Abstract
BackgroundThe TNM system, which reflects the anatomical extent of disease, was used for stage definition. In the recently published AJCC 8th edition, the new staging system of the clinical and pathological prognostic stage, which incorporates biological factors, is introduced.Patients and methodsA total of 2622 patients with primary breast cancer at stage I–III were included in this study. The anatomic stage (aStage) and the pathological prognostic stage (ppStage) for each case were determined according to the definition of the AJCC 8th edition, and the influence of these stages on the prognosis was compared.ResultsThe stage distributions of aStage and ppStage were as follows: aStage, stage IA (54.8%), IB (1.1%), IIA (26.1%), IIB (9.2%), IIIA (5.6%), IIIB (0.1%), and IIIC (3.1%); and ppStage, stage IA (66.6%), IB (13.1%), IIA (11.1%), IIB (3.2%), IIIA (3.3%), IIIB (1.4%), and IIIC (1.2%). Compared with the aStage, the ppStage stayed the same in 1710 patients (65.2%), was downstaged in 778 patients (29.7%), and was upstaged in 134 patients. The pathological tumor size (pT2) and lymph node metastasis (pN1) were associated with downstaging, and histological grade 3 was associated with upstaging. ER positivity, PgR positivity, and HER2-positivity were significantly associated with downstaging, and the TN subtype was associated with upstaging. Both the aStage and ppStage were significantly associated with the prognosis; however, the Kaplan–Meier curves for the relapse-free survival (RFS), distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS), and overall survival were better stratified by the ppStage.ConclusionThe ppStage reflects the prognosis of patients with early breast cancer more accurately than the aStage.
Highlights
An improved understanding of the breast cancer biology has greatly changed the therapeutic strategies for both early and advanced breast cancer
In terms of tumor subtypes determined by HR and human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2), HR+ /HER2− subtypes were observed in 2039 patients (77.8%), HR+ /HER2+ in 154 (5.9%), HR− /HER2+ 176 (6.7%), and HR−/HER2− in 253 (9.6%)
Months from surgery (c) biological factors, including the tumor grade, growth activity (Ki67 index), expression of HR and HER2 status and multigene assays, are taken into consideration when deciding on adjuvant treatment strategies
Summary
An improved understanding of the breast cancer biology has greatly changed the therapeutic strategies for both early and advanced breast cancer. The TNM (primary tumor [T], regional lymph node [N], and distant metastases [M]) staging system by American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) began in 1959 [3]. Since it has been employed worldwide, including in. The anatomic stage (aStage) and the pathological prognostic stage (ppStage) for each case were determined according to the definition of the AJCC 8th edition, and the influence of these stages on the prognosis was compared. ER positivity, PgR positivity, and HER2-positivity were significantly associated with downstaging, and the TN subtype was associated with upstaging Both the aStage and ppStage were significantly associated with the prognosis; the Kaplan–Meier curves for the relapse-free survival (RFS), distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS), and overall survival were better stratified by the ppStage. Conclusion The ppStage reflects the prognosis of patients with early breast cancer more accurately than the aStage
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
