Incorporating Biology Into Breast Cancer Staging: American Joint Committee on Cancer, Eighth Edition, Revisions and Beyond

Author(s):  
Elizabeth A. Mittendorf ◽  
John M. S. Bartlett ◽  
Daphne L. Lichtensztajn ◽  
Sarat Chandarlapaty

Higher-quality imaging, refined surgical procedures, enhanced pathologic evaluation, and improved understanding of the impact of tumor biology on treatment and prognosis have necessitated revisions of the AJCC breast cancer staging system. The eighth edition includes clinical and pathologic prognostic stages that incorporate biologic variables—grade, estrogen and progesterone receptor status, HER2 status, and multigene panels—with the anatomic extent of disease defined by tumor, node, and metastasis categories. The prognostic staging systems facilitate more refined stratification with respect to survival than anatomic stage alone. Because the prognostic staging systems are dependent on biologic factors, accuracy is dependent on rigorous pathologic evaluation of tumors and on administration of treatment dictated by tumor biology. It is anticipated that technological advances will facilitate even more refined determination of underlying biology within tumors and in the peripheral blood, which increasingly is being evaluated as a compartment that reflects the primary tumor and sites of distant metastases. Diseases should be staged according to the eighth edition staging system to accurately reflect prognosis and to allow standardized data collection. Such standardization will facilitate assessment of the impact of advances in diagnosis and treatment of patients with breast cancer.

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 407-414 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashley Biswal ◽  
Jacqueline Erler ◽  
Omar Qari ◽  
Arthur A. Topilow ◽  
Varsha Gupta ◽  
...  

Mastology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Suppl 1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cynthia Mara Brito Lins Pereira ◽  
Yasmin de Farias Khayat ◽  
Mariana Rocha Bohone

In Brazil, breast cancer is the first among the most prevalent malignancies in women, without considering non-melanoma skin cancer. However, in spite of the high number of deaths caused by breast cancer, there has been a great reduction in mortality rates and greater survival of patients with metastatic disease in the last decades. Such improvements are related to advances in treatment and greater knowledge about the biology of breast cancer. The American Joint Committee for Cancer (AJCC) cancer staging system is one of the important tools for doctors, and helps to predict disease progression and make therapeutic decisions. Therapeutic planning and prognosis of patients is possible through staging. Since the publication of the first edition of the Cancer Staging Manual, AJCC has insisted on seeing anatomical information. TNM staging (T: tumor; N: lymph nodes; M: metastasis). Limitations regarding this staging method were evidenced, as it is based only on anatomy and does not take biological factors into account. Through immunohistochemical study, breast cancer is subdivided into different molecular subtypes. When considering the modifications of the new edition of the TNM/AJCC system with respect to the prognostic and predictive factors of cancer, there may be a reclassification of patients, leading to a more reliable approach to their real disease condition. Objective: To analyze the impact generated by the update of the TNM/AJCC staging system (eighth edition), in the classification of patients with breast cancer seen at Hospital Ophir Loyola, a referral oncology hospital in the city of Belém, state of Pará, in 2018. Method: 176 medical records of patients undergoing treatment at Hospital Ophir Loyola, in 2018, were analyzed, which had information on the staging of the seventh edition and with immunohistochemical results. Result: 61.93% were between 40-60 years old, 46.2% were from the capital. Regarding the stage of diagnosis according to the 7th edition, 23 patients (13%) were in stage I, 66 cases (37.5%) in stage II, and the vast majority, totaling 77 cases (43.8%), in stage III. In addition, there were 03 cases (1.7%) in stage 0 (zero), and 07 cases (4%) in stage IV. There was a change in disease staging for 60.8% (107/176; 95%CI 53.4‒67.7) of the cases, 36.5% (39/107; 95%CI 28.0‒45.9) of these cases were upstaged, and in the others (63.5%, 68/107; 95%CI 54.1‒72.1), the change was to a lower prognostic category (down-staged). There was a significant increase in the proportion of cases staged in 2018 as IB and a significant reduction in cases staged by the most recent criterion such as IIB and IIIA (p<0.0001). Conclusion: the changes to new staging have shown to be more effective on the behavior of the tumor, helping in therapeutic decisions.


2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 829-837 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esther C. Yoon ◽  
Christopher Schwartz ◽  
Edi Brogi ◽  
Katia Ventura ◽  
Hannah Wen ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11037-11037
Author(s):  
J. Wang ◽  
S. J. Anderson ◽  
J. P. Costantino ◽  
E. P. Mamounas ◽  
J. M. Hassett ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (11) ◽  
pp. 1292-1300 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariana Chavez‐MacGregor ◽  
Elizabeth A. Mittendorf ◽  
Christina A. Clarke ◽  
Daphne Y. Lichtensztajn ◽  
Kelly K. Hunt ◽  
...  

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (11) ◽  
pp. 3105
Author(s):  
Kumiko Kida ◽  
Kenneth R. Hess ◽  
Bora Lim ◽  
Toshiaki Iwase ◽  
Sudpreeda Chainitikun ◽  
...  

The AJCC updated its breast cancer staging system to incorporate biological factors in the “prognostic stage”. We undertook this study to validate the prognostic and anatomic stages for inflammatory breast cancer (IBC). We established two cohorts of IBC diagnosed without distant metastasis: (1) patients treated at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center between 1991 and 2017 (MDA cohort) and (2) patients registered in the national Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database between 2010 and 2015 (SEER cohort). For prognostic staging, estrogen receptor (ER)+/progesterone receptor (PR)+/ human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2)+/grade 1–2 was staged as IIIA; ER+/PR−/HER2−/grade 3, ER−/PR+/HER2−/grade 3, and triple-negative cancers as IIIC; and all others as IIIB. Endpoints were breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS), overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS). We studied 885 patients in the MDA cohort and 338 in the SEER cohort. In the MDA cohort, the prognostic stage showed significant predictive power for BCSS, OS, and DFS (all p < 0.0001), although the anatomic stage did not. In both cohorts, the Harrell concordance index (C index) was significantly higher in the prognostic stage than the anatomic stage for all endpoints. In conclusion, the prognostic stage provided more accurate prognostication for IBC than the anatomic stage. Our results show that the prognostic staging is applicable in IBC.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document