N, LNR or LODDS: Which Is the Most Appropriate Lymph Node Classification Scheme for Patients with Radically Resected Pancreatic Cancer?
LNR
LODDS
lymph node classification
pancreatic cancer
Journal
Cancers
ISSN: 2072-6694
Titre abrégé: Cancers (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101526829
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 Apr 2022
06 Apr 2022
Historique:
received:
04
03
2022
revised:
01
04
2022
accepted:
02
04
2022
entrez:
12
4
2022
pubmed:
13
4
2022
medline:
13
4
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Even though numerous novel lymph node (LN) classification schemes exist, an extensive comparison of their performance in patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has not yet been performed. We investigated the prognostic performance and discriminative ability of 25 different LN ratio (LNR) and 27 log odds of metastatic LN (LODDS) classifications by means of Cox regression and C-statistic in 319 patients with resected PDAC. Regression models were adjusted for age, sex, T category, grading, localization, presence of metastatic disease, positivity of resection margins, and neoadjuvant therapy. Both LNR or LODDS as continuous variables were associated with advanced tumor stage, distant metastasis, positive resection margins, and PDAC of the head or corpus. Two distinct LN classifications, one LODDS and one LNR, were found to be superior to the N category in the complete patient collective. However, only the LODDS classification exhibited statistically significant, gradually increasing HRs of their subcategories and at the same time significantly higher discriminative potential in the subgroups of patients with PDAC of the head or corpus and in patients with tumor free resection margins or M0 status, respectively. On this basis, we built a clinically helpful nomogram to estimate the prognosis of patients after radically resected PDAC. One LNR and one LODDS classification scheme were found to out-perform the N category in terms of both prognostic performance and discriminative ability, in distinct patient subgroups, with reference to OS in patients with resected PDAC.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Even though numerous novel lymph node (LN) classification schemes exist, an extensive comparison of their performance in patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has not yet been performed.
METHOD
METHODS
We investigated the prognostic performance and discriminative ability of 25 different LN ratio (LNR) and 27 log odds of metastatic LN (LODDS) classifications by means of Cox regression and C-statistic in 319 patients with resected PDAC. Regression models were adjusted for age, sex, T category, grading, localization, presence of metastatic disease, positivity of resection margins, and neoadjuvant therapy.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Both LNR or LODDS as continuous variables were associated with advanced tumor stage, distant metastasis, positive resection margins, and PDAC of the head or corpus. Two distinct LN classifications, one LODDS and one LNR, were found to be superior to the N category in the complete patient collective. However, only the LODDS classification exhibited statistically significant, gradually increasing HRs of their subcategories and at the same time significantly higher discriminative potential in the subgroups of patients with PDAC of the head or corpus and in patients with tumor free resection margins or M0 status, respectively. On this basis, we built a clinically helpful nomogram to estimate the prognosis of patients after radically resected PDAC.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
One LNR and one LODDS classification scheme were found to out-perform the N category in terms of both prognostic performance and discriminative ability, in distinct patient subgroups, with reference to OS in patients with resected PDAC.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35406606
pii: cancers14071834
doi: 10.3390/cancers14071834
pmc: PMC8997819
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
Int J Cancer. 2021 Sep 1;149(5):993-1001
pubmed: 33937984
J Am Coll Surg. 2015 Aug;221(2):367-79.e4
pubmed: 26081176
J Thorac Dis. 2017 May;9(5):1182-1189
pubmed: 28616267
Cancers (Basel). 2021 Aug 02;13(15):
pubmed: 34359803
Ann Surg. 2008 Dec;248(6):968-78
pubmed: 19092341
J Gastrointest Surg. 2008 Oct;12(10):1790-6
pubmed: 18709510
Ann Surg Oncol. 2008 Jul;15(7):1820-7
pubmed: 18369675
Pathol Oncol Res. 2020 Jan;26(1):467-473
pubmed: 30693420
BMC Cancer. 2019 Oct 15;19(1):952
pubmed: 31615457
Tumour Biol. 2016 Aug;37(8):11105-13
pubmed: 26912060
Pancreatology. 2016 Jan-Feb;16(1):14-27
pubmed: 26699808
Cancer. 2010 Jun 1;116(11):2571-80
pubmed: 20336791
Int J Surg. 2013;11(5):419-24
pubmed: 23541652
Pancreas. 2020 Mar;49(3):435-441
pubmed: 32132517
Int J Surg. 2016 Aug;32:24-30
pubmed: 27321382
Am J Surg. 2017 Sep;214(3):442-449
pubmed: 28687101
Int J Surg. 2016 Nov;35:165-171
pubmed: 27713088
Ann Surg Oncol. 2014 Mar;21(3):875-82
pubmed: 24242677
World J Surg. 2012 Aug;36(8):1906-14
pubmed: 22484567
J Clin Oncol. 2010 Oct 10;28(29):4450-6
pubmed: 20837948
Oncol Lett. 2019 Jan;17(1):1299-1305
pubmed: 30655898
Anticancer Res. 2018 Aug;38(8):4877-4882
pubmed: 30061263
Oncotarget. 2015 Nov 3;6(34):36911-22
pubmed: 26426993
World J Gastroenterol. 2013 Mar 28;19(12):1975-83
pubmed: 23569344
J Surg Oncol. 2015 Mar;111(3):299-305
pubmed: 25312786
Surgery. 2014 Sep;156(3):591-600
pubmed: 25061003
Chin J Cancer Res. 2017 Aug;29(4):323-332
pubmed: 28947864
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2017 Apr;43(4):743-750
pubmed: 28094085
World J Surg. 2012 Mar;36(3):667-74
pubmed: 22270984
Ann Thorac Surg. 2016 Aug;102(2):424-32
pubmed: 27180928
Ann Oncol. 2011 Sep;22(9):2049-2056
pubmed: 21310759
Sci Rep. 2017 Aug 31;7(1):10123
pubmed: 28860457
J Gastrointest Surg. 2011 Jun;15(6):1017-25
pubmed: 21487831
Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 Jun;95(25):e3860
pubmed: 27336871
BMC Cancer. 2018 Dec 4;18(1):1208
pubmed: 30514228
J Clin Epidemiol. 2008 Apr;61(4):323
pubmed: 18313555
J Am Coll Surg. 2016 May;222(5):750-759.e2
pubmed: 27113512
J Cancer. 2018 Apr 18;9(9):1667-1679
pubmed: 29760806
Pancreatology. 2014 Jul-Aug;14(4):289-94
pubmed: 25062879
Ann Surg Oncol. 2009 Jul;16(7):1727-33
pubmed: 19396496
Mol Clin Oncol. 2017 May;6(5):782-788
pubmed: 28529752
Br J Cancer. 2017 Dec 5;117(12):1874-1882
pubmed: 28982112
Ann Surg Oncol. 2016 Sep;23(9):3016-23
pubmed: 27150440
PLoS One. 2011;6(12):e28937
pubmed: 22174929
N Engl J Med. 2018 Dec 20;379(25):2395-2406
pubmed: 30575490
Ann Surg Oncol. 2022 Apr;29(4):2561-2569
pubmed: 34890024
J Surg Oncol. 2019 Jun;119(7):948-957
pubmed: 30742308
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2020 Feb;405(1):43-54
pubmed: 32040705
Colorectal Dis. 2014 Nov;16(11):O386-92
pubmed: 24980876
J Gastrointest Surg. 2016 Oct;20(10):1707-15
pubmed: 27384432
J Gastrointest Surg. 2015 May;19(5):813-20
pubmed: 25560183
Br J Surg. 2013 Mar;100(4):505-14
pubmed: 23319421
BMC Surg. 2017 Nov 23;17(1):109
pubmed: 29169392