| 1. |
- Aasebo, Kristine, et al.
(författare)
-
CDX2 : A Prognostic Marker in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Defining a Better BRAF Mutated and a Worse KRAS Mutated Subgroup
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Frontiers in Oncology. - : FRONTIERS MEDIA SA. - 2234-943X. ; 10
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Survival of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients has improved, but mainly for trial patients. New predictive and prognostic biomarkers validated in the general mCRC population are needed. Caudal-type homeobox 2 (CDX2) is an intestine-specific transcription factor with potential prognostic and predictive effect, but the importance in mCRC has not been fully investigated. Methods: Immunohistochemistry analysis of CDX2 was performed in a Scandinavian population-based cohort of mCRC (n = 796). Frequency, clinical and tumor characteristics, response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival (OS) were estimated. Results: Loss of CDX2 expression was found in 87 (19%) of 452 stained cases, in 53% if BRAF mutated (BRAFmut) and in 9% if KRAS mutated (KRASmut). CDX2 loss was associated with microsatellite instability, BRAFmut, and poor differentiation and inversely associated with KRASmut. Patients with CDX2 loss received less first-line (53 vs. 64%, p = 0.050) and second-line (23 vs. 39%, p = 0.006) chemotherapy and secondary surgery (1 vs. 9%, p = 0.019). Median progression-free survival and OS for patients given first-line combination chemotherapy was 4 and 10 months if CDX2 loss vs. 9 and 24 months if CDX2 expressed (p = 0.001, p < 0.001). Immediate progression on first-line combination chemotherapy was seen in 35% of patients with CDX2 loss vs. 10% if CDX2 expressed (p = 0.003). Median OS in patients with BRAFmut or KRASmut and CDX2 expressed in tumor (both 21 months) was comparable to wild-type patients (27 months). However, if CDX2 loss, median OS was only 8 and 11 months in BRAFmut and KRASmut cases, respectively, and 10 months in double wild-type patients. In multivariate analysis, CDX2 loss (hazard ratio: 1.50, p = 0.027) and BRAFmut (hazard ratio: 1.62, p = 0.012) were independent poor prognostic markers for OS. Conclusion: In a population-based cohort of mCRC patients, CDX2 loss is an independent poor prognostic marker. Expression of CDX2 defines a new subgroup of BRAFmut cases with a much better prognosis. Loss of CDX2 defines a small group of KRASmut cases with a worse prognosis. Patients with CDX2 loss receive less palliative chemotherapy with less benefit and rarely reach secondary surgery.
|
|
| 2. |
- Aasebö, Kristine Ö., et al.
(författare)
-
Consequences of a high incidence of microsatellite instability and BRAF-mutated tumors : A population-based cohort of metastatic colorectal cancer patients
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Cancer Medicine. - : WILEY. - 2045-7634. ; 8:7, s. 3623-3635
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Immunotherapy for patients with microsatellite-instable (MSI-H) tumors or BRAF-inhibitors combination treatment for BRAF-mutated (mutBRAF) tumors in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is promising, but the frequency of these molecular changes in trial patients are low. Unselected population-based studies of these molecular changes are warranted.Methods: A population-based cohort of 798 mCRC patients in Scandinavia was studied. Patient and molecular tumor characteristics, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated.Results: Here, 40/583 (7%) tumor samples were MSI-H and 120/591 (20%) were mutBRAF; 87% of MSI-H tumors were mutBRAF (non-Lynch). Elderly (>75 years) had more often MSI-H (10% vs 6%) and MSI-H/mutBRAF (9% vs 4%) tumors. Response rate (5% vs 44%), PFS (4 vs 8 months), and OS (9 vs 18 months) after first-line chemotherapy was all significantly lower in patients with MSI-H compared to patients with microsatellite stable tumors. MSI-H and mutBRAF were both independent poor prognostic predictors for OS (P = 0.049, P < 0.001) and PFS (P = 0.045, P = 0.005) after first-line chemotherapy. Patients with MSI-H tumors received less second-line chemotherapy (15% vs 37%, P = 0.005).Conclusions: In unselected mCRC patients, MSI-H and mutBRAF cases were more common than previously reported. Patients with MSI-H tumors had worse survival, less benefit from chemotherapy, and they differed considerably from recent third-line immunotherapy trial patients as they were older and most had mutBRAF tumor (non-Lynch).
|
|
| 3. |
- Labori, Knut Jørgen, et al.
(författare)
-
Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX versus upfront surgery for resectable pancreatic head cancer (NORPACT-1) : a multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial
- 2024
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology. - : The Lancet Group. - 2468-1253. ; 9:3, s. 205-217
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundIn patients undergoing resection for pancreatic cancer, adjuvant modified fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) improves overall survival compared with alternative chemotherapy regimens. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX with the standard strategy of upfront surgery in patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.MethodsNORPACT-1 was a multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial done in 12 hospitals in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1, and had a resectable tumour of the pancreatic head radiologically strongly suspected to be pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Participants were randomly assigned (3:2 before October, 2018, and 1:1 after) to the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group or upfront surgery group. Patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group received four neoadjuvant cycles of FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, irinotecan 180 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus then 2400 mg/m2 over 46 h on day 1 of each 14-day cycle), followed by surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients in the upfront surgery group underwent surgery and then received adjuvant chemotherapy. Initially, adjuvant chemotherapy was gemcitabine plus capecitabine (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 over 30 min on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle and capecitabine 830 mg/m2 twice daily for 3 weeks with 1 week of rest in each 28-day cycle; four cycles in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group, six cycles in the upfront surgery group). A protocol amendment was subsequently made to permit use of adjuvant modified FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, irinotecan 150 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 over 46 h on day 1 of each 14-day cycle; eight cycles in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group, 12 cycles in the upfront surgery group). Randomisation was performed with a computerised algorithm that stratified for each participating centre and used a concealed block size of two to six. Patients, investigators, and study team members were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival at 18 months. Analyses were done in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol populations. Safety was assessed in all patients who were randomly assigned and received at least one cycle of neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02919787, and EudraCT, 2015-001635-21, and is ongoing.FindingsBetween Feb 8, 2017, and April 21, 2021, 77 patients were randomly assigned to receive neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX and 63 to undergo upfront surgery. All patients were included in the ITT analysis. For the per-protocol analysis, 17 (22%) patients were excluded from the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group (ten did not receive neoadjuvant therapy, four did not have pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, and three received another neoadjuvant regimen), and eight (13%) were excluded from the upfront surgery group (seven did not have pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and one did not undergo surgical exploration). 61 (79%) of 77 patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group received neoadjuvant therapy. The proportion of patients alive at 18 months by ITT was 60% (95% CI 49–71) in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group versus 73% (62–84) in the upfront surgery group (p=0·032), and median overall survival by ITT was 25·1 months (95% CI 17·2–34·9) versus 38·5 months (27·6–not reached; hazard ratio [HR] 1·52 [95% CI 1·00–2·33], log-rank p=0·050). The proportion of patients alive at 18 months in per-protocol analysis was 57% (95% CI 46–67) in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group versus 70% (55–83) in the upfront surgery group (p=0·14), and median overall survival in per-protocol population was 23·0 months (95% CI 16·2–34·9) versus 34·4 months (19·4–not reached; HR 1·46 [95% CI 0·99–2·17], log-rank p=0·058). In the safety population, 42 (58%) of 73 patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and 19 (40%) of 47 patients in the upfront surgery group had at least one grade 3 or worse adverse event. 63 (82%) of 77 patients in the neoadjuvant group and 56 (89%) of 63 patients in the upfront surgery group had resection (p=0·24). One sudden death of unknown cause and one COVID-19-related death occurred after the first cycle of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX. Adjuvant chemotherapy was initiated in 51 (86%) of 59 patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and 44 (90%) of 49 patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the upfront surgery group (p=0·56). Adjuvant modified FOLFIRINOX was given to 13 (25%) patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and 19 (43%) patients in the upfront surgery group. During adjuvant chemotherapy, neutropenia (11 [22%] patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and five [11%] in the upfront surgery group) was the most common grade 3 or worse adverse event.InterpretationThis phase 2 trial did not show a survival benefit from neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma compared with upfront surgery. Implementation of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX was challenging. Future trials on treatment sequencing in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma should be biomarker driven.
|
|
| 4. |
- Labori, Knut Jørgen, et al.
(författare)
-
Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX versus upfront surgery for resectable pancreatic head cancer (NORPACT-1) : a multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial
- 2024
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology. - : Elsevier. - 2468-1253. ; 9:3, s. 205-217
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: In patients undergoing resection for pancreatic cancer, adjuvant modified fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) improves overall survival compared with alternative chemotherapy regimens. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX with the standard strategy of upfront surgery in patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.Methods: NORPACT-1 was a multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial done in 12 hospitals in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1, and had a resectable tumour of the pancreatic head radiologically strongly suspected to be pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Participants were randomly assigned (3:2 before October, 2018, and 1:1 after) to the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group or upfront surgery group. Patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group received four neoadjuvant cycles of FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, irinotecan 180 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus then 2400 mg/m2 over 46 h on day 1 of each 14-day cycle), followed by surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients in the upfront surgery group underwent surgery and then received adjuvant chemotherapy. Initially, adjuvant chemotherapy was gemcitabine plus capecitabine (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 over 30 min on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle and capecitabine 830 mg/m2 twice daily for 3 weeks with 1 week of rest in each 28-day cycle; four cycles in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group, six cycles in the upfront surgery group). A protocol amendment was subsequently made to permit use of adjuvant modified FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, irinotecan 150 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 over 46 h on day 1 of each 14-day cycle; eight cycles in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group, 12 cycles in the upfront surgery group). Randomisation was performed with a computerised algorithm that stratified for each participating centre and used a concealed block size of two to six. Patients, investigators, and study team members were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival at 18 months. Analyses were done in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol populations. Safety was assessed in all patients who were randomly assigned and received at least one cycle of neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02919787, and EudraCT, 2015-001635-21, and is ongoing.Findings: Between Feb 8, 2017, and April 21, 2021, 77 patients were randomly assigned to receive neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX and 63 to undergo upfront surgery. All patients were included in the ITT analysis. For the per-protocol analysis, 17 (22%) patients were excluded from the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group (ten did not receive neoadjuvant therapy, four did not have pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, and three received another neoadjuvant regimen), and eight (13%) were excluded from the upfront surgery group (seven did not have pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and one did not undergo surgical exploration). 61 (79%) of 77 patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group received neoadjuvant therapy. The proportion of patients alive at 18 months by ITT was 60% (95% CI 49–71) in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group versus 73% (62–84) in the upfront surgery group (p=0·032), and median overall survival by ITT was 25·1 months (95% CI 17·2–34·9) versus 38·5 months (27·6–not reached; hazard ratio [HR] 1·52 [95% CI 1·00–2·33], log-rank p=0·050). The proportion of patients alive at 18 months in per-protocol analysis was 57% (95% CI 46–67) in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group versus 70% (55–83) in the upfront surgery group (p=0·14), and median overall survival in per-protocol population was 23·0 months (95% CI 16·2–34·9) versus 34·4 months (19·4–not reached; HR 1·46 [95% CI 0·99–2·17], log-rank p=0·058). In the safety population, 42 (58%) of 73 patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and 19 (40%) of 47 patients in the upfront surgery group had at least one grade 3 or worse adverse event. 63 (82%) of 77 patients in the neoadjuvant group and 56 (89%) of 63 patients in the upfront surgery group had resection (p=0·24). One sudden death of unknown cause and one COVID-19-related death occurred after the first cycle of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX. Adjuvant chemotherapy was initiated in 51 (86%) of 59 patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and 44 (90%) of 49 patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the upfront surgery group (p=0·56). Adjuvant modified FOLFIRINOX was given to 13 (25%) patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and 19 (43%) patients in the upfront surgery group. During adjuvant chemotherapy, neutropenia (11 [22%] patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and five [11%] in the upfront surgery group) was the most common grade 3 or worse adverse event.Interpretation: This phase 2 trial did not show a survival benefit from neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma compared with upfront surgery. Implementation of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX was challenging. Future trials on treatment sequencing in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma should be biomarker driven.
|
|
| 5. |
- Mezheyeuski, Artur, et al.
(författare)
-
Metastatic colorectal carcinomas with high SATB2 expression are associated with better prognosis and response to chemotherapy : a population-based Scandinavian study
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Acta Oncologica. - : Taylor & Francis. - 0284-186X .- 1651-226X. ; 59:3, s. 284-290
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Survival and response to therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are very heterogeneous. There is an unmet need for better markers of prognosis and treatment benefit for mCRC patients. The homeobox 2 gene SATB2 has a highly specific expression in colorectal tissue and is associated with better prognosis in non-metastatic CRC.Material and methods: A population-based cohort of 798 mCRC patients was analysed. From primary tumour material, protein expression was assessed by immunohistochemistry. BRAF and KRAS mutation status was also determined. Associations with clinicopathological data, overall and progression-free survival and response to first-line chemotherapy were analysed.Results: Tumour tissue and clinical data were available from 467 patients. SATB2 was strongly expressed in 58% of cases, significantly more in left-sided, low-grade and wild-type BRAF tumours. Patients with high SATB2 tumours had longer overall survival compared with low SATB2 tumours (median 13 vs 8 months respectively, p < .001). Chemotherapy was given to 282 patients (63%). Patients with high SATB2 tumours had longer OS (median 22 vs 15 months respectively, p = .001) and more often responded to chemotherapy than those with low SATB2 (objective response 43% vs 29%, p = .02; clinical response 83% vs 67%, p = .004). Progression-free survival on first-line irinotecan chemotherapy was longer in high SATB2 cases (median 8 vs 4 months respectively, p = .019). Patients with both low SATB2 expression and mutated BRAF (n = 69) had particularly poor survival compared to the rest (median 8 and 12 months respectively, p = .001). In multivariable analysis, the SATB2 findings were independent of known clinicopathological prognostic markers, including BRAF mutation status.Conclusion: Patients with mCRC expressing high level of SATB2 have better prognosis and response to chemotherapy than those with low SATB2 expression. Patients with both low SATB2 expression and mutated BRAF had particularly poor prognosis and could thus benefit from more aggressive therapies.
|
|
| 6. |
- Nunes, Luís, 1995-, et al.
(författare)
-
Molecular characterization of a large unselected cohort of metastatic colorectal cancers in relation to primary tumor location, rare metastatic sites and prognosis
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Acta Oncologica. - 0284-186X .- 1651-226X. ; 59:4, s. 417-426
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: We have reported that BRAF V600E mutations and microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) are more prevalent in a population-based cohort of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients than has been reported from clinical trials or hospital-based patient groups. The aim was to explore if other mutations in mCRC differ in prevalence between these cohorts in relation to mismatch repair status and primary tumor location and if presence of bone or brain metastases is associated with any mutations.Material and methods: A population-based cohort of 798 mCRC patients from three regions in Scandinavia was used. Forty-four cancer related genes were investigated in a custom designed Ampliseq hotspot panel. Differences in survival were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier estimator and the Cox regression analysis.Results: Determination of mutations was possible in 449/501 patients for 40/44 genes. Besides BRAF V600E, seen in 19% of the tumors, none of the other mutations appeared more prevalent than in trial cohorts. BRAF V600E and MSI-H, seen in 8%, were associated with poor prognosis as was right-sided primary tumor location (39%) when compared to left-sided and rectum together; however, in a multivariable regression, only the BRAF mutation retained its statistical significance. No other mutations were associated with poor prognosis. ERBB2 alterations were more common if bone metastases were present at diagnosis (17% vs. 4%, p = .011). No association was found for brain metastases. Fifty-two percent had an alteration that is treatable with an FDA-approved targeted therapy, chiefly by EGFR-inhibitor for RAS wild-type and a check-point inhibitor for MSI-H tumors.Conclusions: Right-sided tumor location, BRAF V600E mutations, but no other investigated mutation, and MSI-H are more commonly seen in an unselected cohort than is reported from clinical patient cohorts, likely because they indicate poor prognosis. Half of the patients have a tumor that is treatable with an already FDA-approved targeted drug for mCRC.
|
|
| 7. |
- Aasebø, Kristine, et al.
(författare)
-
Prognostic role of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes and macrophages in relation to MSI, CDX2 and BRAF status : a population-based study of metastatic colorectal cancer patients
- 2022
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Cancer. - : Springer. - 0007-0920 .- 1532-1827. ; 126:1, s. 48-56
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Tumour-infiltrating CD3, CD8 lymphocytes and CD68 macrophages are associated with favourable prognosis in localised colorectal cancer, but the effect in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is not established.METHODS: A Scandinavian population-based cohort of non-resectable mCRC patients was studied. Tissue microarrays (n = 460) were stained with CD3, CD8 and CD68 using fluorescence-based multiplex immunohistochemistry. Associations with clinicopathological variables, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival were estimated.RESULTS: Two-thirds of microsatellite instable (MSI) and one-fourth of microsatellite stable (MSS) tumours displayed the highest quartile density of CD8. For CD3 high vs low cases, median OS was 20 vs 16 months (HR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.59, 0.76, p = 0.025) with 3-year OS of 27 vs 13%. For CD68 high vs low cases, median OS was 23 vs 15 months (HR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.54, 0.88, p = 0.003) with 3-year OS of 28 vs 12%. MSI, BRAF mutation and CDX2 loss were negative prognostic markers independent of tumour immune infiltration.CONCLUSIONS: In mCRC, high lymphocyte infiltration was found in proportions of MSI and MSS tumours-potential subgroups of immunotherapy response. Tumour-infiltrating CD3 lymphocytes and CD68 macrophages were associated with median and long-term survival. MSI was a significant negative prognostic marker despite high immunogenicity.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Cavalli-Björkman, Nina, 1970-, et al.
(författare)
-
Lower treatment intensity and poorer survival in metastatic colorectal cancer patients who live alone
- 2012
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Cancer. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0007-0920 .- 1532-1827. ; 107:1, s. 189-194
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic status (SES) and social support influences cancer survival. If SES and social support affects cancer treatment has not been thoroughly explored. METHODS: A cohort consisting of all patients who were initially diagnosed with or who developed metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC, n = 781) in three Scandinavian university hospitals from October 2003 to August 2006 was set up. Clinical and socioeconomic data were registered prospectively. RESULTS: Patients living alone more often had synchronous metastases at presentation and were less often treated with combination chemotherapy than those cohabitating (HR 0.19, 95% CI 0.04-0.85, P = 0.03). Surgical removal of metastases was less common in patients living alone (HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.10-0.86, P = 0.02) but more common among university-educated patients (HR 2.22, 95% CI 1.10-4.49, P = 0.02). Smoking, being married and having children did not influence treatment or survival. Median survival was 7.7 months in patients living alone and 11.7 months in patients living with someone (P < 0.001). Living alone remained a prognostic factor for survival after correction for age and comorbidity. CONCLUSION: Patients living alone received less combination chemotherapy and less secondary surgery. Living alone is a strong independent risk factor for poor survival in mCRC.
|
|
| 10. |
- Dahl, Olav, et al.
(författare)
-
Evaluation of the stage classification of anal cancer by the TNM 8th version versus the TNM 7th version
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Acta Oncologica. - 0284-186X .- 1651-226X. ; 59:9, s. 1016-1023
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: The UICC TNM 7th edition introduced stage groups for anal cancer which in 2019 has not yet come into general use. The new TNM 8th edition from 2016 defines 7 sub-stages. Background data for these changes are lacking. We aimed to investigate whether the new classification for anal cancer reliably predict the prognosis in the different stages.Patients and methods: The Nordic Anal Cancer Group (NOAC) conducted a large retrospective study of all anal cancers in Norway, Sweden and most of Denmark in 2000–2007. From the Nordic cohort 1151 anal cancer patients with follow-up data were classified by the TNM 4th edition which has identical T, N and M definitions as the TNM 7th edition, and therefore also can be classified by the TNM 7th stage groups. We used the Nordic cohort to translate the T, N and M stages into the TNM 8th stages and sub-stages. Overall survival for each stage was assessed.Results: Although the summary stage groups for TNM 8th edition discriminates patients with different prognosis reasonably well, the analyses of the seven sub-stages show overlapping overall survival: HR for stage IIA 1.30 (95%CI 0.80–2.12) is not significantly different from stage I (p = .30) and HR for stage IIB 2.35 (95%CI 1.40–3.95) and IIIA 2.48 (95%CI 1.43–4.31) are also similar as were HRs for stage IIIB 3.41 (95%CI 1.99–5.85) and IIIC 3.22 (95%CI 1.99–5.20). Similar overlapping was shown for local recurrence and distant spread.Conclusion: The results for the sub-stages calls for a revision of the staging system. We propose a modification of the TNM 8th edition for staging of anal cancer into four stages based on the T, N and M definitions of the TNM 8th classification.
|
|
