8th edition (8th) of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). BACKGROUND: The new 8th AJCC staging system for PDAC was released in October, 2016, and will be applied in clinical practice in 2018. METHODS: Two large cohorts were included in this analysis. One consisted of 45,856 PDAC patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (2004-2014), and the other consisted of 3166 PDAC patients in the Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center (FUSCC) database (2005-2015). RESULTS: Using the 8th AJCC staging system, the median overall survival of the patients in the same stage varied widely among the different substages. We proposed a modified staging system based on median OS in which we maintained the T, N, and M definitions, but regrouped the substages. In the SEER cohort, the concordance index was higher for local disease with the modified staging system [0.637; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.631-0.642] than with the 8th AJCC staging system (0.620, 95% CI 0.615-0.626). Similar findings were also observed in the FUSCC cohort. In addition, we verified the reliability of the modified staging system in an analysis of patients with different examined lymph node counts (≥15 or 1-14). CONCLUSIONS: The modified 8th AJCC staging system for PDAC proposed in this study provides improvements and may be evaluated for potential adoption in the next edition.
Authors: Stijn van Roessel; Gyulnara G Kasumova; Joanne Verheij; Robert M Najarian; Laura Maggino; Matteo de Pastena; Giuseppe Malleo; Giovanni Marchegiani; Roberto Salvia; Sing Chau Ng; Susanna W de Geus; Sanne Lof; Francesco Giovinazzo; Jacob L van Dam; Tara S Kent; Olivier R Busch; Casper H van Eijck; Bas Groot Koerkamp; Mohammed Abu Hilal; Claudio Bassi; Jennifer F Tseng; Marc G Besselink Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2018-12-19 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Lei Huang; Lina Jansen; Yesilda Balavarca; Masoud Babaei; Lydia van der Geest; Valery Lemmens; Liesbet Van Eycken; Harlinde De Schutter; Tom B Johannesen; Maja Primic-Žakelj; Vesna Zadnik; Marc G Besselink; Petra Schrotz-King; Hermann Brenner Journal: BMC Med Date: 2018-08-21 Impact factor: 8.775
Authors: Mary Linton B Peters; Andrew Eckel; Peter P Mueller; Angela C Tramontano; Davis T Weaver; Anna Lietz; Chin Hur; Chung Yin Kong; Pari V Pandharipande Journal: Pancreatology Date: 2018-07-29 Impact factor: 3.977