首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Annals of Translational Medicine >Comparison of two major staging systems of esophageal cancer—toward more practical common scale for tumor staging
【2h】

Comparison of two major staging systems of esophageal cancer—toward more practical common scale for tumor staging

机译:两种主要的食道癌分期系统的比较-朝着更实用的肿瘤分期标准迈进

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

The latest 8th edition of TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours by Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) and 11th edition of Japanese Classification of Esophageal Cancer by Japan Esophageal Society (JES) are the two major classifications widely accepted as tools for clinical staging of esophageal cancer. Both systems consist of three main categories, i.e., T, N, and M, but large difference exists between the two. JES system has more detailed sub-classification of T1 tumors reflecting meticulous work by Japanese investigators on superficial esophageal cancer. N-category shows the largest difference. UICC defines the N-category according to only the number of the metastatic regional lymph nodes. The definition of regional nodes in UICC system is static and uniform, and supraclavicular nodes are definitely excluded. In JES system, regional nodes are subgrouped into five different patterns according to the main tumor location, and the supraclavicular nodes are always regional nodes for thoracic esophageal cancer. Japanese surgeons have described the evidence that regional nodes should be dynamically defined according to tumor location and supraclavicular nodes should be included in regional nodes. Compared to the simplified N-category, the staging matrix of UICC system is somewhat complicated. The clinical stage and pathological stage of UICC system are not identical and difference exists also between squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and adenocarcinoma. It has another system of pathological prognostic grouping. We can imagine several reasons for the difference occurred between the two systems. One is the difference of major pathology. Another reason is the difference of basic concept of cancer treatment. The relative “dependence” on radical surgery in Japan has required the detailed definition of each lymph node station and the evaluation of “efficacy index” of each station. The strict and detailed definition of lymph node stations has been regarded as an obstacle to those who are not familiar with it. Some simplification can be done but maintaining dynamic definition of regional lymph nodes linked to tumor location. If UICC system can accept this concept, I think the two systems can be unified to realize more practical and useful staging system as an international common language.
机译:国际癌症控制联盟(UICC)最新的TNM恶性肿瘤分类第8版和日本食道学会(JES)的第11版日本食道癌分类是被广泛用作食道癌临床分期工具的两个主要分类。两种系统都包括三个主要类别,即T,N和M,但是两者之间存在很大的差异。 JES系统对T1肿瘤进行了更详细的分类,这反映了日本研究人员对浅表食管癌所做的细致工作。 N类显示最大的差异。 UICC仅根据转移性区域淋巴结的数量来定义N类。 UICC系统中区域节点的定义是静态且统一的,并且明确排除了锁骨上节点。在JES系统中,根据主要肿瘤位置将区域淋巴结分为五种不同的模式,而锁骨上淋巴结始终是胸段食管癌的区域淋巴结。日本外科医生描述了以下证据:应根据肿瘤位置动态定义区域淋巴结,而锁骨上淋巴结应包括在区域淋巴结中。与简化的N类相比,UICC系统的分级矩阵有些复杂。 UICC系统的临床分期和病理分期不同,鳞状细胞癌和腺癌之间也存在差异。它具有病理学预后分组的另一个系统。我们可以想象两个系统之间发生差异的几个原因。一是主要病理学的差异。另一个原因是癌症治疗基本概念的差异。在日本,对根治性手术的相对“依赖性”要求对每个淋巴结站进行详细的定义,并对每个站的“功效指数”进行评估。淋巴结站的严格而详细的定义被认为是不熟悉淋巴结的人的障碍。可以做一些简化,但保持与肿瘤位置相关的区域淋巴结的动态定义。如果UICC系统可以接受这个概念,我认为可以将这两个系统统一起来,以实现更实用,更有用的登台系统,作为国际通用语言。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号