Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD.
Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Ann Surg. 2023 Apr 1;277(4):681-688. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000005313. Epub 2021 Nov 18.
To validate the 7 th and 8 th editions of the AJCC staging system for patients with invasive carcinomas arising in association with IPMN (IPMN-associated PDAC).
Although several studies have validated AJCC systems in patients with conventional PDAC, their applicability to IPMN-associated PDAC has not been assessed.
Two hundred seventy-five patients who underwent resection for IPMN-associated PDAC between 1996 and 2015 at 3 tertiary centers and had data on the size of the invasive component and lymph node status were identified. Concordance probability estimates (CPE) were calculated and recursive partitioning analysis was employed to identify optimal prognostic cutoffs for T and N.
The CPE for the 7 th and 8 th editions of the AJCC schema were relatively good (0.64 for both) and similar for colloid and tubular subtypes (0.64 for both). The 8 th edition introduced T1a sub-staging and a new distinction between N1 and N2. The utility of the former was confirmed, although the latter did not improve prognostic discrimination. The successful validation of the 8th edition of the AJCC criteria in patients with tubular and colloid subtypes allowed us to compare these patients in early vs late T and N stages which showed that with advanced disease, the prognostic superiority of colloid tumors over their tubular counterparts diminishes.
Our findings support the use of the AJCC 8 th edition in the IPMN-associated PDAC population, but suggest that certain cutoffs may need to be revisited. In advanced AJCC stages, patients with colloid vs tubular subtypes have comparable prognosis.
验证第 7 版和第 8 版 AJCC 分期系统在与 IPMN 相关的浸润性胰腺导管腺癌(IPMN 相关 PDAC)患者中的适用性。
尽管已有多项研究对常规 PDAC 患者的 AJCC 系统进行了验证,但尚未评估其在 IPMN 相关 PDAC 患者中的适用性。
在 3 家三级中心,对 1996 年至 2015 年间接受 IPMN 相关 PDAC 切除术且具有侵袭性成分大小和淋巴结状态数据的 275 例患者进行了识别。计算了一致性概率估计值(CPE),并采用递归分区分析确定 T 和 N 的最佳预后截断值。
第 7 版和第 8 版 AJCC 分期方案的 CPE 相对较好(均为 0.64),且胶状和管状亚型的 CPE 也相似(均为 0.64)。第 8 版引入了 T1a 亚分期和 N1 与 N2 之间的新区别。前者的实用性得到了证实,尽管后者并未提高预后区分度。第 8 版 AJCC 标准在管状和胶状亚型患者中的成功验证使我们能够比较这些患者在早期和晚期 T 和 N 分期中的情况,结果表明,随着疾病的进展,胶状肿瘤的预后优势相对于管状肿瘤逐渐减弱。
我们的研究结果支持在 IPMN 相关 PDAC 人群中使用 AJCC 第 8 版,但提示某些截断值可能需要重新考虑。在晚期 AJCC 分期中,胶状与管状亚型的患者具有相似的预后。