• Korean Journal of Head & Neck Oncology
• /
• v.18 no.2
• /
• pp.179-183
• /
• 2002

Objective: A comparison of American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) 1988 and 1997 nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) classifications was made in terms of patient distribution and efficacy in predicting prognosis. Materials and Methods: Between Jan. 1981 and Dec. 1998, 60 cases of node negative nasopharyngeal carcinoma were retrospectively reviewed. The extent of disease each patients restaged according to the 4th and 5th AJCC system and Ho system, respectively. Results: The overall and disease free 5-year survival rates were 61.1% and 62.6%, respectively. Among T classifications of 4th AJCC, 5th AJCC and Ho staging system were not observed significantly different in disease-free survival rates, respectively. Conclusion: We observed a better patient distribution with AJCC 1997 comparing to AJCC 1988. The new classification also attained better statistical significances among stages in the overall survival and disease free survival rates was needed.

• Korean Journal of Head & Neck Oncology
• /
• v.33 no.2
• /
• pp.9-15
• /
• 2017

The recently released the $8^{th}$ edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Staging Manual introduces significant modifications from the prior $7^{th}$ edition. In this paper, the contents of the new changes in the decision of cancer of the head and neck is summarized except changes in staging of skin and thyroid cancer. In addition to the 8th edition, 1) Addition of extracapsular involvement in metastatic lymph nodes (N category) 2) Oral cancer T classification change, 3) Staging of the pharyngeal cancer was divided into 3 chapters: high-risk human papilloma virus (HR-HPV) associated oropharyngeal cancer (OPC), non HR-HPV associated OPC and hypopharynx cancer (HPC), and nasopharynx cancer (NPC) 4) Changes in T and N classification in NPC, 5) In the case of cancer of unknown primary, P16-positive case is defined as HR-HPV related OPC, and EBV-positive case is defined as NPC. The process that led to these changes highlights the need to collect high-fidelity cancer registry-level data that can be used to confirm prognostic observations identified in institutional data sets. Clinicians will continue to use the latest information for patient care, including scientific content of the 8th Edition Manual. All newly diagnosed cases through December $31^{st}$ 2017 should be staged with the 7th edition. The time extension will allow all partners to develop and update protocols and guidelines and for software vendors to develop, test, and deploy their products in time for the data collection and implementation of the 8th edition in 2018. The 8th edition strikes a balance between a personalized, complex system and a more general, simpler one that maintains the user-friendliness and worldwide acceptability of the traditional TNM staging paradigm.

• Journal of Gastric Cancer
• /
• v.17 no.3
• /
• pp.212-219
• /
• 2017

Purpose: The aims of this study were to compare the 7th and 8th editions of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging manuals on tumor, node, and metastasis (TNM) staging systems and to evaluate whether the 8th edition represents a better refinement of the 7th staging system, when applied for the classification of gastric cancers. Materials and Methods: A total of 5,507 gastric cancer patients, who underwent treatment from January 1989 to December 2013 at a single institute, were included. We compared patient survival rates across the disease groups classified according to the 7th and 8th editions of the AJCC TNM staging systems. Results: Stage migration was observed in 6.4% (n=355) of the patients. Of these, 3.5% (n=192) and 2.9% (n=158) of patients showed a higher stage and lower stage, respectively. According to the 8th edition of the AJCC TNM staging criteria, the 5-year overall survival rates of the patients with stage IIIB and IIIC showed a significant difference (40.8% vs. 20.2%, P<0.001) whereas no significant differences in the 5-year overall survival rates were observed according to the 7th edition criteria (37.6% vs. 33.2%, P=0.381). Conclusions: Restaging stage III cancers according to the 8th edition of the AJCC TNM classification criteria improved survival rate discrimination, particularly, in institutes where the stage III patients were not distinctly categorized.

• Journal of Digestive Cancer Research
• /
• v.7 no.1
• /
• pp.13-17
• /
• 2019

Stomach cancer is the fifth most common malignancy in the world. The incidence of stomach cancer is declining worldwide, however, gastric cancer still remains the third most common cause of cancer death. The tumor, node, and metastasis (TNM) staging system has been frequently used as a method for cancer staging system and the most important reference in cancer treatment. In 2016, the classification of gastric cancer TNM staging was revised in the 8^th American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) edition. There are several modifications in stomach cancer staging in this edition compared to the 7^th edition. First, the anatomical boundary between esophagus and stomach has been revised, therefore the definition of stomach cancer and esophageal cancer has refined. Second, N3 is separated into N3a and N3b in pathological classification. Patients with N3a and N3b revealed distinct prognosis in stomach cancer, and these results brought changes in pathological staging. Several large retrospective studies were conducted to compare staging between the 7^th and 8^th AJCC editions including prognostic value, stage grouping homogeneity, discriminatory ability, and monotonicity of gradients globally. The main objective of this review is to evaluate the clinical and pathological implications of AJCC 8^th staging classification in the stomach cancer.

• Annals of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery
• /
• v.27 no.3
• /
• pp.251-257
• /
• 2023

Backgrounds/Aims: This is a retrospective analysis of whether the 8th edition American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) was a significant improvement over the 7th AJCC distal extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma classification. Methods: In total, 111 patients who underwent curative resection of mid-distal bile duct cancer from 2002 to 2019 were included. Cases were re-classified into 7th and 8th AJCC as well as clinicopathological univariate and multivariate, and Kaplan-Meier survival curve and log rank were calculated using R software. Results: In patient characteristics, pancreaticoduodenectomy/pylorus preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy had better survival than segmental resection. Only lymphovascular invasion was found to be significant (hazard ratio 2.01, p = 0.039) among all clinicopathological variables. The 8th edition AJCC Kaplan Meier survival curve showed an inability to properly segregate stage I and IIA, while there was a large difference in survival probability between IIA and IIB. Conclusions: The 8th distal AJCC classification did resolve the anatomical issue with the T stage, as T1 and T3 showed improvement over the 7th AJCC, and the N stage division of the N1 and N2 category was found to be justified, with poorer survival in N2 than N1. Meanwhile, in TMN staging, the 8th AJCC was able differentiate between early stage (I and IIA) and late stage (IIB and III) to better explain the patient prognosis.

• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.48 no.3
• /
• pp.157-163
• /
• 2015

Accurate staging of esophageal cancer is very important to achieving optimal treatment outcomes. The AJCC (American Joint Committee on Cancer) first published TNM esophageal cancer staging recommendations in the first edition of their staging manual in 1977. Thereafter, the staging of esophageal cancer was changed many times over the years. This article reviews the current status of staging of esophageal cancer.

• Korean Journal of Radiology
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.69-82
• /
• 2019

In 2017, the American Joint Committee on Cancer announced the 8th edition of its cancer staging system. For breast cancer, the most significant change in the staging system is the incorporation of biomarkers into the anatomic staging to create prognostic stages. Different prognostic stages are assigned to tumors with the same anatomic stages according to the tumor grade, hormone receptor (estrogen receptor; progesterone receptor) status, and HER2 status. A Clinical Prognostic Stage is assigned to all patients regardless of the type of therapy used; in contrast, a Pathologic Prognosis Stage is assigned to patients in whom surgery is the initial treatment. In a few situations, low Oncotype DX recurrence scores can change the prognostic stage. The radiologists need to understand the importance of the biologic factors that can influence cancer staging.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.36 no.4
• /
• pp.295-303
• /
• 2018

Purpose: We evaluated prognostic value of the 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer/International Union for Cancer Control (AJCC/UICC) staging system for nasopharyngeal cancer and investigated whether tumor volume/metabolic information refined prognostication of anatomy based staging system. Materials and Methods: One hundred thirty-three patients with nasopharyngeal cancer who were staged with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) between 2004 and 2013 were reviewed. Multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate prognostic value of the 8th edition of the AJCC/UICC staging system and other factors including gross tumor volume and maximum standardized uptake value of primary tumor (GTV-T and SUV-T). Results: Median follow-up period was 63 months. In multivariate analysis for overall survival (OS), stage group (stage I-II vs. III-IVA) was the only significant prognostic factor. However, 5-year OS rates were not significantly different between stage I and II (100% vs. 96.2%), and between stage III and IVA (80.1% vs. 71.7%). Although SUV-T and GTV-T were not significant prognostic factors in multivariate analysis, those improved prognostication of stage group. The 5-year OS rates were significantly different between stage I-II, III-IV (SUV-T ≤ 16), and III-IV (SUV-T > 16) (97.2% vs. 78% vs. 53.8%), and between stage I, II-IV (GTV-T ≤ 33 mL), and II-IV (GTV-T > 33 mL) (100% vs. 87.3% vs. 66.7%). Conclusion: Current anatomy based staging system has limitations on prognostication for nasopharyngeal cancer despite the most accurate assessment of tumor extent by MRI. Tumor volume/metabolic information seem to improve prognostication of current anatomy based staging system, and further studies are needed to confirm its clinical significance.

• Journal of Gastric Cancer
• /
• v.16 no.4
• /
• pp.207-214
• /
• 2016

Purpose: The utility of N classification has been questioned after the 7th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC)/Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) was published. We evaluated the correlation between ratio-based N (rN) classification with the overall survival of pathological T4 gastric cancer patients who underwent D2 lymphadenectomy. Materials and Methods: We reviewed 222 cases of advanced gastric cancer patients who underwent curative gastrectomy between January 2006 and December 2015. The T4 gastric cancer patents were classified into four groups according to the lymph node ratio (the number of metastatic lymph nodes divided by the retrieved lymph nodes): rN0, 0%; rN1, ${\leq}13.3%$; rN2, ${\leq}40.0%$; and rN3, >40.0%. Results: The rN stage showed a large down stage migration compared with pathological T4N3 (AJCC/UICC). There was a significant difference in overall survival between rN2 and rN3 groups in patients with pT4N3 (P=0.013). In contrast, the difference in metastatic lymph nodes was not significant in these patients (${\geq}16$ vs. <15; P=0.177). In addition, the rN staging system showed a more distinct difference in overall survival than the pN staging system for pathological T4 gastric cancer patients. Conclusions: Our results confirm that rN staging could be a good alternative for pathological T4 gastric cancer patients who undergo D2 lymphadenectomy. However, before applying this system to gastric cancer patients who undergo D2 lymphadenectomy, a larger sample size is required to further evaluate the usefulness of the rN staging system for all stages, including less advanced stages.

• Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention
• /
• v.16 no.7
• /
• pp.2903-2908
• /
• 2015

Background: Head and neck cancer (HNC) is the eighth most common cancer as estimated from worldwide data. The incidence of HNC in Peninsular Malaysia was reported as 8.5 per 100,000 population. This study was aimed to determine the treatment outcomes for HNC patients treated in the Oncology Unit of University Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC). Materials and Methods: All newly diagnosed patients with squamous cell carcinoma of head and neck (HNSCC) referred for treatment to the Oncology Unit at UMMC from 2003-2010 were retrospectively analyzed. Treatment outcomes were 5-year overall survival (OS), cause specific survival (CSS), loco-regional control (LRC) and radiotherapy (RT) related side effects. Kaplan-Meier and log rank analyses were used to determine survival outcomes, stratified according to American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage. Results: A total of 130 cases were analysed. Most cases (81.5%) were at late stage (AJCC III-IVB) at presentation. The 5-year OS for the whole study population was 34.4% with a median follow up of 24 months. The 5-year OS according to AJCC stage was 100%, 48.2%, 41.4% and 22.0% for stage I, II, III and IVA-B, respectively. The 5-year overall CSS and LCR were 45.4% and 55.4%, respectively. Late effects of RT were documented in 41.4% of patients. The most common late effect was xerostomia. Conclusions: The treatment outcome of HNSCC at our centre is lagging behind those of developed nations. Efforts to increase the number of patients presenting in earlier stages, increase in the use of combined modality treatment, especially concurrent chemoradiotherapy and implementation of intensity modulated radiotherapy, may lead to better outcomes for our HNC patients.