Critical updates in neuroendocrine tumors: Version 9 American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system for all cancer sites, including gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs), is meant to be dynamic, requiring periodic updates to optimize AJCC staging definitions. This entails the collaboration of experts charged with evaluating new evidence that supports changes to each staging system. GEP-NETs are the second most prevalent neoplasm of gastrointestinal origin after colorectal cancer. Since publication of the AJCC eighth edition, the World Health Organization has updated the classification and separates grade 3 GEP-NETs from poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma. In addition, because of major advancements in diagnostic and therapeutic technologies for GEP-NETs, AJCC version 9 advocates against the use of serum chromogranin A for the diagnosis and monitoring of GEP-NETs. Furthermore, AJCC version 9 recognizes the increasing role of endoscopy and endoscopic resection in the diagnosis and management of NETs, particularly in the stomach, duodenum, and colorectum. Finally, T1NXM0 has been added to stage I in these disease sites as well as in the appendix.

Survival outcomes used to generate version 9 American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for anal cancer.

The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system for all cancer sites, including anal cancer, is the standard for cancer staging in the United States. The AJCC staging criteria are dynamic, and periodic updates are conducted to optimize AJCC staging definitions through a panel of experts charged with evaluating new evidence to implement changes. With greater availability of large data sets, the AJCC has since restructured and updated its processes, incorporating prospectively collected data to validate stage group revisions in the version 9 AJCC staging system, including anal cancer. Survival analysis using AJCC eighth edition staging guidelines revealed a lack of hierarchical order in which stage IIIA anal cancer was associated with a better prognosis than stage IIB disease, suggesting that, for anal cancer, tumor (T) category has a greater effect on survival than lymph node (N) category. Accordingly, version 9 stage groups have been appropriately adjusted to reflect contemporary long-term outcomes. This article highlights the changes to the now published AJCC staging system for anal cancer, which: (1) redefined stage IIB as T1-T2N1M0 disease, (2) redefined stage IIIA as T3N0-N1M0 disease, and (3) eliminated stage 0 disease from its guidelines altogether.

Survival outcomes used to validate version 9 of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for appendiceal cancer.

The standard for cancer staging in the United States for all cancer sites, including primary carcinomas of the appendix, is the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system. AJCC staging criteria undergo periodic revisions, led by a panel of site-specific experts, to maintain contemporary staging definitions through the evaluation of new evidence. Since its last revision, the AJCC has restructured its processes to include prospectively collected data because large data sets have become increasingly robust and available over time. Thus survival analyses using AJCC eighth edition staging criteria were used to inform stage group revisions in the version 9 AJCC staging system, including appendiceal cancer. Although the current AJCC staging definitions were maintained for appendiceal cancer, incorporating survival analysis into the version 9 staging system provided unique insight into the clinical challenges in staging rare malignancies. This article highlights the critical clinical components of the now published version 9 AJCC staging system for appendix cancer, which (1) justified the separation of three different histologies (non-mucinous, mucinous, signet-ring cell) in terms of prognostic variance, (2) demonstrated the clinical implications and challenges in staging heterogeneous and rare tumors, and (3) emphasized the influence of data limitations on survival analysis for low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasms.

The new (Version 9) American Joint Committee on Cancer tumor, node, metastasis staging for cervical cancer.

The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) tumor, node, metastasis (TNM) staging for all cancer sites has been periodically updated as a published manual for many years. The last update, the eighth edition AJCC Cancer Staging Manual went into use on January 1, 2018. The AJCC has since restructured and updated its processes, and all AJCC staging-related data are now housed on its new application programming interface. Consequently, the next AJCC TNM staging update, AJCC version 9 TNM staging, will be published electronically and will be released chapter by chapter. The first chapter of version 9 AJCC TNM staging is the updated cervical cancer staging, which is now published. This article highlights the changes to the AJCC TNM cervical cancer staging; these changes align with the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging. The most important of the changes are: 1) the incorporation of imaging and surgical findings, 2) the elimination of lateral spread from T1a, 3) the addition of a subcategory to T1b (T1b3), and 4) histopathology is updated to reflect human papillomavirus-associated and human papillomavirus-independent carcinomas.

Differentiated and anaplastic thyroid carcinoma: Major changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual.

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE This is a review of the major changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging manual, eighth edition, for differentiated and anaplastic thyroid carcinoma. All patients younger than 55 years have stage I disease unless they have distant metastases, in which case, their disease is stage II. In patients aged 55 years or older, the presence of distant metastases confers stage IVB, while cases without distant metastases are further categorized based on the presence/absence of gross extrathyroidal extension, tumor size, and lymph node status. Patients aged 55 years or older whose tumor measures 4 cm or smaller (T1-T2) and is confined to the thyroid (N0, NX) have stage I disease, and those whose tumor measures greater than 4 cm and is confined to the thyroid (T3a) have stage II disease regardless of lymph node status. Patients aged 55 years or older whose tumor is confined to the thyroid and measures 4 cm or smaller (T1-T2) with any lymph node metastases present (N1a or N1b) have stage II disease. In patients who demonstrate gross extrathyroidal extension, the disease is considered stage II if only the strap muscles are grossly invaded (T3b); stage III if there is gross invasion of the subcutaneous tissue, larynx, trachea, esophagus, or recurrent laryngeal nerve (T4a); or stage IVA if there is gross invasion of the prevertebral fascia or tumor encasing the carotid artery or internal jugular vein (T4b). The same T definitions will be used for both differentiated and anaplastic thyroid cancer, but the basic premise of the anatomic stage groups will remain the same. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:55-63. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

The prognostic impact of tumor deposits in colorectal cancer: More than just N1c.

BACKGROUND: The identification of tumor deposits (TD) currently plays a limited role in staging for colorectal cancer (CRC) aside from N1c lymph node designation. The objective of this study was to determine the prognostic impact, beyond American Joint Committee on Cancer N1c designation, of TDs among patients with primary CRC. METHODS: Patients who had resected stage I-III primary CRC diagnosed between 2010 and 2019 were identified from the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) stratified by TD status and lymph node (N) status was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analyses. RESULTS: In total, 147,783 patients with primary CRC were identified. TDs were present in 15,444 patients (10.5%). The presence of TDs was significantly associated with adverse tumor characteristics, including advanced pathologic stage, nodal status, and metastasis status. The presence of TDs was associated with worse CSS (hazard ratio [HR], 3.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.02-3.22), as it was for each given N category (e.g., N2a and TD-negative [HR, 2.50; 95% CI, 2.37-2.64] vs. N2a and TD-positive [HR, 3.75; 95% CI, 3.49-4.03]). The presence of multiple TDs was also associated with decreased CSS for each given N category compared with a single TD (e.g. N2a with one TD [HR, 3.09; 95% CI, 2.65-3.61] vs. N2a with two or more TDs [HR, 4.32; 95% CI, 3.87-4.82]). CONCLUSIONS: TDs were identified as an independent predictor of a worse outcome in patients with CRC. The presence of TDs confers distinctly different CSS and provides important prognostic information among patients with CRC and warrants further investigation as a unique variable in future iterations of CRC staging.

Data-driven optimization of version 9 American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for anal cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system undergoes periodic revisions to maintain contemporary survival outcomes related to stage. Recently, the AJCC has developed a novel, systematic approach incorporating survival data to refine stage groupings. The objective of this study was to demonstrate data-driven optimization of the version 9 AJCC staging system for anal cancer assessed through a defined validation approach. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients diagnosed with anal cancer in 2012 through 2017. Kaplan-Meier methods analyzed 5-year survival by individual clinical T category, N category, M category, and overall stage. Cox proportional hazards models validated overall survival of the revised TNM stage groupings. RESULTS: Overall, 24,328 cases of anal cancer were included. Evaluation of the 8th edition AJCC stage groups demonstrated a lack of hierarchical prognostic order. Survival at 5 years for stage I was 84.4%, 77.4% for stage IIA, and 63.7% for stage IIB; however, stage IIIA disease demonstrated a 73.0% survival, followed by 58.4% for stage IIIB, 59.9% for stage IIIC, and 22.5% for stage IV (p <.001). Thus, stage IIB was redefined as T1-2N1M0, whereas Stage IIIA was redefined as T3N0-1M0. Reevaluation of 5-year survival based on data-informed stage groupings now demonstrates hierarchical prognostic order and validated via Cox proportional hazards models. CONCLUSION: The 8th edition AJCC survival data demonstrated a lack of hierarchical prognostic order and informed revised stage groupings in the version 9 AJCC staging system for anal cancer. Thus, a validated data-driven optimization approach can be implemented for staging revisions across all disease sites moving forward.

Validation of the AJCC 8th Edition Breast Cancer Prognostic Staging System in Legacy Alliance Trials (AFT-01).

BACKGROUND: The 8th edition American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system combined anatomic stage (AS) with receptor status and grade to create prognostic stage (PS). PS has been validated in single-institution and cancer registry studies; however, missing human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status and variable treatment and follow-up create limitations. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to compare the relative prognostic ability of PS versus AS to predict survival using breast cancer clinical trial data. METHODS: Women with non-metastatic breast cancer enrolled in six Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology trials were included (enrollment years 1997-2010). AS and PS were constructed using pathological tumor size, nodal status, estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), HER2 status, and grade. Unadjusted Cox proportional hazard models were estimated to predict overall survival within 5 years, with AS and PS as predictor variables. The relative predictive power of staging models was assessed by comparing Harrell concordance indices (C-indices). Kaplan-Meier-based mortality estimates were compared by stage. RESULTS: Overall, 6924 women were included (median age 53 years); 45.2% were diagnosed with ER+/PR+/HER2- tumors, 26.2% with HER2+ tumors, and 17.1% with ER-/PR-/HER2- tumors. Median follow-up time was 5 years (interquartile range 2.95-5.00). PS significantly improved predictive performance (C-index 0.721) for overall survival compared with AS (0.700) (p = 0.020). Kaplan-Meier hazard estimates suggested PS did not distinguish mortality risk between patients with IIB and IIIA or IB and IIA disease. CONCLUSIONS: PS has significantly improved predictive performance for OS compared with AS. As systemic therapies evolve, it will be important to re-evaluate the prognostic staging system, particularly for patients with intermediate-stage cancers. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Identifier: NCT02171078.

Retinoblastoma Outcomes Based on the 8th Edition American Joint Committee on Cancer Pathological Classification in 1411 Patients.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcomes of retinoblastoma (RB) based on the 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) pathological classification in a global cohort of patients. DESIGN: Retrospective, multicentre, intercontinental collaborative study PARTICIPANTS: 1411 patients INTERVENTION(S): Primary enucleation with/without adjuvant chemotherapy/radiotherapy MAIN OUTCOMES(S): Orbital tumor recurrence, tumor-related metastasis, tumor-related death RESULTS: Based on the 8th edition AJCC pathological classification, 645 (46%) eyes belonged to pT1, 164 (11%) to pT2, 493 (35%) to pT3, and 109 (8%) to pT4 categories. At a mean follow-up of 38 months (median, 35 months; <1-149 months), orbital tumor recurrence was seen in 8 (1%), 5 (3%), 22 (4%) and 25 (23%) of pT1, pT2, pT3, and pT4 (p<0.001) categories, respectively; tumor-related metastasis was seen in 7 (1%), 5 (3%), 40 (8%), and 46 (43%) of pT1, pT2, pT3, and pT4 (p<0.001) categories, respectively; tumor-related death was seen in 12 (2%), 7 (4%), 64 (13%), and 64 (59%) of pT1, pT2, pT3, and pT4 (p<0.001) categories, respectively. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis of outcomes revealed pT category and adjuvant therapy as independent predictors of outcomes. Categories pT3b (p=0.005), pT3c (p<0.001), pT3d (p<0.001), and pT4 (p<0.001) had a greater hazard for orbital recurrence; categories pT2a (p=0.015), pT3a (p<0.001), pT3b (p<0.001), pT3c (p<0.001), pT3d (p<0.001) and pT4 (p<0.001) had a greater hazard for tumor-related metastasis; and categories pT2a (p=0.068), pT2b (p=0.004), pT3a (p<0.001), pT3b (p<0.001), pT3c (p<0.001), pT3d (p<0.001) and pT4 (p<0.001) had a greater hazard for tumor-related death when compared to the pT1 category. Patients who did not receive adjuvant therapy had greater hazards of orbital tumor recurrence in categories pT3b (p=0.005), pT3c (p=0.003), and pT4 (p=0.002); greater hazards of tumor-related metastasis in categories pT3a (p=0.001), pT3b (p=0.01), pT3c (p=0.001), and pT4 (p=0.007); and tumor-related death in categories pT3a (p<0.001), pT3b (p=0.009), pT3c (p=0.018), and pT4 (p<0.001) when compared to those who received adjuvant therapy. CONCLUSION: The 8th edition AJCC pathological classification predicts outcomes in patients undergoing primary enucleation for RB, and adjuvant therapy is associated with a lower risk of orbital recurrence, tumor-related metastasis, and tumor-related death in the pT3 and pT4 categories.

Inaccurate Clinical Stage Is Common and Associated With Poor Survival in Patients With Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical staging in lung cancer has implications for treatment planning and prognosis. We sought to determine the rate of inaccurate clinical stage (relative to pathologic), identify risk factors for inaccuracy, and evaluate the association of inaccuracy on survival. We hypothesized that inaccurate staging was associated with poor survival. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, adult patients who received surgical resection without neoadjuvant treatment for nonsmall cell lung cancer from 2004 to 2020 in the National Cancer Database were categorized by accuracy of clinical stage (relative to pathologic stage). Multivariate models were used to determine risk factors for inaccuracy. The association between inaccuracy and overall survival was also analyzed. RESULTS: We identified 255,598 patients with lung cancer, including 84,543 patients (33.1%) who were inaccurately staged. Stage inaccuracy was associated with higher tumor, node, metastasis stage (T-category 3: odds ratio [OR] = 1.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.15-1.28; N-category 2: OR = 2.6, 95% CI 2.47-2.79), greater quantity of lymph nodes evaluated, and more extensive resection (extended lobectomy/bilobectomy: OR = 1.3, 95% CI 1.20-1.37; pneumonectomy: OR = 1.6, 95% CI 1.54-1.74). Patients undergoing robotic surgery were less likely to be inaccurately staged (OR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.852-0.939). Inaccurate staging was associated with worse overall survival (5-y 67.5% accurate versus 55.4% inaccurate, P < 0.001). Inaccurate staging was also associated with worse survival in a multivariate Cox model (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.3, 95% CI 1.29-1.33). Both "understaging" (path > clinical) and "overstaging" (clinical > path) were associated with inferior survival. CONCLUSIONS: Inaccurate clinical stage (relative to pathologic) occurs in one-third of patients receiving surgery for lung cancer. Inaccuracy is associated with poor survival. Quality improvement initiatives should focus on improving clinical staging accuracy.