4.6 Article

Prognostic Factors and Outcome for Patients with Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Underwent Surgical Resection Alone Evaluation of the Seventh Edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging System for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

期刊

JOURNAL OF THORACIC ONCOLOGY
卷 8, 期 4, 页码 495-501

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e3182829e2c

关键词

Cancer staging; Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma; Prognosis; Survival

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: More data are essential to test the efficacy of the seventh edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). This retrospective study was designed to identify the prognostic factors for survival of patients with ESCC who underwent surgical resection alone and to evaluate the new AJCC staging system for ESCC. Methods: Data of a single-center cohort of 2011 patients with ESCC who underwent surgical resection alone according to the new staging system were reviewed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors. Results: The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates were 83.5, 57.4, and 47.4%, respectively, with a median survival time of 51.0 months. Age, histologic grade, R-category, pT category, pN category, pM category, pTNM stage, and the extent of lymph node metastasis were independent prognostic factors (p < 0.05). In separate subgroup analyses, the survival differences were not significant for pN2 versus pN3 category (p = 0.159) and stages IA versus IB (p = 0.922). Subdivisions by depth of infiltration rather than tumor grade for pT1N0M0 cancers and modified nodal categories (0, 1, 2-3, and >= 4 positive lymph nodes) better represented a survival advantage. Conclusions: The seventh edition of the AJCC staging system for ESCC is acceptable in predicting survival. However, tumor location does not influence survival in our study. Subdivisions of pT1N0M0 cancers and the N-classification may need to be modified.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据