HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Author home page(s): Thomas W. Rice Eugene H. Blackstone Sudish C. Murthy Malcolm M. DeCamp Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Rice, T. W. Articles by Goldblum, J. R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Rice, T. W. Articles by Goldblum, J. R. Related Collections Esophagus - cancer Related Article

J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2003;125:1103-1113
© 2003 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery

General Thoracic Surgery

Refining esophageal cancer staging

From The Center for Swallowing and Esophageal Disorders, Departments of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery,^a Biostatistics and Epidemiology,^b Hematology and Medical Oncology,^c and Anatomic Pathology,^d The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio.

Read at the Eighty-second Annual Meeting of The American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Washington, DC, May 5-8, 2002.

Received for publication April 23, 2002. Revisions requested July 8, 2002; revisions received Aug 1, 2002. Accepted for publication Aug 15, 2002. Address for reprints: Thomas W. Rice, MD, The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Ave/Desk F25, Cleveland, OH 44195 (E-mail: ricet{at}ccf.org).

Objective: Cancer staging is dynamic, reflecting accrual of knowledge and experience in treatment. The objectives of this study were to assess current esophageal cancer staging and to determine whether refinements of classification and stage grouping are necessary.
Methods: From 1983 through November 2000, 480 patients underwent esophagectomy without induction therapy. Depth of tumor invasion (T), regional lymph node status (N), distant status (M), number of metastatic regional lymph nodes, and histopathologic type and grade were subjected to survival-tree analysis, multivariable Cox and hazard function analysis, and residual misclassification risk analysis.
Results: Inhomogenity of survival was found within and lack of distinction was found between current American Joint Committee on Cancer staging groups, supporting the need for refinement. T1 and N1 were redefined on the basis of survival differences. T1a is intramucosal cancer, T1b is submucosal cancer (P = .008), N1 is 1 or 2 metastatic regional lymph nodes, and N2 is 3 or more metastatic regional lymph nodes (P = .01). Current subclassification of M1 is not warranted (P = .9). Histopathologic type (P = .17) and grade (P = .3) minimally refined staging. Reassignment of staging groups constrained by American Joint Committee on Cancer definitions of stages 0 and IV produced less monotonic, distinctive, and homogeneous survival than free assignment of staging groups.
Conclusions: Current American Joint Committee on Cancer staging of esophageal cancer is inadequate. Refinement requires redefinition of T1, N1, and M1 classifications. Stage grouping within the constraints of American Joint Committee on Cancer definitions produces less accurate prognosis than free assignment based on survival data.

Related Article

Should the esophageal cancer staging system be revised?

Valerie W. Rusch
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2003 125: 992-993. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]