Comparison analysis of Chinese 2008, 1992 and 2002 UICC staging system for nasopharyngeal carcinoma
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1005-1201.2010.10.005
- VernacularTitle:鼻咽癌2008年与1992年及2002年国际抗癌联盟分期法的病例对比研究
- Author:
Qihua YANG
;
Biling LIANG
;
Zehong YANG
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Nasopharyngeal neoplasms;
Neoplasm staging;
Magnetic resonance imaging
- From:
Chinese Journal of Radiology
2010;44(10):1030-1035
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To compare the Chinese 2008, 1992 and 2002 UICC (International Union Against Cancer) staging System for nasopharyngeal carcinoma and find out the reasons for the changes in the new Chinese 2008 staging system. Methods From Apr. 2007 to Dec. 2008, 285 naive patients with pathologically proved NPC, but without metastasis, received standard enhanced MRI scans of the nasopharynx and neck. Based on MRI imaging data and clinical information, clinical stage was classified according to the Chinese 2008, Chinese 1992 staging system and 2002 6th UICC staging system,respectively. Comparisons were made between Chinese 2008 and 1992 staging system, and between Chinese 2008 and 2002 UICC staging system by χ2 test. Results As a result of deleting some details of the old staging system, Chinese 2008 staging system is easier to grasp. With Chinese 2008 staging system, the number of cases in stage T1 to T4 are 66, 84, 72,63, respectively; those in stage N0 to N3 are 12,48,169,56; the number of cases in clinical stage Ⅰ -Ⅳ are 5,30,141 and 109. With 2002 6th UICC staging system, the number of cases in stage T1 to T4 are 66, 83, 55,81; those in stage N0 to N3 are 26,50,201,8;the number of cases in clinical stage Ⅰ -Ⅳ are 6,40,153 and 86. With Chinese 1992 staging system, the number of cases in stage T1 to T4 are 62,91,71,61; those in stage No to N3 are 26,189,61,9; the number of cases in clinical stage Ⅰ -Ⅳ are 6, 110, 98 and 71. Comparing with the staging results of Chinese 1992 staging system, many cases showed different stage based on Chinese 2008 system including 12 cases (4.21%) inT stage (3 up-staging and 9 down-staging), 217 cases (76.14%) in N stage (216 up-staging, most rise I stage, and 1 down-staging), 123 cases (43. 16% ) in clinical stage ( 121 up-staging and 2 down-staging). Comparing with the staging results of 2002 UICC staging system, 35 cases ( 12. 28% )changes in T stage (8 up-staging and 27 down-staging), 77 cases (27. 02% ) changes in N stage (all upstaging, most rise 1 stage), 74 cases (25. 95% ) changes in clinical stage (54 up-staging and 20 downstaging) based on Chinese 2008. Comparing the constituent ratio of T, N and clinical staging results separately, statistical differences were found between Chinese 2008 and Chinese 1992 staging system in N0,N1, N2, N3, clinical stage Ⅱ , Ⅲ, Ⅳ. Statistical difference was also found in N0, N2, N3, clinical stage Ⅳ between Chinese 2008 and 2002 UICC staging system. χ2 test results show that there is N0 significant difference of T stage constituent ratio among the 3 staging system ( χ2 = 6. 916, P = 0. 329 ), but the difference of N stage and clinical stage constituent ratio are significant( χ2 = 275. 169 and 84. 515, P ＜0. 0125). Conclusion Chinese 2008 Staging System for nasopharyngeal carcinoma is based on MRI, with clear definition to some anatomical location, after deleting some details in the old stage system, it's easier to use. The most obvious change for Chinese 2008 Staging System is the up-staging in N staging,which leads to the changes in clinical stage and constituent ratio of stage result.
