Tumor volume/metabolic information can improve the prognostication of anatomy based staging system for nasopharyngeal cancer? Evaluation of the 8th edition of the AJCC/UICC staging system for nasopharyngeal cancer
- Author:
Yuri JEONG
1
;
Sang wook LEE
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords: Nasopharyngeal neoplasms; Neoplasm staging; Prognosis
- MeSH: Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Joints; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Multivariate Analysis; Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms; Neoplasm Staging; Prognosis; Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated; Tumor Burden
- From:Radiation Oncology Journal 2018;36(4):295-303
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
- Abstract: PURPOSE: We evaluated prognostic value of the 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer/International Union for Cancer Control (AJCC/UICC) staging system for nasopharyngeal cancer and investigated whether tumor volume/metabolic information refined prognostication of anatomy based staging system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred thirty-three patients with nasopharyngeal cancer who were staged with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) between 2004 and 2013 were reviewed. Multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate prognostic value of the 8th edition of the AJCC/UICC staging system and other factors including gross tumor volume and maximum standardized uptake value of primary tumor (GTV-T and SUV-T). RESULTS: Median follow-up period was 63 months. In multivariate analysis for overall survival (OS), stage group (stage I-II vs. III-IVA) was the only significant prognostic factor. However, 5-year OS rates were not significantly different between stage I and II (100% vs. 96.2%), and between stage III and IVA (80.1% vs. 71.7%). Although SUV-T and GTV-T were not significant prognostic factors in multivariate analysis, those improved prognostication of stage group. The 5-year OS rates were significantly different between stage I-II, III-IV (SUV-T ≤ 16), and III-IV (SUV-T > 16) (97.2% vs. 78% vs. 53.8%), and between stage I, II-IV (GTV-T ≤ 33 mL), and II-IV (GTV-T > 33 mL) (100% vs. 87.3% vs. 66.7%). CONCLUSION: Current anatomy based staging system has limitations on prognostication for nasopharyngeal cancer despite the most accurate assessment of tumor extent by MRI. Tumor volume/metabolic information seem to improve prognostication of current anatomy based staging system, and further studies are needed to confirm its clinical significance.
