Literature DB >> 29808375

Siewert III esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma: does TNM 8th save us?

Andrea Zanoni1,2, Giuseppe Verlato3, Gian Luca Baiocchi4, Francesco Casella5, Andrea Cossu6, Alessia d'Ignazio7, Stefano De Pascale8, Simone Giacopuzzi9.   

Abstract

Siewert III cancers were classified as esophageal cancers by the TNM 7th edition (TNM7), while being defined as gastric cancers by the new TNM 8th edition (TNM8). Aim of this study was to compare previous and present TNM classifications of Siewert III. From 2000 to 2015, 309 patients with Siewert III adenocarcinoma were treated at ten high-volume centers, belonging to the GIRCG (Italian Research Group for Gastric Cancer). We retrospectively analyzed overall survival according to TNM classifications: gastric TNM8 was compared with either gastric TNM7 or esophageal TNM7. Median number of lymph nodes harvested was 31 (interquartile range 22-44). Agreement between gastric TNM7 and TNM8 was very good (weighted kappa 92.3%, IC 95% 90.3-94.1%). Accordingly, stage migration was observed in 54 of 309 patients (17.5%), with 12 patients upstaged (3.9%) and 42 downstaged (13.6%). Cox models including either gastric TNM7 or TNM8 achieved similar goodness-of-fit and c-index. Differences were much larger, when shifting from esophageal TNM7 to gastric TNM8: the agreement was much lower (weighted kappa 69.1%, 65.2-73.2%), with 196 of 309 patients (63.4%) downstaging. The corresponding Cox model presented the lowest goodness-of-fit and discrimination ability. Gastric TNM7 and TNM8 were largely superimposable, so that stage migration was minor and prognostic significance was similar. At variance, stage migration was substantial when shifting from esophageal TNM7 to TNM8. Moreover, survival models with esophageal TNM7 presented the worst goodness-of-fit and the lowest discrimination ability. This further supports placing Siewert III among gastric cancers, as done in TNM8.

Entities:  

Keywords:  EGJ; Esophageal TNM7; Gastric TNM7; Gastric TNM8; Siewert III

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29808375     DOI: 10.1007/s13304-018-0537-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Updates Surg        ISSN: 2038-131X


  22 in total

1.  The effectiveness of the 8th American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM classification in the prognosis evaluation of gastric cancer patients: A comparative study between the 7th and 8th editions.

Authors:  Jun Lu; Chao-Hui Zheng; Long-Long Cao; Ping Li; Jian-Wei Xie; Jia-Bin Wang; Jian-Xian Lin; Qi-Yue Chen; Mi Lin; Chang-Ming Huang
Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol       Date:  2017-09-13       Impact factor: 4.424

2.  Effect of the number of lymph nodes harvested on the long-term survival of gastric cancer patients according to tumor stage and location: a 12-year study of 1,637 cases.

Authors:  Zhanlong Shen; Yingjiang Ye; Qiwei Xie; Bin Liang; Kewei Jiang; Shan Wang
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2015-05-16       Impact factor: 2.565

3.  Validation of the updated 7th edition AJCC TNM staging criteria for gastric adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Lee J McGhan; Barbara A Pockaj; Richard J Gray; Sanjay P Bagaria; Nabil Wasif
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2011-10-05       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 4.  Siewert III adenocarcinoma: treatment update.

Authors:  Alberto Di Leo; Andrea Zanoni
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2017-03-16

5.  Lymph node metastases of adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and esophagogastric junction.

Authors:  Xun Zhang; David I Watson; Glyn G Jamieson
Journal:  Chin Med J (Engl)       Date:  2007-12-20       Impact factor: 2.628

6.  Total number of resected lymph nodes predicts survival in esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Nasser K Altorki; Xi Kathy Zhou; Brendon Stiles; Jeffrey L Port; Subroto Paul; Paul C Lee; Madhu Mazumdar
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 12.969

7.  Worldwide esophageal cancer collaboration.

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

8.  Optimum lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Nabil P Rizk; Hemant Ishwaran; Thomas W Rice; Long-Qi Chen; Paul H Schipper; Kenneth A Kesler; Simon Law; Toni E M R Lerut; Carolyn E Reed; Jarmo A Salo; Walter J Scott; Wayne L Hofstetter; Thomas J Watson; Mark S Allen; Valerie W Rusch; Eugene H Blackstone
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 12.969

9.  Survival benefit of greater number of lymph nodes dissection for advanced node-negative gastric cancer patients following radical gastrectomy.

Authors:  Hongyong He; Zhenbin Shen; Xuefei Wang; Jing Qin; Yihong Sun; Xinyu Qin
Journal:  Jpn J Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-10-23       Impact factor: 3.019

10.  Prognostic significance of the total number of harvested lymph nodes for lymph node-negative gastric cancer patients.

Authors:  Xin Ji; Zhao-De Bu; Zi-Yu Li; Ai-Wen Wu; Lian-Hai Zhang; Ji Zhang; Xiao-Jiang Wu; Xiang-Long Zong; Shuang-Xi Li; Fei Shan; Zi-Yu Jia; Jia-Fu Ji
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2017-08-22       Impact factor: 4.430

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.