Changes in the 2003 American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging for Breast Cancer Dramatically Affect Stage-Specific Survival

2003 ◽  
Vol 21 (17) ◽  
pp. 3244-3248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wendy A. Woodward ◽  
Eric A. Strom ◽  
Susan L. Tucker ◽  
Marsha D. McNeese ◽  
George H. Perkins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Staging System ◽  
Stage Ii ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
American Joint Committee ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Ajcc Staging System ◽  
Ajcc Staging

Purpose: To evaluate how implementation of the 2003 American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system will affect stage-specific survival of breast cancer patients. Patients and Methods: Records of 1,350 patients treated on sequential institutional protocols with mastectomy and adjuvant doxorubicin-based chemotherapy were reviewed. Pathologic stage was assigned retrospectively according to the 1988 and the 2003 AJCC staging criteria. Overall stage-specific survival (OS) was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and hypothetical differences were compared by the log-rank test. Results: Six hundred five of 1,087 patients with stage II disease according to the 1988 classification system had stage II disease according to the 2003 system. The 10-year OS for patients with stage II disease was significantly improved using the 2003 system (76% [2003] v 65% [1988]; P < .0001). Two hundred eighty-nine of 633 patients with stage IIb disease using the 1988 system were stage IIb with the 2003 system, and 10-year OS was 58% (1988) versus 70% (2003; P = .003). The number of patients with stage III disease increased from 207 (1988) to 443 (2003), and the 10-year OS changed from 45% (1988) to 50% (2003; P = .077). Most of this difference resulted from changes within stage IIIa: OS, 45% (1988) versus 59% (2003; P < .0001). Conclusion: Stage reclassification using the new AJCC staging system for breast cancer will result in significant changes in reported outcome by stage. It is imperative that careful attention is devoted to this effect so that accurate conclusions regarding the efficacy of new treatment strategies can be drawn.

scholarly journals Prognostic and Predictive Value of the American Joint Committee on Cancer Pathological Prognostic Staging System in Nodal Micrometastatic Breast Cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jian Shi ◽  
Chen-Lu Lian ◽  
Feng Chi ◽  
Ping Zhou ◽  
Jian Lei ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Regression Model ◽  
Staging System ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Operating Characteristics ◽  
Cancer Specific Survival ◽  
Discriminative Ability ◽  
American Joint Committee ◽  
Prognostic Staging System

IntroductionTo investigate the prognostic and predictive effect of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) 8th edition pathological prognostic staging system in patients with T1-2N1micM0 breast cancer who underwent mastectomy.MethodsData from T1-2N1micM0 breast cancer patients who underwent mastectomy from 2010–2014 were obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program. The chi-square test, binomial logistics regression, receiver-operating characteristics curve, competing-risk regression model, Cox proportional hazards regression model, and proportional hazard assumption were used for statistical analyses.ResultsWe identified 4,729 patients, including 1,062 patients were received postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT). Stage change occurred in 88.2% of the patients, of which 84.4% were downstaged and 3.7% were upstaged. Patients with higher pathological prognostic stages were independently predicted to receive PMRT. The 5-year breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) was 97.5, 93.7, 90.1, 86.0, and 73.5% in disease stages IA, IB, IIA, IIB, and IIIA, respectively, according to the 8th edition criteria (P &lt; 0.001). The AJCC 8th edition demonstrated moderate discriminative ability, and it had a significantly better ability to predict the BCSS than the AJCC 7th edition criteria (P &lt; 0.001). The multivariate prognostic analysis showed that the new pathological prognostic staging was an independent prognostic factor affecting the BCSS. The BCSS worsened with an increase in the stage. The PMRT did not affect the BCSS regardless of the pathological prognostic stage. Similar trends were found using the competing-risks regression model.ConclusionsThe 8th AJCC breast cancer pathological prognostic staging system downstaged 84.4% of patients with T1-2N1micM0 disease and the survival outcome prediction with this staging system was more accurate than the AJCC 7th edition system. Our study does not support using the prognostic stage as a guideline to escalate of PMRT.

Seventh edition (2010) of gastric adenocarcinoma AJCC staging system: Is there room for improvement?

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 77-77
Author(s):  
Manali I. Patel ◽  
Kim F Rhoads ◽  
Yifei Ma ◽  
James M. Ford ◽  
Jeffrey A. Norton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Gastric Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Health Planning ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction ◽  
Staging System ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Population Database ◽  
Curative Intent ◽  
Ajcc Staging System ◽  
Ajcc Staging

77 Background: The gastric cancer AJCC staging system recently underwent significant modifications of the T and N categories as well as stage groupings. The new system has not been validated on a US population database, but studies on Asian patients have reported no difference in survival between stages IB and IIA, as well as IIB and IIIA. Methods: California Cancer Registry data linked to Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development discharge abstracts were used to identify patients with gastric adenocarcinoma (gastroesophageal junction tumors excluded) who underwent curative-intent surgical resection from 2002 to 2006. AJCC stage was reclassified based on the 7th edition. Disease-specific survival (DSS) probabilities were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log rank test. Results: Of 4,985 patients identified, 2,262 had complete pathologic data and known cause of death. Median age was 70 years and 60% were males. Median number of examined lymph nodes was 12 and 39% of patients received adjuvant chemotherapy. The 7th edition AJCC system did not distinguish outcome adequately between stages IB and IIA (P = .25), or IIB and IIIA (P = .33, Table ). By merging stage II into one category and moving T2N1 to stage IB and T2N2, T1N3 to stage IIIA, we propose a new grouping system which showed improved discriminatory ability ( Table ). Conclusions: In this first study validating the new 7th edition AJCC staging system for gastric cancer on a US population, we found stages IB and IIA, as well as IIB and IIIA to perform similarly. We propose a revised stage grouping for the AJCC system that better discriminates between outcomes. [Table: see text]

Implications for the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging systems on esophageal squamous cell cancer patients receiving multimodality therapy.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 123-123
Author(s):  
Motoo Nomura ◽  
Tetsuya Abe ◽  
Azusa Komori ◽  
Yukiya Narita ◽  
Shiori Uegaki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Regression Model ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Squamous Cell ◽  
Cell Cancer ◽  
Staging System ◽  
Prognostic Impact ◽  
American Joint Committee ◽  
Staging Systems ◽  
Ajcc Staging System ◽  
Ajcc Staging

123 Background: The 7th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system is based on pathologic data from esophageal cancers treated by surgery alone. The objective of this study was to evaluate the prognostic impact of the pretreatment clinical stage (cTNM) and posttreatment pathologic stage (ypTNM) on esophageal cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery (NAC-S). Methods: Information on 245 consecutive esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients undergoing NAC-S was reviewed. Data collected included demographics, cTNM, ypTNM, and survival. Statistical methods included the Cox regression model, Akaike information criterion (AIC) within the Cox proportional hazard regression model, and Kaplan-Meier analyses. Results: The overall three-year survival rate was 67.6%. There were significant differences between stages II and III in cTNM and ypTNM stage, respectively (P < 0.01, respectively). There were no significant survival differences between stages I and II, between stages III and IV in each TNM stage. For all patients, cN stage (cN0 vs. cN1-3), ypT stage (ypT0-2 vs. ypT3-4), ypN stage (N0 vs. N1-3), and ypM stage were independent prognostic factors by multivariate analysis (P< 0.05). Compared with cTNM stage, ypTNM stage has a smaller AIC value, which described the optimum prognostic stratification. Conclusions: Our study indicates that the ypTNM stage of the 7th edition of AJCC staging system has better performance than the cTNM stage in patients undergoing NAC-S.

scholarly journals Stage-Specific Outcomes of Patients With Uterine Leiomyosarcoma: A Comparison of the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics and American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Systems

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (12) ◽  
pp. 2066-2072 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oliver Zivanovic ◽  
Mario M. Leitao ◽  
Alexia Iasonos ◽  
Lindsay M. Jacks ◽  
Qin Zhou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Uterine Cancer ◽  
Staging System ◽  
International Federation ◽  
Uterine Leiomyosarcoma ◽  
Figo Staging ◽  
American Joint Committee ◽  
Gynecology And Obstetrics ◽  
Staging Systems ◽  
Ajcc Staging System ◽  
Ajcc Staging

Purpose Uterine leiomyosarcoma (LMS) is staged by the modified International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging system for uterine cancer. We aimed to determine whether the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) soft tissue sarcoma (STS) staging system is more accurate in predicting progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Patients and Methods Patients with uterine LMS who presented at our institution from 1982 to 2005 were staged retrospectively according to a modified FIGO staging system and the AJCC STS staging system. The predictive accuracy of the two staging systems was compared using concordance estimation. Results Two hundred nineteen patients had sufficient clinical and pathologic information to be staged under both systems; 132 patients were upstaged using the AJCC staging system, whereas only four were downstaged. Stage-specific PFS and OS rates for stages I, II, and III differed substantially between the two staging systems. In both systems, there was prognostic overlap between stages II and III. Thus, despite the marked stage-specific differences in 5-year PFS and OS rates for stages I, II, and III, both systems had similar concordance indices. Conclusion Estimates of stage-specific PFS and OS for uterine LMS were altered substantially when using the AJCC versus FIGO staging system. Adjuvant treatment strategies should be tested in patients at substantial risk for disease progression and death. Neither the FIGO nor AJCC staging system is ideal for identifying such patients, suggesting a need for a uterine LMS-specific staging system to better target patients for trials of adjuvant therapies.

scholarly journals Stage II Differentiated Thyroid Cancer Is a High-Risk Disease in Patients <45/55 Years Old

2019 ◽  
Vol 104 (11) ◽  
pp. 4941-4948 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zeming Liu ◽  
Xiaopei Shen ◽  
Rengyun Liu ◽  
Guangwu Zhu ◽  
Tao Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Thyroid Cancer ◽  
Mortality Risk ◽  
Older Patients ◽  
Differentiated Thyroid Cancer ◽  
Staging System ◽  
Stage I ◽  
Stage Ii ◽  
Stage Iii ◽  
Ajcc Staging System ◽  
Ajcc Staging

Abstract Purpose The mortality risk of stage II differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) based on the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system requires further investigation. Methods Retrospective study of DTC in the US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program for disease-specific mortality risk in various AJCC stages, with patient age stratification of stage II disease. Results Using AJCC staging system 6.0, hazard ratios (HRs) of mortality for stage II DTC in patients &lt;45 yo and patients ≥45 yo and stages III, IVA, IVB, and IVC compared with stage I were 46.95, 4.95, 9.82, 57.37, 222.10, and 468.68, respectively, showing a robustly higher mortality risk in stage II disease in patients &lt;45 yo than in older patients (P &lt; 0.001), comparable with stage IVA (P = 0.482). Similar results were obtained with AJCC 7.0. With AJCC 8.0, HRs of mortality for stage II in patients &lt;55 yo and patients ≥55 yo and stages III, IVA, and IVB compared with stage I were 75.16, 11.23, 69.45, 134.94, and 235.70, respectively, showing a robustly higher risk in stage II disease in patients &lt;55 yo than in older patients (P &lt; 0.001), comparable with stage III (P = 0.57). Kaplan-Meier survival curves displayed a sharp decline with stage II disease in patients &lt;45/55 yo compared with older patients. Conclusions The mortality risk of stage II DTC was sharply differentiated at patient age 45/55 years, being robustly high in younger patients and comparable with stage III/IVA. This emphasizes the importance of considering age when managing stage II DTC and not treating it as a uniformly low-risk disease.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document