Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer · 2024
The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Mesothelioma Staging Project: Proposals for the M Descriptors in the Forthcoming Ninth Edition of the TNM Classification for Pleural Mesothelioma.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kindler Hedy L, Rosenthal Adam, Giroux Dorothy J, Nowak Anna K, Billè Andrea, Gill Ritu R, Pass Harvey, Rice David, Ripley Robert T, Wolf Andrea, Blyth Kevin G, Cedres Susanna, Rusch Valerie, Members of the IASLC Staging and Prognostic Factors Committee, Advisory Boards and Participating Institutions
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer developed a global multicenter database to propose evidence-based revisions for the ninth edition of the TNM classification of pleural mesothelioma (PM). This study analyzes the M category to validate eighth edition M category recommendations.
METHODS: Cases were submitted electronically or by transfer of existing institutional databases for patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed PM. The presence and number of metastases (single versus multiple) in each of eight organ systems were reported for patients with M1 disease at diagnosis. Overall survival (OS) was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Differences in OS were assessed by log-rank test.
RESULTS: Of 7338 submitted cases, 3598 were eligible and 3221 had sufficient data for clinical staging; 228 cases (7%) were M1. Median overall estimated survival was inferior for M1 compared with M0 patients: 10.5 months versus 21.5 months, respectively (p < 0.0001); estimated 1-year survival was 46% versus 71%, respectively. OS differences between M categories were preserved within histologic subgroups. Among 158 patients with organ-specific documentation of M1 disease, there was no statistically significant difference in OS between those with intrathoracic versus more distant metastatic disease (14.4 mo versus 10.9 mo, p = 0.64). No significant survival difference was detected between patients with metastatic disease in a single-organ system versus multiple-organ systems (12.6 mo versus 8.8 mo, p = 0.45).
CONCLUSIONS: This evidence-based analysis of the M category for PM conforms with the eighth edition M descriptors. No changes are proposed in the ninth edition of the mesothelioma M category.
METHODS: Cases were submitted electronically or by transfer of existing institutional databases for patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed PM. The presence and number of metastases (single versus multiple) in each of eight organ systems were reported for patients with M1 disease at diagnosis. Overall survival (OS) was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Differences in OS were assessed by log-rank test.
RESULTS: Of 7338 submitted cases, 3598 were eligible and 3221 had sufficient data for clinical staging; 228 cases (7%) were M1. Median overall estimated survival was inferior for M1 compared with M0 patients: 10.5 months versus 21.5 months, respectively (p < 0.0001); estimated 1-year survival was 46% versus 71%, respectively. OS differences between M categories were preserved within histologic subgroups. Among 158 patients with organ-specific documentation of M1 disease, there was no statistically significant difference in OS between those with intrathoracic versus more distant metastatic disease (14.4 mo versus 10.9 mo, p = 0.64). No significant survival difference was detected between patients with metastatic disease in a single-organ system versus multiple-organ systems (12.6 mo versus 8.8 mo, p = 0.45).
CONCLUSIONS: This evidence-based analysis of the M category for PM conforms with the eighth edition M descriptors. No changes are proposed in the ninth edition of the mesothelioma M category.