Refining esophageal cancer staging

被引:143
作者
Rice, TW
Blackstone, EH
Rybicki, LA
Adelstein, DJ
Murthy, SC
DeCamp, MM
Goldblum, JR
机构
[1] Cleveland Clin Fdn, Ctr Swallowing & Esophageal Disorders, Dept Thorac & Cardiovasc Surg, Cleveland, OH 44195 USA
[2] Cleveland Clin Fdn, Dept Biostat & Epidemiol, Cleveland, OH 44195 USA
[3] Cleveland Clin Fdn, Dept Hematol & Med Oncol, Cleveland, OH 44195 USA
[4] Cleveland Clin Fdn, Dept Anat Pathol, Cleveland, OH 44195 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1067/mtc.2003.170
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objective: Cancer staging is dynamic, reflecting accrual of knowledge and experience in treatment. The objectives of this study were to assess current esophageal cancer staging and to determine whether refinements of classification and stage grouping are necessary. Methods: From 1983 through November 2000, 480 patients underwent esophagectomy without induction therapy. Depth of tumor invasion (T), regional lymph node status (N), distant status (M), number of metastatic regional lymph nodes, and histopathologic type and grade were subjected to survival-tree analysis, multivariable Cox and hazard function analysis, and residual misclassification risk analysis. Results: Inhomogenity of survival was found within and lack of distinction was found between current American Joint Committee on Cancer staging groups, supporting the need for refinement. T1 and N1 were redefined on the basis of survival differences. T1a is intramucosal cancer, T1b is submucosal cancer (P = .008), N1 is 1 or 2 metastatic regional lymph nodes, and N2 is 3 or more metastatic regional lymph nodes (P = .01). Current subclassification of M1 is not warranted (P = .9). Histopathologic type (P = .17) and grade (P = .3) minimally refined staging. Reassignment of staging groups constrained by American Joint Committee on Cancer definitions of stages 0 and IV produced less monotonic, distinctive, and homogeneous survival than free assignment of staging groups. Conclusions: Current American Joint Committee on Cancer staging of esophageal cancer is inadequate. Refinement requires redefinition of T1, N1, and M1 classifications. Stage grouping within the constraints of American Joint Committee on Cancer definitions produces less accurate prognosis than free assignment based on survival data.
引用
收藏
页码:1103 / 1113
页数:11
相关论文
共 20 条
[1]  
*AM JOINT COMM CAN, 2002, AJCC CANC STAG MAN, P91
[2]  
Balch CM, 2000, CANCER-AM CANCER SOC, V88, P1484, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(20000315)88:6<1484::AID-CNCR29>3.0.CO
[3]  
2-D
[4]   THE DECOMPOSITION OF TIME-VARYING HAZARD INTO PHASES, EACH INCORPORATING A SEPARATE STREAM OF CONCOMITANT INFORMATION [J].
BLACKSTONE, EH ;
NAFTEL, DC ;
TURNER, ME .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION, 1986, 81 (395) :615-624
[5]   Statistical modeling: The two cultures [J].
Breiman, L .
STATISTICAL SCIENCE, 2001, 16 (03) :199-215
[6]   M1A/M1B esophageal carcinoma: Clinical relevance [J].
Christie, NA ;
Rice, TW ;
DeCamp, MM ;
Goldblum, JR ;
Adelstein, DJ ;
Zuccaro, G ;
Rybicki, LA ;
Blackstone, EH .
JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 1999, 118 (05) :900-906
[7]  
Dickson GH, 2001, EUR J SURG ONCOL, V27, P641
[8]   PROGNOSTIC FACTORS OF RESECTED ADENOCARCINOMA OF THE ESOPHAGUS [J].
HOLSCHER, AH ;
BOLLSCHWEILER, E ;
BUMM, R ;
BARTELS, H ;
HOFLER, H ;
SIEWERT, JR .
SURGERY, 1995, 118 (05) :845-855
[9]  
Huang X, 1997, CANCER, V79, P1122, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19970315)79:6<1122::AID-CNCR10>3.3.CO
[10]  
2-#