World journal of surgery · 2013
Lymph node ratio may be supplementary to TNM nodal classification in node-positive breast carcinoma based on the results of 2,151 patients.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Duraker Nüvit, Bati Bakir, Çaynak Zeynep Civelek, Demir Davut
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to determine how lymph node ratio (LNR; the ratio of the number of metastatic lymph nodes to the number of removed lymph nodes) can supplement the TNM nodal classification in breast carcinoma.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the file records of 2,151 patients.
RESULTS: Lymph node ratio-based low- (LNR ≤ 0.20), intermediate- (LNR 0.21-0.65), and high-risk (LNR > 0.65) patient groups had significantly different disease-free survival (DFS) (P < 0.001). The DFS of patients with N1, N2, and N3 disease was significantly different (P < 0.001). When LNR and TNM nodal groupings were included together in the Cox analysis, both groupings had independent prognostic significance (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). The most significant LNR threshold value separating patients in low-risk and high-risk groups in terms of disease recurrence was 0.20 for N1 disease (P < 0.001), 0.35 for N2 disease (P < 0.001), and 0.90 for N3 disease (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Lymph node ratio and TNM nodal groupings show no superiority over each other in categorizing patients with node-positive breast carcinoma into prognostic groups of low-, intermediate-, and high-risk. However, LNR grouping may supplement TNM nodal classification by categorizing patients within each TNM nodal group into low-risk and high-risk groups with significantly different survival.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the file records of 2,151 patients.
RESULTS: Lymph node ratio-based low- (LNR ≤ 0.20), intermediate- (LNR 0.21-0.65), and high-risk (LNR > 0.65) patient groups had significantly different disease-free survival (DFS) (P < 0.001). The DFS of patients with N1, N2, and N3 disease was significantly different (P < 0.001). When LNR and TNM nodal groupings were included together in the Cox analysis, both groupings had independent prognostic significance (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). The most significant LNR threshold value separating patients in low-risk and high-risk groups in terms of disease recurrence was 0.20 for N1 disease (P < 0.001), 0.35 for N2 disease (P < 0.001), and 0.90 for N3 disease (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Lymph node ratio and TNM nodal groupings show no superiority over each other in categorizing patients with node-positive breast carcinoma into prognostic groups of low-, intermediate-, and high-risk. However, LNR grouping may supplement TNM nodal classification by categorizing patients within each TNM nodal group into low-risk and high-risk groups with significantly different survival.