Leila Sisic1, Susanne Blank1, Henrik Nienhüser1, Sara Dorr1, Georg Martin Haag2, Dirk Jäger2, Thomas Bruckner3, Beat P Müller-Stich1, Katja Ott4, Markus W Büchler1, Alexis Ulrich1, Thomas Schmidt5. 1. Department of Surgery, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany. 2. Department of Medical Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany. 3. Institute for Medical Biometrics and Informatics (imbi), University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany. 4. Department of Surgery, RoMed Hospital Rosenheim, Rosenheim, 83022, Germany. 5. Department of Surgery, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany. Electronic address: Thomas.Schmidt1@med.uni-heidelberg.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prognostic differences between pTN- and ypTN-categories and the prognostic accuracy of the 8th edition UICC-pTNM- and AJCC-ypTNM-staging-system for esophageal and gastric adenocarcinoma are unclear. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data of 740 patients with esophagogastric adenocarcinoma, who underwent curative surgery (344 after neoadjuvant treatment [NT]) at our institution. Survival analyses were performed according to Kaplan-Meier (log-rank test). Multivariate analyses were performed using the Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: Low ypT-categories did not discriminate overall survival (ypT0: reference; ypT1: HR1.0/p = 0.909; ypT2: HR0.9/p = 0.845; ypT3: HR1.5/p = 0.184; ypT4: HR2.8/p = 0.004) and no difference was found between ypN1- and ypN2-disease (ypN0: HR0.4/p < 0.001; ypN1: reference; ypN2: HR1.1/p = 0.653; ypN3: HR1.7/p = 0.014). In esophageal adenocarcinoma the UICC-TNM- and AJCC-ypTNM-staging-system was able to predict survival for patients after NT, while in gastric cancer it failed to provide sufficient prognostic information. A simplified staging system provided better stratification after NT and was an independent prognosticator for both esophageal and gastric adenocarcinoma (stage I: reference; stage II: HR2.2/p = 0.005; stage III: HR4.1/p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Prognostic value of ypTN-categories seems limited. After NT the current UICC/AJCC-staging-system is able to predict survival in esophageal adenocarcinoma, but needs to be reevaluated in gastric cancer patients and modified if needed. A novel simplified staging system might be more practicable for patients after NT.
BACKGROUND: Prognostic differences between pTN- and ypTN-categories and the prognostic accuracy of the 8th edition UICC-pTNM- and AJCC-ypTNM-staging-system for esophageal and gastric adenocarcinoma are unclear. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data of 740 patients with esophagogastric adenocarcinoma, who underwent curative surgery (344 after neoadjuvant treatment [NT]) at our institution. Survival analyses were performed according to Kaplan-Meier (log-rank test). Multivariate analyses were performed using the Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: Low ypT-categories did not discriminate overall survival (ypT0: reference; ypT1: HR1.0/p = 0.909; ypT2: HR0.9/p = 0.845; ypT3: HR1.5/p = 0.184; ypT4: HR2.8/p = 0.004) and no difference was found between ypN1- and ypN2-disease (ypN0: HR0.4/p < 0.001; ypN1: reference; ypN2: HR1.1/p = 0.653; ypN3: HR1.7/p = 0.014). In esophageal adenocarcinoma the UICC-TNM- and AJCC-ypTNM-staging-system was able to predict survival for patients after NT, while in gastric cancer it failed to provide sufficient prognostic information. A simplified staging system provided better stratification after NT and was an independent prognosticator for both esophageal and gastric adenocarcinoma (stage I: reference; stage II: HR2.2/p = 0.005; stage III: HR4.1/p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Prognostic value of ypTN-categories seems limited. After NT the current UICC/AJCC-staging-system is able to predict survival in esophageal adenocarcinoma, but needs to be reevaluated in gastric cancerpatients and modified if needed. A novel simplified staging system might be more practicable for patients after NT.