Suppr超能文献

第 7 版和第 8 版 AJCC 软组织肉瘤分类系统在欧洲三级肉瘤中心治疗的局限性、中等级或高级别疾病患者的四肢和躯干中的比较。

Comparison of the 7th and 8th version of the AJCC classification system for soft tissue sarcomas of extremities and trunk in patients with localised, intermediate or high-grade disease treated at European tertiary sarcoma centres.

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedics and Trauma, Medical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 5, 8036, Graz, Austria.

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, the Netherlands.

出版信息

Eur J Surg Oncol. 2021 Aug;47(8):2182-2188. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2021.03.252. Epub 2021 Mar 29.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The updated 8th version of the AJCC-staging system for soft tissue sarcomas (STS) has been criticised for omitting tumour depth as category-defining variable and eventually not improving prognostic accuracy in comparison to the 7th version. This study aimed at investigating the prognostic accuracy of both AJCC-versions in STS-patients treated at European tertiary sarcoma centres.

METHODS

1032 patients (mean age: 60.7 ± 16.3 years; 46.0% [n = 475] females; median follow-up: 38.6 months), treated at five tertiary sarcoma centres for localised, intermediate or high-grade STS of extremities and trunk were retrospectively included. Uni- and multivariate Cox-regression models and Harrell's C-indices were calculated to analyse prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) and assess prognostic accuracy.

RESULTS

In univariate analysis, prognostic accuracy for OS was comparable for both AJCC-versions (C-index: 0.620 [8th] vs. 0.614 [7th]). By adding margins, age, gender, and histology to the multivariate models, prognostic accuracy of both versions could be likewise improved (C-index: 0.714 [8th] vs. 0.705 [7th]). Moreover, tumour depth did not significantly contribute to prognostic accuracy of the 8th version's multivariate model (C-index for both models: 0.714). Stratification into four main T-stages based on tumour size only, as implemented in the 8th version, significantly improved prognostic accuracy between each category. However, T-stages as defined in the 7th version had poorer discriminatory power (C-index: 0.625 [8th] vs. 0.582 [7th]).

CONCLUSION

Both AJCC-versions perform equally well regarding prognostic accuracy. Yet, simplification of the 8 version by omitting tumour depth as T-stage-defining parameter, whilst emphasizing the importance of tumour size, should be considered advantageous.

摘要

背景

软组织肉瘤(STS)的第 8 版 AJCC 分期系统已被批评为忽略了肿瘤深度作为分类定义变量,并且与第 7 版相比最终并未提高预后准确性。本研究旨在调查在欧洲三级肉瘤中心治疗的 STS 患者中,这两个 AJCC 版本的预后准确性。

方法

回顾性纳入了 5 家三级肉瘤中心治疗的 1032 名局部、中间或高级别肢体和躯干 STS 患者,这些患者的平均年龄为 60.7 ± 16.3 岁,46.0%(n=475)为女性,中位随访时间为 38.6 个月。使用单变量和多变量 Cox 回归模型和 Harrell's C 指数分析总生存(OS)的预后因素,并评估预后准确性。

结果

在单变量分析中,两种 AJCC 版本的 OS 预后准确性相当(C 指数:0.620 [第 8 版] vs. 0.614 [第 7 版])。通过将边缘、年龄、性别和组织学添加到多变量模型中,两种版本的预后准确性也可以得到提高(C 指数:0.714 [第 8 版] vs. 0.705 [第 7 版])。此外,肿瘤深度对第 8 版多变量模型的预后准确性没有显著贡献(两个模型的 C 指数均为 0.714)。仅根据肿瘤大小将肿瘤分为四个主要 T 期,如第 8 版中实施的那样,可显著改善每个类别之间的预后准确性。然而,第 7 版中定义的 T 期具有较差的区分能力(C 指数:0.625 [第 8 版] vs. 0.582 [第 7 版])。

结论

两种 AJCC 版本在预后准确性方面表现相当。然而,通过省略肿瘤深度作为 T 期定义参数来简化第 8 版,同时强调肿瘤大小的重要性,应该被认为是有利的。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验