Literature DB >> 33633979

The prognostic and predictive value of the 8th American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system among early breast cancer patients aged <50 years.

Jun Wang1, Chen-Lu Lian1, Ping Zhou1, Jian Lei2, Li Hua2, Zhen-Yu He3, San-Gang Wu1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study respectively analyzed the prognostic value and the role in treatment decision-making [breast-conserving surgery (BCS) + radiotherapy (RT) or mastectomy (MAST)] of the 8th American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) pathological prognostic staging system compared with the 7th AJCC anatomical staging system among early breast cancer patients aged <50 years.
METHODS: Patients with T1-2N0M0 breast cancer aged <50 years were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database between 2010 and 2014. Breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) was used as the primary endpoint. Chi-squared test, receiver operating characteristics analysis, Kaplan-Meier method, and multivariate Cox proportional models were used to conduct statistical analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 22,640 female patients were identified, and 24.4% of them reallocated to new stage groups from the 7th to the 8th AJCC staging. Among them, 46.2% (n=10,450) and 53.8% (n=12,190) of patients received BCS + RT and MAST, respectively. The 8th AJCC staging system was an independent prognostic factor for BCSS. Patients treated with BCS + RT had better BCSS compared to those treated with MAST (P<0.001). According to the 8th AJCC staging, BCS + RT could improve 5-year BCSS compared with MAST in patients with stage IA (P=0.006) and stage IB (P=0.001) diseases, while comparable BCSS was found between the two treatment arms in patients' stage IIA disease (P=0.366). Multivariate analyses replicated similar findings after stratification by the 8th AJCC stages.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with T1-2N0 breast cancer and aged <50 years, the 8th AJCC pathological staging system provides accurate prognostic information than the 7th anatomical staging. BCS + RT is the optimal local management for stage IA and IB diseases, while it is the optional management in stage IIA disease according to the 8th AJCC staging. 2021 Gland Surgery. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system (AJCC staging system); Breast cancer; breast-conserving surgery (BCS); mastectomy (MAST); radiotherapy (RT)

Year:  2021        PMID: 33633979      PMCID: PMC7882352          DOI: 10.21037/gs-20-587

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gland Surg        ISSN: 2227-684X


  32 in total

1.  The Potential Impact of AMAROS on the Management of the Axilla in Patients with Clinical T1-2N0 Breast Cancer Undergoing Primary Total Mastectomy.

Authors:  Martine Moossdorff; Faina Nakhlis; Jiani Hu; William T Barry; Katya Losk; Courtney Haskett; Marjolein L Smidt; Tari A King
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2018-05-31       Impact factor: 5.344

Review 2.  Overall survival according to type of surgery in young (≤40 years) early breast cancer patients: A systematic meta-analysis comparing breast-conserving surgery versus mastectomy.

Authors:  Jose Vila; Sara Gandini; Oreste Gentilini
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2015-02-23       Impact factor: 4.380

3.  Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications.

Authors:  T Sørlie; C M Perou; R Tibshirani; T Aas; S Geisler; H Johnsen; T Hastie; M B Eisen; M van de Rijn; S S Jeffrey; T Thorsen; H Quist; J C Matese; P O Brown; D Botstein; P E Lønning; A L Børresen-Dale
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2001-09-11       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Breast Cancer-Major changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual.

Authors:  Armando E Giuliano; James L Connolly; Stephen B Edge; Elizabeth A Mittendorf; Hope S Rugo; Lawrence J Solin; Donald L Weaver; David J Winchester; Gabriel N Hortobagyi
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2017-03-14       Impact factor: 508.702

5.  Comparison of breast-conserving surgery and mastectomy in early breast cancer using observational data revisited: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Authors:  Kai Chen; Zihao Pan; Liling Zhu; Tingting Hu; Min Peng; Weijuan Jia; Fengxi Su; Shunrong Li; Erwei Song
Journal:  Sci China Life Sci       Date:  2018-10-24       Impact factor: 6.038

6.  Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer.

Authors:  Bernard Fisher; Stewart Anderson; John Bryant; Richard G Margolese; Melvin Deutsch; Edwin R Fisher; Jong-Hyeon Jeong; Norman Wolmark
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2002-10-17       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer.

Authors:  Umberto Veronesi; Natale Cascinelli; Luigi Mariani; Marco Greco; Roberto Saccozzi; Alberto Luini; Marisel Aguilar; Ettore Marubini
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2002-10-17       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Evaluation of the prognostic stage in the 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer in locally advanced breast cancer: An analysis based on SEER 18 database.

Authors:  Maoli Wang; Hongliang Chen; Kejin Wu; Ang Ding; Mingdi Zhang; Peng Zhang
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2017-10-31       Impact factor: 4.380

Review 9.  Oncoplastic breast surgery: comprehensive review.

Authors:  N Bertozzi; M Pesce; P L Santi; E Raposio
Journal:  Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 3.507

10.  Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries.

Authors:  Freddie Bray; Jacques Ferlay; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Rebecca L Siegel; Lindsey A Torre; Ahmedin Jemal
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2018-09-12       Impact factor: 508.702

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.