AJCC 8th edition prognostic staging provides no better discriminatory ability in prognosis than anatomical staging in triple negative breast cancer

BMC Cancer. 2020 Jan 6;20(1):18. doi: 10.1186/s12885-019-6494-3.

Abstract

Background: We retrospectively compared the prognostic value between the AJCC 8th edition anatomic (AS) and prognostic staging (PS) system for triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) in a cohort from two involved institutions and a large population database.

Methods: Clinicopathological data of TNBCs were identified in two involved institutions (SYSUCC-PWH cohort). Data from SEER database during 2010-2015 was also accessed. We restaged all cases into AS and PS group according to the AJCC 8th staging system.

Results: A total of 611 and 31,941 TNBCs were identified in two cohorts, with a median follow-up of 53.5 and 27 months respectively. PS upstaged 46.1% of patients in SYSUCC-PWH cohort, and 62.4% in SEER cohort. No significant difference was observed in C index between AS and PS models for disease-specific survival (DSS), progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) in either cohort. χ2 statistic and Hazard Ratio for PFS, DSS and OS showed better discrimination between IA and IB, IIB and IIIA, IIIA and IIIB in AS model than PS model. Besides, patients with IIIC unchanged stage showed worse PFS compared to those with AS IIIA or IIIB upstaged to PS IIIC in both cohorts(p = 0.049, p < 0.001).

Conclusions: Our findings demonstrated that prognostic staging system did not provide better discriminatory ability in predicting TNBCs prognosis than anatomic staging system.

Keywords: AJCC 8th; Anatomic stage; Prognostic stage; Triple negative breast cancer.

Publication types

  • Evaluation Study

MeSH terms

  • Cohort Studies
  • Humans
  • Kaplan-Meier Estimate
  • Neoplasm Staging*
  • Prognosis
  • Proportional Hazards Models
  • Retrospective Studies
  • SEER Program
  • Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms / mortality*
  • Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms / pathology