Journal of Gastric Cancer

The Korean Gastric Cancer Association (대한위암학회)
권호 표지

Does the New UICC/AJCC TNM Staging System (7th Edition) Improve Assessing Prognosis in Gastric Cancer Compared to the Old System (6th Edition)?

UICC/AJCC 제7판 위암 병기 분류법은 제6판 분류법에 비하여 예후 예측을 증진시키는가?

  • Ha, Tae-Kyung (Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, Hanyang University) ;
  • Kim, Hyun-Ja (Department of Preventive Medicine, College of Medicine, Hanyang University) ;
  • Kwon, Sung-Joon (Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, Hanyang University)
  • 하태경 (한양대학교 의과대학 외과학교실) ;
  • 김현자 (한양대학교 의과대학 예방의학교실) ;
  • 권성준 (한양대학교 의과대학 외과학교실)
  • Received : 2009.08.27
  • Accepted : 2009.10.27
  • Published : 2009.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: We evaluated the efficacy and prognostic predictability of the $7^{th}$ UICC TNM classification compared to $6^{th}$ UICC TNM classification in patients with gastric cancer. Materials and Methods: Between June 1992 and December 2006, 1,633 patients with gastric cancer who had undergone gastric surgery and who had been analyzed by the $6^{th}$ UICC method were analyzed using the new $7^{th}$ UICC system. Results: Significant differences in 5-year survival rates were observed for $7^{th}$ UICC N0, N1, N2, N3a, and N3b compared to $6^{th}$ UICC. There were no significant differences in 5-year survival rates between T2 and T3. Distinct survival differences were present between stage III (IIIa, IIIb, and IIIc) and stage IV in $7^{th}$ UICC. Significant differences in 5-year survival rates were not expected for Ia versus Ib, Ib versus IIa, and IIb versus IIIa. The survival rates for the same stages were not homogeneously differentiated by $7^{th}$ UICC except for stage IV. Conclusion: The $7^{th}$ UICC classification system is not better able to predict patient survival compared to 6th UICC in patients with gastric cancer, but is better for accurate prognosis of patients with stage IV gastric cancer.

목적: 제6판 UICC TNM 분류법과 비교하여 새로 개정될 제7판 분류법이 위암 환자들의 예후를 예측하는데 어떠한 차이점이 있는지를 그 유용성과 함께 비교 분석한다. 대상 및 방법: 1992년 6월부터 2006년 12월 사이에 한양대학교병원 외과에서 위암으로 수술 받은 1,633명을 대상으로 제6판 및 제7판(예정) UICC TNM 병기분류법에 따른 예후 예측과 관련된 사항들을 비교 분석하였다. 결과: 제7판 분류에 의한 T2와 T3 사이 생존율의 차이가 유의하지 않았으나 N0, N1, N2, N3a, N3b 사이 생존율은 모두 유의한 차이를 보였다. 제7판에 따른 병기 III와 병기 IV 사이의 생존율 차이는 유의하였으나 병기 Ia와 Ib사이, Ib와 IIa사이, IIa와 IIb사이, IIb와 IIIa 사이의 생존율 차이는 유의하지 않았다. 동일병기로 분류되었으나 구성요소의 차이에 따라 생존율의 동질성을 확보하지 못하는 경우가 병기 IV를 제외하면 제6판보다 제7판에서 더 많았다. 결론: 제7판 분류법은 제6판 분류법에 비하여 너무 복잡하게 구성되어 있으며, 서로 다른 병기 사이의 생존율의 차별화나 동일 병기를 이루고 있는 서로 다른 인자로 구성된 경우들 사이에서의 생존율의 동질성 평가에서 부족하였다. 그러나 근치 인자와 비근치 인자를 같은 병기로 구분한 제6판의 병기 IV 분류 기준을 수정하여 서로 다른 병기로 분리 해 놓은 제7판에서의 변화는 적절하다고 평가할 수 있겠다.

Keywords

References

  1. Dukes CE. The classification of cancer of the rectum. J Pathol Bacterial 1932;35:323-332. https://doi.org/10.1002/path.1700350303
  2. Denoix PF. Nomenclature classification des cancers [in French]. Bull Inst Nat Hyg (Paris) 1952;7:743-748.
  3. Gospodarowicz MK, Benedet L, Hutter RV, Fleming I, Henson DE, Sobin LH. History and international developments in cancer staging. Cancer Prevent Control 1998;2:262-268.
  4. Sobin LH. TNM: principles, history, and relation to other prognostic factors. Cancer 2001;91(8 Suppl):1589-1592. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(20010415)91:8+<1589::AID-CNCR1170>3.0.CO;2-K
  5. Gospodarowiez MK, Miller D, Groome PA, Greene FL, Logan PA, Sobin LH, for the UICC TNM Project. The process for continuous improvement of the TNM classification. Cancer 2005;100:1-5. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.11898
  6. Sayegh ME, Sano T, Dexter S, Katai H, Fukugawa T, Sasako M. TNM and Japanese staging systems for gastric cancer: how do they coexist? Gastric Cancer 2004;7:140-148.
  7. Greene FL. TNM staging for malignancies of the digestive tract: 2003 changes and beyond. Semin Surg Oncol 2003; 21:23-29. https://doi.org/10.1002/ssu.10018
  8. Greene FL, Sobin LH. The staging of cancer: a retrospective and prospective appraisal. CA Cancer J Clin 2008;58:180-190. https://doi.org/10.3322/CA.2008.0001
  9. Burke HB. Editorial, outcome prediction and the future of the TNM staging system. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96:1408-1409. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djh293
  10. UICC Committee on Clinical Stage Classification and Applied Statistics, ed. Clinical Stage Classification and Presentation of ReSults, Malignant Tumors of the Breast and Larynx. Paris, France: International Union Against Cancer, 1958.
  11. Kennedy BJ. TNM classification for stomach cancer. Cancer 1970;26:971-983. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(197011)26:5<971::AID-CNCR2820260503>3.0.CO;2-R
  12. Katai H, Yoshimura K, Maruyama K, Sasako M, Sano T. Evaluation of the new International Union Against Cancer TNM staging for gastric carcinoma. Cancer 2000;88:1796-1800. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(20000415)88:8<1796::AID-CNCR6>3.0.CO;2-2
  13. Karpeh MS, Leon L, Klimstra D, Brennan MF. Lymph node staging in gastric cancer: is location more important than number? An analysis of 1038 patients. Ann Surg 2000;232: 362-371. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-200009000-00008
  14. Klein Kranenbarg E, Hermans J, van Krieken JH, van de Velde CJ. Evaluation of the 5th edition of the TNM classification for gastric cancer: improved prognostic value. Br J Cancer 2001;84:64-71. https://doi.org/10.1054/bjoc.2000.1548
  15. Mendes de Almeida JC, Limbert M, Mendes de Almeida JM. Does the new classification (1997) improve prognostic stratification in gastric cancer submitted to R0 surgery? Eur J Surg Oncol 1999;25:280-283. https://doi.org/10.1053/ejso.1998.0642
  16. de Manzoni G, Verlato G, Guglielmi A, Laterza E, Tomezzoli A, Pelosi G, Di Leo A, Cordiano C. Classification of lymph node metastases from carcinoma of the stomach: comparison of the old (1987) and new (1997) TNM systems. World J Surg 1999;23:664-669. https://doi.org/10.1007/PL00012365
  17. Lee WJ, Hong RL, Lai IR, Chen CN, Lee PH, Chung KC. Reappraisal of the new UICC staging system for gastric cancer: problem in lymph node stage. Hepatogastroenterology 2002;49:860-864.
  18. Yang H, Ahn H, Yoon H, Kong S, Cho J, Park D, Lee H, Kim W, Kim H, Choi K, et al. Application of new TNM staging system for gastric cancer and prognostic significance of the number of metastatic lymph nodes. S51, p29, abstract 8th IGCC 2009.
  19. Ha TK, Kwon SJ. Subclassification of stage IV gastric cancer according to the presence of distant metastasis (IVa and IVb). J Korean Gastric Cancer Asso 2006;6:173-180. https://doi.org/10.5230/jkgca.2006.6.3.173
  20. An JY, Ha TK, Noh JH, Sohn TS, Kim S. Proposal to subclassify stage IV gastric cancer into IVA, IVB, and IVM. Arch Surg 2009;144:38-45. https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.2008.502
  21. Li CL, Yan M, Chen J, Xiang M, Zhu ZG, Lin YZ. Prognostic influence of sub-stages according to pTNM categories in patients with stage IV gastric cancer. J Surg Oncol 2009; 99:324-328. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.21242
  22. Park JM, Park SS, Mok YJ, Kim CS. pN3M0 gastric cancer: the category that allows the sub-classification of stage-IV gastric cancer (IVa and IVb). Ann Surg Oncol 2007;14:2535-2542. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-007-9445-1