Determining prognosis in patients with pancreatic endocrine neoplasms: Can the WHO classification system be simplified?

被引:154
作者
Ferrone, Cristina R.
Tang, Laura H.
Tomlinson, James
Gonen, Mithat
Hochwald, Steven N.
Brennan, Murray F.
Klimstra, David S.
Allen, Peter J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Surg, New York, NY 10021 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1200/JCO.2007.12.9809
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose The WHO classification for well-differentiated pancreatic endocrine neoplasms (PENs) incorporates both stage and grade. This study compares the prognostic value of a simplified staging and grading system with the WHO system in a large single-institution study. Patients and Methods A prospective database (1982 to 2005) identified 183 patients who underwent operative treatment for PENs. Tumors were staged (< 2 cm primary, >= 2 cm primary, or metastases) and graded (low grade: no necrosis and < two mitoses/50 high-powered fields [HPF]; or intermediate grade: necrosis and/or >= two mitoses/50 HPF) with a simplified schema. Influence of stage and grade on recurrence and disease-specific survival (DSS) was determined. Prognostic strength was assessed with the concordance index (CI). Results Median age of the 183 patients was 56 years, and 53% were women. Median follow-up time was 44 months (range, 1 to 226 months). Classification identified 28 patients (15%) with WHO 1.1 disease, 74 (41%) with 1.2 disease, and 81 (44%) with 2.0 disease. Classification by stage identified 35 patients (19%) with tumors less than 2 cm, 96 (52%) with tumors >= 2 cm, and 52 (29%) with nodal or distant metastases. Tumors were low grade in 102 patients (56%). Earlier stage tumors were more likely to be low grade (< 2 cm, 83%; >= 2 cm, 61%; metastases, 28%; P < .001). The WHO classification, tumor stage, and grade were associated with 5-year DSS (P < .001). Tumors >= 2 cm or metastases are stratified by grade (5-year DSS rate for low v intermediate grade: >= 2 cm, 97% v 80%, respectively; P < .001; metastases, 93% v 62%, respectively; P = .05). The CI was 0.72 for WHO, 0.71 for stage, 0.66 for grade, and 0.76 for stage combined with grade. Conclusion Accurate prognostic information can be obtained by combining tumor size and metastases with simple grading information based on necrosis and mitotic rate.
引用
收藏
页码:5609 / 5615
页数:7
相关论文
共 17 条
[1]   Cytokeratin 19 is a powerful predictor of survival in pancreatic endocrine tumors [J].
Deshpande, V ;
Fernandez-del Castillo, C ;
Muzikansky, A ;
Deshpande, A ;
Zukerberg, L ;
Warshaw, AL ;
Lauwers, GY .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL PATHOLOGY, 2004, 28 (09) :1145-1153
[2]   Concordance probability and discriminatory power in proportional hazards regression [J].
Gönen, M ;
Heller, G .
BIOMETRIKA, 2005, 92 (04) :965-970
[3]   EVALUATING THE YIELD OF MEDICAL TESTS [J].
HARRELL, FE ;
CALIFF, RM ;
PRYOR, DB ;
LEE, KL ;
ROSATI, RA .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1982, 247 (18) :2543-2546
[4]   Prognostic factors in pancreatic endocrine neoplasms: An analysis of 136 cases with a proposal for low-grade and intermediate-grade groups [J].
Hochwald, SN ;
Zee, S ;
Conlon, KC ;
Colleoni, R ;
Louie, O ;
Brennan, MF ;
Klimstra, DS .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2002, 20 (11) :2633-2642
[5]   Neuroendocrine tumours of the pancreas: Predictors of survival after surgical treatment [J].
Jarufe, NP ;
Coldham, C ;
Orug, T ;
Mayer, AD ;
Mirza, DF ;
Buckels, JAC ;
Bramhall, SR .
DIGESTIVE SURGERY, 2005, 22 (03) :157-162
[6]   NONFUNCTIONING ISLET CELL TUMORS [J].
KENT, RB ;
VANHEERDEN, JA ;
WEILAND, LH .
ANNALS OF SURGERY, 1981, 193 (02) :185-190
[7]   Advances in the treatment of neuroendocrine tumors [J].
Kulke M. .
Current Treatment Options in Oncology, 2005, 6 (5) :397-409
[8]  
Modlin IM, 1997, CANCER-AM CANCER SOC, V79, P813, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19970215)79:4<813::AID-CNCR19>3.0.CO
[9]  
2-2
[10]   Morbidity and mortality of aggressive resection in patients with advanced neuroendocrine tumors [J].
Norton, JA ;
Kivlen, M ;
Li, M ;
Schneider, D ;
Chuter, T ;
Jensen, RT .
ARCHIVES OF SURGERY, 2003, 138 (08) :859-865