Rice T W, Ishwaran H, Hofstetter W L, Kelsen D P, Apperson-Hansen C, Blackstone E H
Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.
Dis Esophagus. 2016 Nov;29(8):897-905. doi: 10.1111/dote.12533.
We report analytic and consensus processes that produced recommendations for pathologic stage groups (pTNM) of esophageal and esophagogastric junction cancer for the AJCC/UICC cancer staging manuals, 8th edition. The Worldwide Esophageal Cancer Collaboration provided data for 22,654 patients with epithelial esophageal cancers; 13,300 without preoperative therapy had pathologic assessment after esophagectomy or endoscopic treatment. Risk-adjusted survival for each patient was developed using random survival forest analysis to identify data-driven pathologic stage groups wherein survival decreased monotonically with increasing group, was distinctive between groups, and homogeneous within groups. The AJCC Upper GI Task Force, by smoothing, simplifying, expanding, and assessing clinical applicability, produced consensus pathologic stage groups. For pT1-3N0M0 squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and pT1-2N0M0 adenocarcinoma, pT was inadequate for grouping; subcategorizing pT1 and adding histologic grade enhanced staging; cancer location improved SCC staging. Consensus eliminated location for pT2N0M0 and pT3N0M0G1 SCC groups, and despite similar survival, restricted stage 0 to pTis, excluding pT1aN0M0G1. Metastases markedly reduced survival; pT, pN, and pM sufficiently grouped advanced cancers. Stage IIA and IIB had different compositions for SCC and adenocarcinoma, but similar survival. Consensus stage IV subgrouping acknowledged pT4N+ and pN3 cancers had poor survival, similar to pM1. Anatomic pathologic stage grouping, based on pTNM only, produced identical consensus stage groups for SCC and adenocarcinoma at the cost of homogeneity in early groups. Pathologic staging can neither direct pre-treatment decisions nor aid in prognostication for treatment other than esophagectomy or endoscopic therapy. However, it provides a clean, single therapy reference point for esophageal cancer.
我们报告了为美国癌症联合委员会(AJCC)/国际抗癌联盟(UICC)癌症分期手册第8版制定食管和食管胃交界癌病理分期组(pTNM)建议的分析和共识过程。全球食管癌协作组提供了22654例上皮性食管癌患者的数据;13300例未接受术前治疗的患者在食管切除或内镜治疗后进行了病理评估。使用随机生存森林分析得出每位患者的风险调整生存率,以确定数据驱动的病理分期组,其中生存率随组的增加而单调下降,组间有明显差异,组内具有同质性。AJCC上消化道工作组通过平滑、简化、扩展和评估临床适用性,得出了共识病理分期组。对于pT1-3N0M0鳞状细胞癌(SCC)和pT1-2N0M0腺癌,pT用于分组不够充分;对pT1进行亚分类并增加组织学分级可增强分期效果;癌症位置改善了SCC分期。共识消除了pT2N0M0和pT3N0M0G1 SCC组的位置因素,尽管生存率相似,但将0期限制为pTis,不包括pT1aN0M0G1。转移显著降低了生存率;pT、pN和pM对晚期癌症进行了充分分组。IIA期和IIB期的SCC和腺癌组成不同,但生存率相似。共识IV期亚组分类承认pT4N+和pN3癌症的生存率较差,与pM1相似。仅基于pTNM的解剖病理分期分组,以早期组的同质性为代价,得出了SCC和腺癌相同的共识分期组。病理分期既不能指导治疗前决策,也无助于除食管切除或内镜治疗以外的其他治疗的预后评估。然而,它为食管癌提供了一个清晰、单一治疗的参考点。