Hu, Chung‐Yuan

Abstract Background The tumor, node, metastasis (TNM) classification at pathological evaluation determines prognosis following cancer treatment. For rectal cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy, whether ypTNM likely confers different prognosis than pTNM. We compared survival outcomes of patients classified by ypTNM vs pTNM staging. Methods Patients with resected locoregional rectal cancer from the National Cancer Database who underwent upfront surgery (pTNM) and had ≥5 years follow-up (2010-2017) were compared with those receiving neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery (ypTNM). To address treatment selection bias, analyses were stratified by receipt of guideline-concordant care. Overall survival (OS) was compared using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression analyses. Results Of 50 436 patients (median age = 60; 61.4% male), 11 732 (23.3%) underwent upfront surgery and 38 704 (76.7%) received neoadjuvant therapy; 78.8% of the upfront surgery group received guideline-concordant care. In analyses stratified by guideline-concordant care, overall survival was similar for stage 0-I (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.05; 95% CI = 0.96 to 1.15) but significantly worse for ypTNM vs pTNM in stage II (HR = 1.50; 95% CI = 1.27 to 1.77; 5-year OS = 75.6% vs 83.2%) and stage III (HR = 1.60; 95% CI = 1.46 to 1.75; 5-year OS = 67.0% vs 78.2%). Multivariable analysis confirmed ypTNM was associated with worse survival at each stage (stage 0-I: HR = 1.14, P = .004; stage II: HR = 1.49, P < .001; stage III: HR = 1.60, P < .001). Conclusion Stage for stage, ypTNM classification is associated with worse survival than pTNM classification, with increasing difference at higher stages. Future staging systems and management guidelines should account for these differences to optimize prognostication and stratification for clinical trials and surveillance strategies.

256 Background: Current staging for colon cancer utilizing the American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM framework stratifies disease into groups according to how advanced the disease is and provides important standardized, individual prognostic information. Ideally, staging systems should exhibit hierarchical logic, with increasing stage reflecting worse prognosis. We sought to evaluate hierarchy within the 8th edition AJCC staging system for colon cancer. Methods: All patients with primary colon (including rectosigmoid) cancer diagnosed 2010-2017 were identified from the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Patients were only included if they carried a histologic diagnosis of invasive primary (non-recurrent) cancer, underwent radical surgery, and had complete pathologic staging data (T, N, M category data). Patients with missing follow-up data were excluded. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to assess overall survival by AJCC 8th edition pathologic summary stage group to determine whether staging was hierarchical for colon cancer. Multivariable modeling and log likelihood ratio test was then used to identify relative contributions of T and N variables to overall survival. Results: Among 270,584 colon cancer patients, pathologic staging was noted to be hierarchical by T category alone and by N category alone. However, summary staging was non-hierarchical in both instances. Multivariable modeling confirmed the AJCC non-hierarchy issue (colon HRs: 1, 1.54, 2.62, 2.60, 1.02, 2.15, and 4.38 for stage 1 as reference, 2a, 2b, 2c, 3a, 3b, 3c respectively). Multivariable modeling demonstrated that high T category (T4a, T4b) conferred the greatest risk of mortality based on hazard ratio (T4a HR 2.76, T4b HR 3.04), while high T category as well as high N category (N2a, N2b) contributed substantially to the survival model based on z-score. Further modeling assessing the predictive power of T and N category with respect to overall survival demonstrated that T category more strongly predicted overall survival than N category in colon cancer (likelihood chi-square test statistic pT:7009 vs pN:3586). Conclusions: Hierarchy in survival based on AJCC summary stage was not observed for patients with stage II-III colon cancer resulting in a paradoxical better observed survival with some stage III cancer subgroups compared to stage II cancer subgroups. High T category appears to more significantly impact survival than N category for patients with N0-N1 disease, while high N category appears more important for patients with T1-3 disease. Future revisions of the AJCC staging system should account for the differential impact of T and N category identified herein to more accurately confer prognostic information.