Department of Radiation Oncology, China Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan.
J Thorac Oncol. 2010 Mar;5(3):340-3. doi: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e3181c8137a.
To investigate the feasibility and clinical impact of the 7th edition of the "Tumor, Node, Metastasis" (TNM) classification scheme in lung cancer as proposed by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) for non-small cell lung cancer.
We evaluated the feasibility of the new staging system in our routine biweekly multidisciplinary lung cancer staging conference compared with the 6th TNM staging in a prospective manner from April 2008 to June 2009. The impact of IASLC staging versus the 6th TNM staging was observed at three levels: change in substaging, staging, and clinical management (based on the discussion within the staging conference).
From 348 patients discussed during these conferences, 226 eligible non-small cell lung cancer patients newly diagnosed within the study period were reviewed and clinically staged. The majority were elderly (median age, 67 years) and men (58%). Of these, 23 patients had different staging, and four patients had different substaging in the IASLC staging compared with the 6th TNM staging. An impact on clinical management was seen in 2.7% (6 of 226) of these patients because of coding ipsilateral different-lobe metastasis as T4 instead of M1.
The new staging system was clinically feasible and resulted in some (27 of 226, 12%) differences in staging. An impact on clinical decision making was occasionally seen within our institutional practice. Further studies are needed to investigate the comprehensive and long-term impact of the new staging system.
为了研究国际肺癌研究协会(IASLC)提出的第 7 版“肿瘤、淋巴结、转移”(TNM)分类方案在非小细胞肺癌中的可行性和临床影响。
我们以前瞻性的方式,从 2008 年 4 月至 2009 年 6 月,在我们每周两次的多学科肺癌分期会议上评估新分期系统的可行性,并与第 6 版 TNM 分期进行比较。IASLC 分期与第 6 版 TNM 分期的影响在三个层面上进行观察:亚分期、分期和临床管理的变化(基于分期会议上的讨论)。
在这些会议上讨论的 348 名患者中,回顾了 226 名在研究期间新诊断的非小细胞肺癌患者,并进行了临床分期。大多数患者年龄较大(中位年龄为 67 岁)且为男性(58%)。其中,23 名患者在 IASLC 分期中与第 6 版 TNM 分期的分期不同,4 名患者在亚分期中不同。由于同侧不同叶转移被编码为 T4 而不是 M1,有 2.7%(226 例中的 6 例)的患者的临床管理受到影响。
新的分期系统在临床上是可行的,导致了一些(226 例中的 27 例,12%)分期的差异。在我们的机构实践中,偶尔会对临床决策产生影响。需要进一步的研究来调查新分期系统的全面和长期影响。