AJCC第7版与第8版分期对乳腺癌患者预后预测的比较分析

背景与目的：美国癌症联合委员会（American Joint Committee on Cancer,AJCC）第8版乳腺癌分期在传统解剖因素基础上,结合生物标志物,建立了一种全新的乳腺癌预后分期系统。该研究旨在分析AJCC第8版乳腺癌分期的临床应用价值。方法：分析222例乳腺癌根治术后出现复发转移的患者,按照AJCC第7版解剖分期：肿瘤（tumor,T）分期、淋巴结（node,N）分期、转移（metastasis,M）分期,和第8版预后分期标准进行初诊状态再分期,比较不同标准分期的差异及与预后的关系,生存分析采用Kaplan-Meier方法,log-rank法检验无病生存期（disease-free survival,DFS）的差异。结果：按照AJCC第7版分期标准,ⅠA、ⅠB、ⅡA、ⅡB、ⅢA、ⅢB和ⅢC期的患者分别为34例（15.3%）、0例（0.0%）、73例（32.9%）、26例（11.7%）、45例（20.3%）、4例（1.8%）和40例（18.0%）;按照AJCC第8版预后分期标准,ⅠA、ⅠB、ⅡA、ⅡB、ⅢA、ⅢB和ⅢC期的患者分别为47例（21.2%）、35例（15.8%）、55例（24.8%）、17例（7.7%）、25例（11.3%）、30例（13.5%）和13例（5.9%）,差异有统计学意义（P=0.000）。分期变化主要有：第7版Ⅰ期细分为第8版ⅠA和ⅠB期;第7版ⅡA期细分为第8版ⅠA、ⅠB和ⅡA期;第7版ⅡB期细分为第8版ⅠA、ⅠB、ⅡA、ⅡB和ⅢA期;第7版ⅢA期细分为第8版ⅠB、ⅡA、ⅡB、ⅢA、ⅢB和ⅢC期;第7版ⅢB和ⅢC期细分为第8版ⅢA、ⅢB和Ⅲc期。AJCC第7版TNM分期和第8版预后分期与患者DFS比较差异均有统计学意义（P=0.002和0.001）,第8版预后分期ⅢB和ⅢC期亚组的DFS更为准确。结论： AJCC第8版预后分期能够准确预测乳腺癌患者的预后。     

美国癌症研究联合会第七版肿瘤分期对鼻咽癌放疗预后的影响

目的 观察美国癌症研究联合会( AJCC)第7版肿瘤分期标准对鼻咽癌常规放疗(CRT)和凋强放疗(IMRT)预后的影响.方法 用AJCC第7版肿瘤TNM分期标准对本院2004-2006年接受CRT和IMRT的鼻咽癌患者重新分期和分析预后.共1138例患者入组,CRT 790例,IMRT 348例.CRT和IMRT患者中位年龄分别为47岁和45岁(x2 =1.49,P=0.222),男女比例分别为580∶210和266∶82(x2=1.15,P=0.303),Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ、Ⅳ期例数分别为0、41、488、261和5、65、176、102例(x2 =64.78,P=0.001).比较两种放疗的3年疗效,Kaplan-Meier法计算生存率并Logrank法检验.结果 3年随访率为96.0％.常规、IMRT患者中位随访时间分别为32、33个月,死亡例数分别为113、35例.N分期是影响常规、IMRT总生存和无远处转移生存的因素(x2 =6.50、13.60,P=0.038、0.004和X2=7.78、15.30,P=0.009、0.002),临床分期对CRT总生存有影响(x2=6.70,P=0.035)、对IMRT无远处转移生存有影响(x2=9.12,P=0.028).结论 第7版AJCCT分期仍不能满足准确判断鼻咽癌预后的需要,N分期是影响鼻咽癌总生存和无远处转移生存的重要预后因素.     

青年女性乳腺癌病理学特点及预后因素分析

目的 乳腺癌已是青年女性最常见的恶性肿瘤之一,青年乳腺癌患者也越来越受关注.本研究探讨青年女性乳腺癌(≤35岁)的临床病理学特点,分析影响患者临床预后的因素.方法 回顾性分析广西医科大学附属肿瘤医院2006-01-01-2011-01-01收治的127例≤35岁女性乳腺癌的临床资料,采用Kaplan-Meier法计算无疾病进展生存率和总生存率,Log-rank检验比较生存差异,Cox比例风险回归模型进行预后多因素分析.结果 全组病例TNM病理分期:Tis(原位癌)2例,Ⅰ期38例,Ⅱ期50例,Ⅲ期31例,Ⅳ期6例.5年总生存率、10年累积生存率Ⅰ期分别为97.4％(37/38)和94.7％(36/38),Ⅱ期为92.0％(46/50)和90.0％(45/50),Ⅲ期为71.0％(22/31)和71.0％(22/31),Ⅳ期为33.3％(2/6)和33.3％(2/6).5年无疾病进展生存率、10年累积无疾病进展生存率I期分别为89.5％(34/38)和89.5％(34/38),Ⅱ期为82.0％(41/50)和76.0％(38/50),Ⅲ期为54.8％(17/31)和51.6％(16/31),Ⅳ期为16.7％(1/6)和16.7％(1/6).Cox多因素回归分析显示,TNM分期(P＜0.01)和流产史(P[0.04)是影响5年总生存(overall survival,OS)的主要因素,TNM分期(P＜0.01)和身体质量指数(P=0.02)是影响10年累积OS的主要因素;TNM分期(P＜0.01)和术后放疗(P=0.02)是影响5年无疾病进展生存(progression free survival,PFS)的主要因素,TNM分期(P＜0.01)、流产史(P=0.01)和术后放疗(P＜0.01)是影响10年累积PFS的主要因素.结论 青年乳腺癌有着独特的临床病理学特点,TNM病理分期、术后放疗、肥胖和流产史是影响其预后的重要因素,早发现、早诊断及早治疗是良好预后的关键.     

胃癌UICC第6与第7版TNM分期对预后预测的对比分析

目的:探讨胃癌第7版UICC分期对判断预后的价值.方法:选择行胃癌根治术、临床病理及随访资料完整的360例胃癌患者为研究对象,按UICC第6版和第7版分别进行TNM分期,Kaplan-Meier生存曲线分析各期5年生存率.结果:360例患者的5年生存率为61.8％,中位生存时间为64.4个月(95％CI:60.6～68.2).第7版Ⅰ、Ⅱ和Ⅲ期患者的5年生存率分别为95.4％、80.1％和37.4％;ⅡA和ⅡB期分别为81.9％和78.9％,ⅢA、ⅢB和ⅢC期分别为59.3％、46.1％和11.7％.与第6版比较,Ⅲ期各亚组间5年生存率差异有统计学意义,P=0.000.结论:第7版TNM分期更注重肿瘤局部浸润深度和淋巴结转移数目对胃癌预后的影响,所以分析预后更精确;同时分期的调整更符合临床实践的预后判断信息,量化复发风险,可指导不同亚期的患者进行个体化综合治疗.     

AJCC第7版与第6版胃癌TNM分期的比较:一项基于预后分析的918例中国胃癌人群的回顾性研究

目的:本研究旨在评价美国癌症联合会(American Joint Committee on Cancer,AJCC)第7版胃癌TNM分期系统在判断预后方面是否优于AJCC第6版胃癌TNM分期系统.方法:对2003年1月-2008年12月单一中心的918例胃癌患者分别采用AJCC第6版和第7版胃癌TNM分期系统进行重新分期,采用单因素和多因素分析评价这2种胃癌TNM分期系统在判断预后中的价值.采用Akaike信息标准(Akaike's Information Criterion,AIC)评价这2个分期系统的优劣.结果:AJCC第7版胃癌TNM分期系统中,T、N和M分期亚组的总生存时间差异有统计学意义.对患者进行Ⅰ～Ⅳ期临床分期,则无论是按照AJCC胃癌TNM分期系统第6版还是第7版,Ⅰ～Ⅳ期这4条生存曲线的差异均有统计学意义(P值均为0.000);按照AJCC第7版胃癌TNM分期系统的8个亚分期,ⅠA期和ⅠB期、ⅠB期和Ⅱ A期、Ⅱ B期和Ⅲ A期、Ⅲ A期和Ⅲ B期以及Ⅲ B期和Ⅲ C期的生存曲线差异均无统计学意义(P=0.643、P=0.267、P=0.534、P=0.124、P=0.174).AJCC第7版胃癌TNM分期系统的AIC值小于第6版.结论:AJCC第7版胃癌TNM分期系统在预测预后价值方面要优于第6版,但前者的优势十分有限,且存在一定缺陷.     

美国癌症研究联合会两版临床分期标准对局部晚期胃癌疗后预测价值比较

目的 比较美国癌症研究联合会第6、7版分期对局部晚期胃癌根治术后的预后预测。方法 对2002-2004年在本院接受胃癌根治性手术(R0切除且＞D1淋巴结清扫)、病理诊断为T3-4N0～1M0、TxN2-3 M0期的297例患者分别按两版分期标准进行分期,比较两版分期的N、TNM分期中5年总生存(OS)、无瘤生存(DFS...     

Comparison of stage-specific outcome of breast cancer based on 5th and 6th AJCC staging system

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To investigate the appropriateness of the new staging system (AJCC 6th edition) for breast carcinoma. METHODS: We reviewed the clinicopathologic data of 1,768 breast cancer patients, and their disease stages were re-categorized by the new system. The overall survival (OS) and distant relapse free survival (DRFS) rates were compared between those patients whose stages by the old system (AJCC 5th edition) remained the same (the remainders) and those patients whose stages moved up (the upstaged cases) as well as between the subgroups in the new system. RESULTS: The 10-year DRFS rates of the upstaged cases in each stage were poorer than those of the remainders, and statistical significance was demonstrated for stage IIB and stage IIIA. The 10-year OS rates were also poorer in the upstaged cases, and statistical significance was demonstrated for stage IIIA. Subgroup analysis within the new system between the node-negative versus node-positive subgroups in stages IIA and IIB showed a significant OS difference. The DRFS difference was also shown between the subgroups in stage IIA. CONCLUSIONS: The new staging system seems to more accurately reflect disease outcome, however, a re-evaluation might be required to reflect the impact of nodal involvement upon the new staging system.     

新疆地区1006例不同分子分型乳腺癌的临床病理特征及预后

目的 探讨新疆地区不同分子分型乳腺癌的临床病理特征和预后。方法 收集2008年1月至2010年12月新疆医科大学附属肿瘤医院行手术治疗的1006例女性乳腺癌患者的临床病历资料,根据雌激素受体（ER）、孕激素受体（PR）、人表皮生长因子受体-2（HER-2）和Ki-67的状态,将乳腺癌分为：Luminal A型、Luminal B型、HER-2过表达型及Basal like型,对比分析不同分子分型乳腺癌患者的临床病理特征、复发转移及预后情况。结果 Luminal A型551例（54.8％）,Luminal B型182例（18.1％）,HER-2过表达型77例（7.7％）,Basal-like型196例（19.4％）。不同分子分型乳腺癌在肿块大小、淋巴结转移数目、临床分期、组织学分级、民族及内分泌治疗的差异均具有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。获得随访的971例患者中,HER-2过表达型的局部复发率（12.3％）及远处转移率（27.4％）均高于其他分型（P＜0.05）。Luminal A型、Luminal B型、HER-2过表达型及Basal-like型6年无病生存率分别为86.8％、75.8％、58.9％、79.1％（P＜0.05）;6年生存率分别为92.1％、83.1％、67.1％、88.0％（P＜0.05）。Cox多因素回归分析显示,淋巴结转移数目、组织学分级、内分泌治疗及分子分型是影响新疆地区乳腺癌总生存时间（OS）和无病生存时间（DFS）的独立因素,民族亦是影响该地区乳腺癌患者DFS的独立因素。结论 新疆地区Luminal A型乳腺癌最常见,预后最好,HER-2过表达型比例最低,预后最差。乳腺癌预后与淋巴结转移数目、组织学分级、内分泌治疗及分子分型有关,民族是影响乳腺癌患者DFS的重要因素。     

178例三阴性乳腺癌的临床病理特征及生存分析

 目的
探讨三阴性乳腺癌(TNBC)患者的临床病理特点、生存情况和预后影响因素。方法收集雌激素受体(ER)、孕激素受体
(PR)和人表皮生长因子受体2(HER2)均阴性的178例乳腺癌患者的临床病理资料,观察其长期生存状况。分析其临床
特点及影响预后的因素。结果有乳腺癌家族史的患者4例。主要病理类型为浸润性导管癌(155/178,87.1%）。组织
学分级多为Ⅲ级(53.1%）。中位肿瘤最大径2.8 cm(0.2～12 cm）,T1、T2期患者160例占89.9%。108例(61.7%）
患者无淋巴结转移。分期为Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ期的患者分别有60例(33.7％)、81例(45.5％)、31例(17.4％)。58例(48.3
％)患者p53阳性。中位随访时间74月(10～156月）,5年
无病生存(DFS)和总生存(OS)率分别是76.9%和86.1%。单因素分析显示T分期、临床分期及淋巴结转移对DFS和OS
均有显著影响。多因素分析显示,淋巴结转移是DFS及OS的独立影响因素。而术后分期是OS的影响因素。共有41例
患者出现复发转移及第二原发肿瘤,常见转移部位依次为骨转移、局部复发或同侧锁骨上淋巴结转移、肺或胸膜转
移、肝转移及脑转移。结论 本组TNBC肿瘤直径较小,组织学分级低分化比例较高(53.1%）。复发转移以骨转移、
局部复发及肺转移为主。淋巴结转移及术后分期是总生存的独立危险因素。     

以大型单中心医院登记为基础的1.37万例结直肠癌手术患者生存报告

背景与目的:基于医院登记为基础的结直肠癌手术患者的随访资料,分析其1、3和5年总生存率(overall survival,OS)与无病生存率(disease-free survival,DFS),为了解中国结直肠癌患者长期生存情况提供真实世界研究证据。方法:研究纳入2008年1月1日-2017年12月31日在复旦大学附属肿瘤医院接受手术治疗的结直肠癌患者共13 721例,通过查阅患者复诊病史、电话随访和死因数据链接等方式收集患者的生存随访资料,随访统计时间截至2019年11月30日。采用Kaplan-Meier法估计患者1、3和5年OS和DFS,根据年龄组、性别、治疗时期、肿瘤分期以及病理学特征、治疗方式各亚组分别描述。结果:结直肠癌手术患者经中位54.03个月随访后,5年OS和0~Ⅲ期患者5年DFS分别为73.87%和72.25%。0~Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ和Ⅳ期结直肠癌手术患者5年OS分别为91.92%、87.15%、70.49%和27.70%,45岁以下年龄组患者5年OS为74.93%,差于45~64岁和65~74岁年龄组。不同组织学类型、分化程度、壁外血管侵犯、神经侵犯、环切缘情况患者的生存差异显著。结论:首次报告中国国内单中心超万人结直肠癌患者的5年长期生存结果,44岁及以下青年结直肠癌患者生存率较低,肿瘤分期是影响结直肠癌患者生存的重要可改变因素,应加强早诊早治,进一步提升患者生存率。     

Ⅱ和Ⅲ期胃癌术后IMRT同期卡培他滨化疗前瞻性Ⅱ期研究中期评估

目的 评价Ⅱ、Ⅲ期(AJCC第7版)胃癌根治术后IMRT同期卡培他滨化疗的初步疗效和急性不良反应,以决定是否继续Ⅱ期研究。方法 2009—2011年35例Ⅱ、Ⅲ期(10、25例)胃癌患者进入前瞻性Ⅱ期研究,根治术后给予辅助放化疗或化疗。放疗采用IMRT,靶区包括吻合口、瘤床和区域淋巴结,剂量45 Gy分25次。同期化疗为卡培他滨每天1600 mg/m²分2次,连续服用5周;辅助化疗为氟尿嘧啶或卡培他滨±奥沙利铂4~8周期。采用Kaplan-Meier法计算生存率并Logrank法单因素预后分析。以DFS 52.9%为继续研究的下限。结果 全组中位随访21个月,随访率94%。3例未完成放疗,2年DFS、OS分别为70%、86%,急性3级胃肠道、血液和总不良反应分别为11%、11%和26%。预后分析显示病理印戒细胞癌成分和淋巴结阳性比是DFS不良预后因素,T₄期可预测OS下降。结论 全组胃癌根治术后IMRT同期卡培他滨化疗的2年DFS>52.9%,且不良反应可耐受,可继续Ⅱ期研究。     

Lymph Node Ratio and pN Staging Show Different Superiority As Prognostic Predictors Depending on the Number of Lymph Nodes Dissected in Chinese Patients With Luminal A Breast Cancer

BackgroundThe lymph node ratio (LNR) classification has shown superiority to pN staging (the number of positive lymph nodes) in breast cancers, but it has not been examined according to whether sufficient lymph nodes have been dissected.MethodsAll Chinese patients with luminal A breast cancer with positive lymph nodes seen at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center between 1995 and 2009 were enrolled. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were the endpoints, and the patients were further classified into 2 groups according to whether ≤ 10 or > 10 lymph nodes were dissected.ResultsFor the whole group, the OS curves of the pN stages overlapped, whereas they were separated in the LNR survival curves. LNR was an independent prognostic factor for OS and DFS, whereas the pN stage was not. In the ≤ 10 lymph nodes dissected group, both OS and DFS curves were clearly separated in the pN staging but overlapped in the LNR classification. In the > 10 lymph nodes dissected group, LNR showed no overlap in the OS curves and was an independent prognostic factor of OS and DFS when compared with pN staging.ConclusionIn Chinese patients with luminal A breast cancer, LNR classification and the pN stage show different superiority as prognostic predictors according to whether > 10 or < 10 lymph nodes are dissected.     

Impact of changes to the American Joint Committee on Cancer T classification on outcome prediction in patients with oropharyngeal cancer

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of the current 6th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) tumor staging criteria in improving outcome prediction for patients with oropharyngeal cancer was analyzed. METHODS: From the database of the Department of Radiation Oncology at the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center the authors identified 875 patients irradiated at the study institution for oropharyngeal cancer between January 1975 and December 1998. The tumors were restaged based on the 6th edition of AJCC tumor staging criteria to reassess the original outcome predictions, specifically overall survival (OS) and local control (LC). RESULTS: Applying the new 6th edition staging system resulted in the following T classification distributions: T2, 301 tumors (34%); T3, 248 tumors (28%); T4a, 224 tumors (26%), and T4b, 102 tumors (12%). The 5-year and 10-year OS rates based on the new system were: T2, 65% and 45%; T3, 44% and 28%; T4a, 30% and 23%; and T4b, 26% and 12%, respectively. The 5-year and 10-year actuarial local LC rates based on the new system were: T2, 85% and 83%; T3, 73% and 71%; T4a, 61% and 58%; and T4b, 42% and 42%, respectively. Differences in OS and LC rates stratified by stage were found to be statistically significant both for the overall distribution of survival and pairwise comparisons of the 4 tumor stage groups. CONCLUSIONS: The modifications established in the 6th edition of the AJCC tumor staging system for oropharyngeal tumors appear to be useful to distinguish prognostic groups for both LC and OS based on tumor stage.     

Breast Cancer—Major changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE The revision of the eighth edition of the primary tumor, lymph node, and metastasis (TNM) classification of the American Joint Commission of Cancer (AJCC) for breast cancer was determined by a multidisciplinary team of breast cancer experts. The panel recognized the need to incorporate biologic factors, such as tumor grade, proliferation rate, estrogen and progesterone receptor expression, human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2) expression, and gene expression prognostic panels into the staging system. AJCC levels of evidence and guidelines for all tumor types were followed as much as possible. The panel felt that, to maintain worldwide value, the tumor staging system should remain based on TNM anatomic factors. However, the recognition of the prognostic influence of grade, hormone receptor expression, and HER2 amplification mandated their inclusion into the staging system. The value of commercially available, gene‐based assays was acknowledged and prognostic input added. Tumor biomarkers and low Oncotype DX recurrence scores can alter prognosis and stage. These updates are expected to provide additional precision and flexibility to the staging system and were based on the extent of published information and analysis of large, as yet unpublished databases. The eighth edition of the AJCC TNM staging system, thus, provides a flexible platform for prognostic classification based on traditional anatomic factors, which can be modified and enhanced using patient biomarkers and multifactorial prognostic panel data. The eighth edition remains the worldwide basis for breast cancer staging and will incorporate future online updates to remain timely and relevant. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67:290–303. © 2017 American Cancer Society.     

Short-term Intensive Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Improving 10-year Survival for Patients with Stage Ⅱ and Operable Stage Ⅲ Breast Cancer

Objective To evaluate the 10-year curative effects of short-term intensive neoadjuvant chemotherapy for operable breast cancer. Methods A total of 510 patients with stagell and operable stagelll breast cancer were divided into group A (preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy 251 cases) and group B (postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy 259 cases). The patients in group A received short -term and intensive neoadjuvant chemotherapy for 4 weeks followed by modified radical mastectomy two weeks after the chemotherapy. The postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy began within two weeks after surgery. The same chemotherapeutic regimen was used for both groups. Results For stage III in group A the 5-year overall survival rate (OS) and disease-free survival rate (DFS) were 59.2% and 54.9% respectively which were higher than those in group B (28.3% and 20.8% respectively,P<0.05). The 10-year OS and DFS were 78.1% and 73.5% respectively for stage II in group A which were higher than those in group B (68.4% and 60.7%,P< 0.05). The 10-year OS and DFS were 42.3% and 40.4% respectively for stage III in group A which were higher than those in group B (20.4% and 18.4% respectively,P<0.05). Conclusion The results showed that intensive neoadjuvant chemotherapy can improve the 10-year survival for patients with stage II and operable stage III breast cancer.     

Ⅰ—Ⅱ期乳腺癌保乳术后放疗的临床疗效及预后分析

目的 分析Ⅰ—Ⅱ期乳腺癌保乳术后放疗的临床疗效和预后因素。方法 回顾分析1999—2013年1376例Ⅰ、Ⅱ期(T1-2N0-1/T3N0)单侧乳腺癌保乳术后放疗的疗效。930例(67.6%)同时接受化疗,先放疗后化疗 517例,先化疗后放疗 413例。1055例(76.7%)患者接受内分泌治疗,86例(39.6%) HER-2阳性患者接受靶向治疗。用Kaplan-Meier计算生存率并Logrank法单因素分析,Cox法多因素分析。结果 中位随访55个月,10年样本量 90例。全组5、10年OS率分别为98.6%和91.5%,DFS率分别为94.6%和82.8%。多因素分析显示年龄(P=0.016)、T分期(P=0.006)、N分期(P=0.004)、脉管癌栓(P=0.038)和放疗距手术时间(P=0.048)是DFS独立预后因素。保乳术后单纯放疗组多因素分析显示,N分期(P=0.044)和ER水平(P=0.026)是DFS独立预后因素。结论 Ⅰ—Ⅱ期乳腺癌保乳术后以放疗为主的综合治疗模式临床疗效满意。影响DFS率的因素包括年龄、T分期、N分期、脉管癌栓和放疗距手术时间。保乳术后单纯放疗组的DFS率和N分期与ER水平有关。     

癌结节在胃癌患者预后中的价值

目的 探讨癌结节在胃癌根治术后患者预后中的价值。方法 收集2015年4月至2016年1月137例胃癌根治术的患者资料,分析癌结节状态与胃癌临床病理特征的关系,并随访患者1年无病生存率。结果 137例胃癌患者的癌结节阳性率为24.8％（34／137）。单因素分析发现,T／N分期越晚、神经／脉管浸润胃癌患者的癌结节阳性率越高。癌结节组与无癌结节组的1年无病生存率分别为59％和85％。对于Ⅰ／Ⅱ期患者,癌结节组和无癌结节组的1年无病生存率分别为40％和91％。结论 胃癌根治术后患者的癌结节与分期、神经／脉管浸润呈正相关。癌结节阳性提示胃癌术后高复发风险,其预后价值在Ⅰ／Ⅱ期胃癌中更显著。     

AJCC-TRG联合ypTN分期评价局部进展期直肠癌预后

目的 探讨AJCC-TRG分级联合ypTN分期评估局部进展期直肠癌(LARC)新辅助放化疗后的预后,并筛查预后最差的亚组人群。方法 2004—2012年间中山大学肿瘤防治中心收治LARC 263例,男176例,女87例,中位年龄55岁。所有患者接受术前新辅助放化疗,并于放疗结束后6~8周施行全直肠系膜切除术。根据第7版AJCC-TRG分级标准及ypTNM分期标准对术后组织标本重新评价。生存分析评价不同肿瘤退缩分级(TRG)联合ypTN对各项生存指标的预测情况。Kaplan-Meier法计算OS、DFS、LRFS及DMFS,Logrank法检验和单因素预后分析。结果 中位随访时间为60.1个月,全组5年OS、DFS、LRFS和DMFS分别为80.0%、75.0%、97.0%和81.0%。不同ypT/TRG、ypN/TRG组合间的OS、DFS及DMFS差异均有统计学意义(P均<0.05)。ypT₃—T₄/TRG 2—3、ypN₁—N₂/TRG 2—3亚组预后最差,5年OS,DFS和DMFS分别为66.9%、56.0%,52.2%、41.4%和60.9%、46.0%。结论 AJCC-TRG联合ypTN分期能更准确评估LARC预后,筛查出高危远处转移预后最差亚组人群,对指导LARC个体化术后辅助治疗具有重要临床意义。     

Number of negative lymph nodes should be considered for incorporation into staging for breast cancer

This study aimed to investigate the prognostic value of the number of involved lymph nodes (pN), number of removed lymph nodes (RLNs), lymph node ratio (LNR), number of negative lymph nodes (NLNs), and log odds of positive lymph nodes (LODDS) in breast cancer patients. The records of 2,515 breast cancer patients who received a mastectomy or breast-conserving surgery were retrospectively reviewed. The log-rank test was used to compare survival curves, and Cox regression analysis was performed to identify prognostic factors. The median follow-up time was 64.2 months, and the 8-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were 74.6% and 82.3%, respectively. Univariate analysis showed that pN stage, LNR, number of RLNs, and number of NLNs were significant prognostic factors for DFS and OS (all, P < 0.05). LODDS was a significant prognostic factor for OS (P = 0.021). Multivariate analysis indicated that pN stage and the number of NLNs were independent prognostic factors for DFS and OS. A higher number of NLNs was associated with higher DFS and OS, and a higher number of involved lymph nodes were associated with poorer DFS and OS. Patients with a NLNs count > 9 had better survival (P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis showed that the NLNs count had a prognostic value in patients with different pT stages and different lymph node status (log-rank P < 0.05). For breast cancer, pN stage and NLNs count have a better prognostic value compared to the RLNs count, LNR, and LODDS. Number of negative lymph nodes should be considered for incorporation into staging for breast cancer.     

The combined pN stage and breast cancer subtypes in breast cancer: a better discriminator of outcome can be used to refine the 8th AJCC staging manual

Background

pN stage and breast cancer subtypes (BCS) are both well-recognized prognostic indicators. Our previous work has highlighted that patients even with the same pN stage exhibited a significant survival difference in different BCS. Given this achievement, we hypothesized that a statistical interaction might exist between pN stage and BCS. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to compare the prognostic value of the combined pN stage and BCS (pN_new stage) with either pN stage or BCS alone, and to determine if this combined new stage could serve as an alternative discriminator of outcome.

Methods

We combined pN stage and BCS to create a new variable named pN_new stage and then divided it into four groups: pN0_new, pN1_new, pN2_new, and pN3_new. Survival analysis was performed with the use of the Kaplan–Meier method and the log-rank test was used for univariate analysis. For multivariate analysis, cox proportional hazard models were applied, allowing for the estimation of disease-free survival (DFS). To assess discriminatory accuracy of the models, we compared the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUROC), the Akaike information criterion (AIC), and the Bayesian information criterion (BIC) values. Then, we used this pN_new stage to generate a TN_newM staging system according to the 7th AJCC staging system.

Results

A statistical interaction between pN stage and BCS was found. In multivariate survival analysis, the pN_new stage has been confirmed as an independent prognostic variable of 5-year DFS. The pN_new stage, with a smaller AIC or BIC value and larger AUROC, was a more powerful predictor of DFS than either pN stage or BCS alone. Results were validated in a separate cohort of patients. The TN_newM stage proposed in our present study was found comparable to the new 8th AJCC edition which includes anatomic T, N, and M plus tumor grade and the status of the biomarkers Her-2, ER, and PR with respect to prognostic value for breast cancer patients.

Conclusions

The pN_new stage (combined pN stage and BCS) appears to be a more powerful predictor and discriminator for the outcome of breast cancer, as compared to pN stage or BCS alone, and the TN_newM stage may serve as a simple, easy-to-use alternative to the 8th AJCC edition staging manual.