Buzaid A C, Tinoco L A, Jendiroba D, Tu Z N, Lee J J, Legha S S, Ross M I, Balch C M, Benjamin R S
Department of Melanoma/Sarcoma, University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston 77301, USA.
J Clin Oncol. 1995 Sep;13(9):2361-8. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1995.13.9.2361.
To determine the prognostic significance of the size of the lymph node mass as measured by physical examination (PE) and of the size of the largest node measured by pathologic analysis (path) in patients with cutaneous melanoma and nodal metastases.
The medical records of all patients with nodal metastases seen at The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center from January 1, 1973 to December 31, 1989 were reviewed. Patient eligibility criteria included the following: (1) availability of data describing the nodal size either by PE or by path and the number of positive nodes; (2) no history of preoperative chemotherapy or radiotherapy; and (3) no history or presence of in-transit, satellite, local, or distant metastases. Eleven variables, including largest diameter of the nodal mass by PE and diameter of the largest node by path, were examined as potential prognostic factors for disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS).
Of 800 patients evaluated, 442 met the eligibility criteria and are the subjects of this study. In the univariate analysis, size of the nodal mass by PE was marginally significant for survival as a continuous variable (P = .045), but not as a categorical variable using a cutoff size of < or = 3 or more than 3 cm as indicated by the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system (P = .61). Size of the largest node by path was not significant for survival. In the multivariate analysis, only the number of positive nodes (P < .001), age (P < .001), and tumor thickness (P < .001) were significant for survival.
Size of the nodal mass by PE and size of the largest node by path are not useful prognostic factors for survival and should be eliminated from the current staging system. More powerful and well-established prognostic factors, such as the number of positive nodes, should be considered for inclusion in staging.
确定体格检查(PE)测量的淋巴结肿块大小以及病理分析(path)测量的最大淋巴结大小对皮肤黑色素瘤伴淋巴结转移患者的预后意义。
回顾了得克萨斯大学MD安德森癌症中心1973年1月1日至1989年12月31日期间所有有淋巴结转移患者的病历。患者入选标准如下:(1)有通过PE或path描述淋巴结大小及阳性淋巴结数量的数据;(2)无术前化疗或放疗史;(3)无区域、卫星灶、局部或远处转移的病史或存在。研究了11个变量,包括PE测量的淋巴结肿块最大直径和path测量的最大淋巴结直径,作为无病生存期(DFS)和总生存期(OS)的潜在预后因素。
在评估的800例患者中,442例符合入选标准,为本研究对象。单因素分析中,PE测量的淋巴结肿块大小作为连续变量对生存有边缘显著性(P = 0.045),但按照美国癌症联合委员会(AJCC)分期系统,以≤3 cm或>3 cm为界值作为分类变量时无显著性(P = 0.61)。path测量的最大淋巴结大小对生存无显著性。多因素分析中,仅阳性淋巴结数量(P <0.001)、年龄(P <0.001)和肿瘤厚度(P <0.001)对生存有显著性。
PE测量的淋巴结肿块大小和path测量的最大淋巴结大小对生存不是有用的预后因素,应从当前分期系统中剔除。应考虑将更有力且公认的预后因素,如阳性淋巴结数量,纳入分期。