The Eighth Edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer Distant Metastases Stage Classification for Metastatic Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors Might Be Feasible for Metastatic Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinomas

被引:13
作者
Wen, Junmiao [1 ,2 ]
Chen, Jiayan [1 ,2 ]
Liu, Di [1 ,2 ]
Xu, Xinyan [1 ,2 ]
Fan, Min [1 ,2 ]
Zhang, Zhen [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Fudan Univ, Shanghai Canc Ctr, Dept Radiat Oncol, Shanghai 200032, Peoples R China
[2] Fudan Univ, Shanghai Med Coll, Dept Oncol, Shanghai 200032, Peoples R China
关键词
Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor; Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas; TNM staging system; Distant metastasis; Survival analysis; ENETS CONSENSUS GUIDELINES; RENAL-CELL CARCINOMA; SURGICAL RESECTION; LIVER METASTASES; NEOPLASMS; EPIDEMIOLOGY; SURVIVAL; SURVEILLANCE; NEPHRECTOMY; VALIDATION;
D O I
10.1159/000502382
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Significant modifications have been made to the 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) distant metastases (M) stage classification for metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNETs). We aimed to validate this revised classification among metastatic PanNET patients using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. We further sought to evaluate the feasibility of applying this classification to metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma (PanNEC) and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients. Methods: Stage IV pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm (PanNEN, including G1/G2 PanNET and G3 PanNEC classified according to the World Health Organization [WHO] 2010 grading scheme) and PDAC patients with metastatic disease diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 were identified and restaged according to the revised M stage classification for PanNET. Overall survival (OS) was compared using Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank test. Uni- and multivariate Cox regression models were utilized to identify prognostic factors. Results: A total of 1,371 stage IV PanNEN and 634 PDAC patients were included. Among PanNEN patients, liver (75.0%) was the most common metastatic site, followed by distant lymph nodes (8.5%), lung (8.4%), bone (7.3%), and brain (1.0%). The 5-year OS for PanNET patients with M1a, M1b, and M1c stage was 44.15, 53.32, and 19.70%, respectively. However, survival comparison showed no significant difference between M1a and M1b stages among PanNET patients. Similar findings were noted after applying this classification to PanNEC patients. Multivariate analysis showed that the age at diagnosis and the number of distant metastatic sites were independent prognostic factors for metastatic PanNEN patients. Interestingly, excellent survival discrimination by M stage among stage IV PDAC patients was noted (M1a vs. M1b vs. M1c, 5-year OS: 5.42, 2.46, and 0%, respectively). Conclusion: Our study is the first large sample-based validation of the AJCC 8th M stage classification for PanNET. The revised classification did not effectively stratify metastatic PanNEN patients. However, further study is warranted to validate this classification for PanNET patients according to the WHO 2017 classification. Interestingly, the revised M stage classification might be feasible for PDAC patients with metastatic disease.
引用
收藏
页码:364 / 376
页数:13
相关论文
共 39 条
  • [1] Amin MB., 2017, AJCC cancer staging manual, V8th, DOI [10.1007/978-3-319-40618-3, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-40618-3]
  • [2] Bergsland E K., 2017, AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, V8th, DOI DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-40618-3_30
  • [3] Application of the pancreatic adenocarcinoma staging system to pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors
    Bilimoria, Karl Y.
    Bentrem, David J.
    Merkow, Ryan P.
    Tomlinson, James S.
    Stewart, Andrew K.
    Ko, Clifford Y.
    Talamonti, Mark S.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF SURGEONS, 2007, 205 (04) : 558 - 563
  • [4] Bosman FT., 2010, WHO CLASSIFICATION T
  • [5] Is there a role for surgical resection in patients with pancreatic cancer with liver metastases responding to chemotherapy?
    Crippa, S.
    Bittoni, A.
    Sebastiani, E.
    Partelli, S.
    Zanon, S.
    Lanese, A.
    Andrikou, K.
    Muffatti, F.
    Balzano, G.
    Reni, M.
    Cascinu, S.
    Falconi, M.
    [J]. EJSO, 2016, 42 (10): : 1533 - 1539
  • [6] Trends in the Incidence, Prevalence, and Survival Outcomes in Patients With Neuroendocrine Tumors in the United States
    Dasari, Arvind
    Shen, Chan
    Halperin, Daniel
    Zhao, Bo
    Zhou, Shouhao
    Xu, Ying
    Shih, Tina
    Yao, James C.
    [J]. JAMA ONCOLOGY, 2017, 3 (10) : 1335 - 1342
  • [7] Bevacizumab combined with 5-FU/streptozocin in patients with progressive metastatic well-differentiated pancreatic endocrine tumours (BETTER trial) - A phase II non-randomised trial
    Ducreux, Michel
    Dahan, Laetitia
    Smith, Denis
    O'Toole, Dermot
    Lepere, Celine
    Dromain, Clarisse
    Vilgrain, Valerie
    Baudin, Eric
    Lombard-Bohas, Catherine
    Scoazec, Jean-Yves
    Seitz, Jean-Francois
    Bitoun, Laurence
    Kone, Sebastien
    Mitry, Emmanuel
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2014, 50 (18) : 3098 - 3106
  • [8] Edge SB, 2010, DR B CC C AJCC CANC
  • [9] ENETS Consensus Guidelines for High-Grade Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors and Neuroendocrine Carcinomas
    Garcia-Carbonero, R.
    Sorbye, H.
    Baudin, E.
    Raymond, E.
    Wiedenmann, B.
    Niederle, B.
    Sedlackova, E.
    Toumpanakis, C.
    Anlauf, M.
    Cwikla, J. B.
    Caplin, M.
    O'Toole, D.
    Perren, A.
    [J]. NEUROENDOCRINOLOGY, 2016, 103 (02) : 186 - 194
  • [10] The impact of surgery in metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a competing risk analysis
    He, Chao-bin
    Zhang, Yu
    Cai, Zhi-yuan
    Lin, Xiao-jun
    [J]. ENDOCRINE CONNECTIONS, 2019, 8 (03): : 239 - 251