Loading…
A comparison of the Chinese 1992 and fifth‐edition International Union Against Cancer staging systems for staging nasopharyngeal carcinoma
BACKGROUND The Chinese 1992 staging system for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) has been widely adopted in mainland China since 1992. The fifth edition of the International Union Against Cancer (UICC) TNM classification defines new rules for classifying NPC. The current study compares the two in predi...
Saved in:
Published in: | Cancer 2000-07, Vol.89 (2), p.242-247 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3866-6137b496a78f62b5a3bd3e67449fb56855361bc7d2a30ae7d913fd7feacd2a253 |
container_end_page | 247 |
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 242 |
container_title | Cancer |
container_volume | 89 |
creator | Hong, Ming‐Huang Mai, Hai‐Qiang Min, Hua‐Qing Ma, Jun Zhang, En‐Pi Cui, Nian‐Ji |
description | BACKGROUND
The Chinese 1992 staging system for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) has been widely adopted in mainland China since 1992. The fifth edition of the International Union Against Cancer (UICC) TNM classification defines new rules for classifying NPC. The current study compares the two in predicting NPC prognosis.
METHODS
Four hundred eleven NPC patients, most of whom had disease of undifferentiated histologic type and were treated in a constant fashion and with definitive intent with radiation therapy alone, entered this comparative study. The patients were restaged according to the rules of the fifth edition of the UICC staging manual and the Chinese 1992 staging system.
RESULTS
In the opinion of the authors, the predictive power of the Chinese 1992 T classification was superior. Conversely, the authors felt that the UICC N classification was more reasonable. The patients were categorized more evenly by the UICC stages than by the Chinese 1992 stages. The 5‐year disease specific survival rates for patients in corresponding stages of both systems were almost identical despite differences in the criteria defining T and N classifications. Statistical analysis showed that the agreement rate was 72%. There were some agreement and correlation between the two staging systems.
CONCLUSIONS
Both systems are essentially similar. Each system appears to have some subtleties that could improve the outcome prediction of the other system if the two were somehow combined. However, it appeared to the authors that the UICC system was slightly better. Cancer 2000;89:242–7. © 2000 American Cancer Society.
The 5‐year survival rates for patients in the corresponding stages of the Chinese 1992 and fifth‐edition International Union Against Cancer (UICC) systems are almost identical in spite of differences in criteria defining the T and N classifications. However, the authors of this study believe that the UICC system is slightly better. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/1097-0142(20000715)89:2<242::AID-CNCR6>3.0.CO;2-Z |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71246053</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>71246053</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3866-6137b496a78f62b5a3bd3e67449fb56855361bc7d2a30ae7d913fd7feacd2a253</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqVkc2O0zAUhS0EYjoDr4C8QIhZpPgncZIOQqrCX6URFT8jodlYN47dGiVOsVOh7ngAFjwjT4JDCsOCDd7EOfru9dE5CJWUzCkh7AklZZ4QmrLHjMST0-y8KBfsKUvZYrFcPU-qN9U78YzPybxaX7Dk-haa_Zm5jWZxpkiylH88QachfBpXsIzfRScRogXN6Ax9W2LVdzvwNvQO9wYPW42rrXU6aEzLkmFwDTbWDNsfX7_rxg42cis3aO9gvEOLr9yoLTdgXRhwBU5pj8MAG-s2OBzCoLuATX-jOQj9bgv-4DY6zivwyrq-g3vojoE26PvH7xm6evniQ_U6uVy_WlXLy0TxQohEUJ7XaSkgL4xgdQa8brgWeZqWps5EkWVc0FrlDQNOQOdNSblpcqNBRSkmcIYeTXt3vv-812GQnQ1Kty043e-DzClLBcl4BN9OoPJ9CF4bufO2i8YlJXKsSI5xyzFu-bsiWZQy_kVFxorkr4okl0RW66hfx50Pjo_v6043f22cOonAwyMAQUFrfAzUhhsu5Slno7f3E_bFtvrwX8b-5WsS-E9lM7lG</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>71246053</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A comparison of the Chinese 1992 and fifth‐edition International Union Against Cancer staging systems for staging nasopharyngeal carcinoma</title><source>Wiley</source><source>EZB Electronic Journals Library</source><creator>Hong, Ming‐Huang ; Mai, Hai‐Qiang ; Min, Hua‐Qing ; Ma, Jun ; Zhang, En‐Pi ; Cui, Nian‐Ji</creator><creatorcontrib>Hong, Ming‐Huang ; Mai, Hai‐Qiang ; Min, Hua‐Qing ; Ma, Jun ; Zhang, En‐Pi ; Cui, Nian‐Ji</creatorcontrib><description>BACKGROUND
The Chinese 1992 staging system for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) has been widely adopted in mainland China since 1992. The fifth edition of the International Union Against Cancer (UICC) TNM classification defines new rules for classifying NPC. The current study compares the two in predicting NPC prognosis.
METHODS
Four hundred eleven NPC patients, most of whom had disease of undifferentiated histologic type and were treated in a constant fashion and with definitive intent with radiation therapy alone, entered this comparative study. The patients were restaged according to the rules of the fifth edition of the UICC staging manual and the Chinese 1992 staging system.
RESULTS
In the opinion of the authors, the predictive power of the Chinese 1992 T classification was superior. Conversely, the authors felt that the UICC N classification was more reasonable. The patients were categorized more evenly by the UICC stages than by the Chinese 1992 stages. The 5‐year disease specific survival rates for patients in corresponding stages of both systems were almost identical despite differences in the criteria defining T and N classifications. Statistical analysis showed that the agreement rate was 72%. There were some agreement and correlation between the two staging systems.
CONCLUSIONS
Both systems are essentially similar. Each system appears to have some subtleties that could improve the outcome prediction of the other system if the two were somehow combined. However, it appeared to the authors that the UICC system was slightly better. Cancer 2000;89:242–7. © 2000 American Cancer Society.
The 5‐year survival rates for patients in the corresponding stages of the Chinese 1992 and fifth‐edition International Union Against Cancer (UICC) systems are almost identical in spite of differences in criteria defining the T and N classifications. However, the authors of this study believe that the UICC system is slightly better.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0008-543X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-0142</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/1097-0142(20000715)89:2<242::AID-CNCR6>3.0.CO;2-Z</identifier><identifier>PMID: 10918151</identifier><identifier>CODEN: CANCAR</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; China ; comparison ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; nasopharyngeal carcinoma ; Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms - classification ; Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms - mortality ; Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms - pathology ; Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms - radiotherapy ; Nasopharynx ; Neoplasm Staging - methods ; Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology ; Predictive Value of Tests ; Prognosis ; Survival Analysis ; Tropical medicine ; tumor staging ; Tumors ; Upper respiratory tract, upper alimentary tract, paranasal sinuses, salivary glands: diseases, semeiology</subject><ispartof>Cancer, 2000-07, Vol.89 (2), p.242-247</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2000 American Cancer Society</rights><rights>2000 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright 2000 American Cancer Society.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3866-6137b496a78f62b5a3bd3e67449fb56855361bc7d2a30ae7d913fd7feacd2a253</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=1434323$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10918151$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hong, Ming‐Huang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mai, Hai‐Qiang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Min, Hua‐Qing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ma, Jun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, En‐Pi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cui, Nian‐Ji</creatorcontrib><title>A comparison of the Chinese 1992 and fifth‐edition International Union Against Cancer staging systems for staging nasopharyngeal carcinoma</title><title>Cancer</title><addtitle>Cancer</addtitle><description>BACKGROUND
The Chinese 1992 staging system for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) has been widely adopted in mainland China since 1992. The fifth edition of the International Union Against Cancer (UICC) TNM classification defines new rules for classifying NPC. The current study compares the two in predicting NPC prognosis.
METHODS
Four hundred eleven NPC patients, most of whom had disease of undifferentiated histologic type and were treated in a constant fashion and with definitive intent with radiation therapy alone, entered this comparative study. The patients were restaged according to the rules of the fifth edition of the UICC staging manual and the Chinese 1992 staging system.
RESULTS
In the opinion of the authors, the predictive power of the Chinese 1992 T classification was superior. Conversely, the authors felt that the UICC N classification was more reasonable. The patients were categorized more evenly by the UICC stages than by the Chinese 1992 stages. The 5‐year disease specific survival rates for patients in corresponding stages of both systems were almost identical despite differences in the criteria defining T and N classifications. Statistical analysis showed that the agreement rate was 72%. There were some agreement and correlation between the two staging systems.
CONCLUSIONS
Both systems are essentially similar. Each system appears to have some subtleties that could improve the outcome prediction of the other system if the two were somehow combined. However, it appeared to the authors that the UICC system was slightly better. Cancer 2000;89:242–7. © 2000 American Cancer Society.
The 5‐year survival rates for patients in the corresponding stages of the Chinese 1992 and fifth‐edition International Union Against Cancer (UICC) systems are almost identical in spite of differences in criteria defining the T and N classifications. However, the authors of this study believe that the UICC system is slightly better.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>China</subject><subject>comparison</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>nasopharyngeal carcinoma</subject><subject>Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms - classification</subject><subject>Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms - mortality</subject><subject>Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms - pathology</subject><subject>Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms - radiotherapy</subject><subject>Nasopharynx</subject><subject>Neoplasm Staging - methods</subject><subject>Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology</subject><subject>Predictive Value of Tests</subject><subject>Prognosis</subject><subject>Survival Analysis</subject><subject>Tropical medicine</subject><subject>tumor staging</subject><subject>Tumors</subject><subject>Upper respiratory tract, upper alimentary tract, paranasal sinuses, salivary glands: diseases, semeiology</subject><issn>0008-543X</issn><issn>1097-0142</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2000</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqVkc2O0zAUhS0EYjoDr4C8QIhZpPgncZIOQqrCX6URFT8jodlYN47dGiVOsVOh7ngAFjwjT4JDCsOCDd7EOfru9dE5CJWUzCkh7AklZZ4QmrLHjMST0-y8KBfsKUvZYrFcPU-qN9U78YzPybxaX7Dk-haa_Zm5jWZxpkiylH88QachfBpXsIzfRScRogXN6Ax9W2LVdzvwNvQO9wYPW42rrXU6aEzLkmFwDTbWDNsfX7_rxg42cis3aO9gvEOLr9yoLTdgXRhwBU5pj8MAG-s2OBzCoLuATX-jOQj9bgv-4DY6zivwyrq-g3vojoE26PvH7xm6evniQ_U6uVy_WlXLy0TxQohEUJ7XaSkgL4xgdQa8brgWeZqWps5EkWVc0FrlDQNOQOdNSblpcqNBRSkmcIYeTXt3vv-812GQnQ1Kty043e-DzClLBcl4BN9OoPJ9CF4bufO2i8YlJXKsSI5xyzFu-bsiWZQy_kVFxorkr4okl0RW66hfx50Pjo_v6043f22cOonAwyMAQUFrfAzUhhsu5Slno7f3E_bFtvrwX8b-5WsS-E9lM7lG</recordid><startdate>20000715</startdate><enddate>20000715</enddate><creator>Hong, Ming‐Huang</creator><creator>Mai, Hai‐Qiang</creator><creator>Min, Hua‐Qing</creator><creator>Ma, Jun</creator><creator>Zhang, En‐Pi</creator><creator>Cui, Nian‐Ji</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><general>Wiley-Liss</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20000715</creationdate><title>A comparison of the Chinese 1992 and fifth‐edition International Union Against Cancer staging systems for staging nasopharyngeal carcinoma</title><author>Hong, Ming‐Huang ; Mai, Hai‐Qiang ; Min, Hua‐Qing ; Ma, Jun ; Zhang, En‐Pi ; Cui, Nian‐Ji</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3866-6137b496a78f62b5a3bd3e67449fb56855361bc7d2a30ae7d913fd7feacd2a253</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2000</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>China</topic><topic>comparison</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>nasopharyngeal carcinoma</topic><topic>Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms - classification</topic><topic>Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms - mortality</topic><topic>Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms - pathology</topic><topic>Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms - radiotherapy</topic><topic>Nasopharynx</topic><topic>Neoplasm Staging - methods</topic><topic>Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology</topic><topic>Predictive Value of Tests</topic><topic>Prognosis</topic><topic>Survival Analysis</topic><topic>Tropical medicine</topic><topic>tumor staging</topic><topic>Tumors</topic><topic>Upper respiratory tract, upper alimentary tract, paranasal sinuses, salivary glands: diseases, semeiology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hong, Ming‐Huang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mai, Hai‐Qiang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Min, Hua‐Qing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ma, Jun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, En‐Pi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cui, Nian‐Ji</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Cancer</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hong, Ming‐Huang</au><au>Mai, Hai‐Qiang</au><au>Min, Hua‐Qing</au><au>Ma, Jun</au><au>Zhang, En‐Pi</au><au>Cui, Nian‐Ji</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A comparison of the Chinese 1992 and fifth‐edition International Union Against Cancer staging systems for staging nasopharyngeal carcinoma</atitle><jtitle>Cancer</jtitle><addtitle>Cancer</addtitle><date>2000-07-15</date><risdate>2000</risdate><volume>89</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>242</spage><epage>247</epage><pages>242-247</pages><issn>0008-543X</issn><eissn>1097-0142</eissn><coden>CANCAR</coden><abstract>BACKGROUND
The Chinese 1992 staging system for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) has been widely adopted in mainland China since 1992. The fifth edition of the International Union Against Cancer (UICC) TNM classification defines new rules for classifying NPC. The current study compares the two in predicting NPC prognosis.
METHODS
Four hundred eleven NPC patients, most of whom had disease of undifferentiated histologic type and were treated in a constant fashion and with definitive intent with radiation therapy alone, entered this comparative study. The patients were restaged according to the rules of the fifth edition of the UICC staging manual and the Chinese 1992 staging system.
RESULTS
In the opinion of the authors, the predictive power of the Chinese 1992 T classification was superior. Conversely, the authors felt that the UICC N classification was more reasonable. The patients were categorized more evenly by the UICC stages than by the Chinese 1992 stages. The 5‐year disease specific survival rates for patients in corresponding stages of both systems were almost identical despite differences in the criteria defining T and N classifications. Statistical analysis showed that the agreement rate was 72%. There were some agreement and correlation between the two staging systems.
CONCLUSIONS
Both systems are essentially similar. Each system appears to have some subtleties that could improve the outcome prediction of the other system if the two were somehow combined. However, it appeared to the authors that the UICC system was slightly better. Cancer 2000;89:242–7. © 2000 American Cancer Society.
The 5‐year survival rates for patients in the corresponding stages of the Chinese 1992 and fifth‐edition International Union Against Cancer (UICC) systems are almost identical in spite of differences in criteria defining the T and N classifications. However, the authors of this study believe that the UICC system is slightly better.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</pub><pmid>10918151</pmid><doi>10.1002/1097-0142(20000715)89:2<242::AID-CNCR6>3.0.CO;2-Z</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0008-543X |
ispartof | Cancer, 2000-07, Vol.89 (2), p.242-247 |
issn | 0008-543X 1097-0142 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71246053 |
source | Wiley; EZB Electronic Journals Library |
subjects | Biological and medical sciences China comparison Female Humans Male Medical sciences Middle Aged nasopharyngeal carcinoma Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms - classification Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms - mortality Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms - pathology Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms - radiotherapy Nasopharynx Neoplasm Staging - methods Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology Predictive Value of Tests Prognosis Survival Analysis Tropical medicine tumor staging Tumors Upper respiratory tract, upper alimentary tract, paranasal sinuses, salivary glands: diseases, semeiology |
title | A comparison of the Chinese 1992 and fifth‐edition International Union Against Cancer staging systems for staging nasopharyngeal carcinoma |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T15%3A15%3A16IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20comparison%20of%20the%20Chinese%201992%20and%20fifth%E2%80%90edition%20International%20Union%20Against%20Cancer%20staging%20systems%20for%20staging%20nasopharyngeal%20carcinoma&rft.jtitle=Cancer&rft.au=Hong,%20Ming%E2%80%90Huang&rft.date=2000-07-15&rft.volume=89&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=242&rft.epage=247&rft.pages=242-247&rft.issn=0008-543X&rft.eissn=1097-0142&rft.coden=CANCAR&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/1097-0142(20000715)89:2%3C242::AID-CNCR6%3E3.0.CO;2-Z&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E71246053%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3866-6137b496a78f62b5a3bd3e67449fb56855361bc7d2a30ae7d913fd7feacd2a253%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=71246053&rft_id=info:pmid/10918151&rfr_iscdi=true |