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

Abstract only 123 Background: The 7 th 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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of clinical oncology Vol. 32; no. 3_suppl; p. 123
Main Authors Nomura, Motoo, Abe, Tetsuya, Komori, Azusa, Narita, Yukiya, Uegaki, Shiori, Nitta, Sohei, Yamaguchi, Kazuhisa, Taniguchi, Hiroya, Kawai, Ryosuke, Uemura, Norihisa, Kadowaki, Shigenori, Takahari, Daisuke, Ura, Takashi, Andoh, Masashi, Niwa, Yasumasa, Shinoda, Masayuki, Muro, Kei
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published 20.01.2014
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Abstract only 123 Background: The 7 th 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.
ISSN:0732-183X
1527-7755
DOI:10.1200/jco.2014.32.3_suppl.123