The American Joint Committee on Cancer and the International Union for Cancer Control update the tumor–node–metastasis (TNM) cancer staging system periodically. The most recent revision is the 7th ...edition, effective for cancers diagnosed on or after January 1, 2010. This editorial summarizes the background of the current revision and outlines the major issues revised. Most notable are the marked increase in the use of international datasets for more highly evidenced-based changes in staging, and the enhanced use of nonanatomic prognostic factors in defining the stage grouping. The future of cancer staging lies in the use of enhanced registry data standards to support personalization of cancer care through cancer outcome prediction models and nomograms.
The seventh edition of the TNM Classification of Malignant Tumors contains several new and modified component classifications. The purpose of this communication was to briefly summarize these changes.
Tumor stage remains the most important determinant of prognosis in colorectal cancer and is the basis of all authoritative patient management guidelines. The pathologic assessment of stage II disease ...is especially critical because it may help to identify patients at additional risk for whom surgery alone may not be curative. Accurate analysis of regional lymph nodes, extent of tumor penetration, and circumferential resection margins constitute the most crucial issues. For assignment of pN0, adequacy of the surgical resection and thoroughness of the lymph node harvest from the resection specimen are both essential. The minimum number of lymph nodes has been variably determined to be between 12 and 18 for assignment of pN0, but the confidence level increases with increasing numbers of nodes examined. The ability of exhaustive analysis of sentinel lymph nodes using special techniques to substitute for an exhaustive lymph node harvest and standard node examination has not been definitively shown. Although special techniques may facilitate the identification of minute amounts of tumor (i.e., isolated tumor cells) in regional lymph nodes, the prognostic significance of such findings remains unclear. Additional stage-independent pathologic features that have been validated as adverse prognostic factors include involvement by tumor of mural lymphovascular channels, venous vessels, or the surgical resection margin of the operative specimen and high tumor grade. The presence of these features may help to identify patients for whom surgery alone will not be curative and adjuvant therapies may be appropriate.
The seventh edition of the TNM Classification of Malignant Tumors contains several new and modified component classifications. The purpose of this communication was to briefly summarize these changes.
Surgical resection is the primary treatment modality for colorectal cancer, and the pathologic assessment of the resection specimen provides data that is essential for patient management, including ...the estimation of postoperative outcome and the rationale for adjuvant therapy. The essential elements of the pathological assessment of colorectal cancer resection specimens include the pathologic determination of TNM stage, tumor type, histologic grade, status of resection margins, and vascular invasion. The prognostic and/or predictive value of these elements, as well as guidelines for their derivation and interpretation, are reviewed in detail. Other tissue-based prognostic factors that are strongly suggested by existing data to have stage-independent prognostic value or to predict response to adjuvant therapy but that have not yet been validated for routine patient care are also reviewed. These include perineural invasion, tumor border configuration, host immune response to tumor, and molecular features such as microsatellite instability or loss of heterozygosity of chromosome 18. The need for high-quality, reproducible pathologic data in the care of the colorectal cancer patient, and the dependence of that data on standardization of all aspects of pathological assessment, is emphasized.
Colon cancers exhibiting DNA mismatch repair (MMR) defects demonstrate distinct clinical and pathologic features, including better prognosis and reduced response to fluorouracil (FU) -based ...chemotherapy. This prospective study investigated adjuvant chemotherapy containing FU and irinotecan in patients with MMR deficient (MMR-D) colon cancers.
Cancer and Leukemia Group B 89803 randomly assigned 1,264 patients with stage III colon cancer to postoperative weekly bolus FU/leucovorin (LV) or weekly bolus irinotecan, FU, and LV (IFL). The primary end point was overall survival; disease-free survival (DFS) was a secondary end point. Tumor expression of the MMR proteins, MLH1 and MSH2, was determined by immunohistochemistry (IHC). DNA microsatellite instability was also assessed using a panel of mono- and dinucleotide markers. Tumors with MMR defects were those demonstrating loss of MMR protein expression (MMR-D) and/or microsatellite instability high (MSI-H) genotype.
Of 723 tumor cases examined by genotyping and IHC, 96 (13.3%) were MMR-D/MSI-H. Genotyping results were consistent with IHC in 702 cases (97.1%). IFL-treated patients with MMR-D/MSI-H tumors showed improved 5-year DFS as compared with those with mismatch repair intact tumors (0.76; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.88 v 0.59; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.64; P = .03). This relationship was not observed among patients treated with FU/LV. A trend toward longer DFS was observed in IFL-treated patients with MMR-D/MSI-H tumors as compared with those receiving FU/LV (0.57; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.71 v 0.76; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.88; P = .07; hazard ratio interaction between tumor status and treatment, 0.51; likelihood ratio P = .117).
Loss of tumor MMR function may predict improved outcome in patients treated with the IFL regimen as compared with those receiving FU/LV.
Integrating diverse types of prognostic information into accurate, individualized estimates of outcome in colorectal cancer is challenging. Significant heterogeneity in colorectal cancer ...prognostication tool quality exists. Methodology is incompletely or inadequately reported. Evaluations of the internal or external validity of the prognostic model are rarely performed. Prognostication tools are important devices for patient management, but tool reliability is compromised by poor quality. Guidance for future development of prognostication tools in colorectal cancer is needed.
Colorectal cancer (CRC) develops as a result of a series of accumulated genomic changes that produce oncogene activation and tumor suppressor gene loss. These characteristics may classify CRC into ...subsets of distinct clinical behaviors.
We studied two of these genomic defects-mismatch repair deficiency (MMR-D) and loss of heterozygosity at chromosomal location 18q (18qLOH)-in patients enrolled onto two phase III cooperative group trials for treatment of potentially curable colon cancer. These trials included prospective secondary analyses to determine the relationship between these markers and treatment outcome. A total of 1,852 patients were tested for MMR status and 955 (excluding patients with MMR-D tumors) for 18qLOH.
Compared with stage III, more stage II tumors were MMR-D (21.3% v 14.4%; P < .001) and were intact at 18q (24.2% v 15.1%; P = .001). For the combined cohort, patients with MMR-D tumors had better 5-year disease-free survival (DFS; 0.76 v 0.67; P < .001) and overall survival (OS; 0.81 v 0.78; P = .029) than those with MMR intact (MMR-I) tumors. Among patients with MMR-I tumors, the status of 18q did not affect outcome, with 5-year values for patients with 18q intact versus 18qLOH tumors of 0.74 versus 0.65 (P = .18) for DFS and 0.81 versus 0.77 (P = .18) for OS.
We conclude that MMR-D tumor status, but not the presence of 18qLOH, has prognostic value for stages II and III colon cancer.
PDF
