Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 308

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

International Validation of the Eighth Edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM Staging System in Patients With Resected Pancreatic Cancer

Open access
van Roessel, Stijn, Kasumova, Gyulnara G., Verheij, Joanne, Najarian, Robert M., Maggino, Laura, de Pastena, Matteo, Malleo, Giuseppe, Marchegiani, Giovanni, Salvia, Roberto, Ng, Sing Chau, de Geus, Susanna W., Lof, Sanne, Giovinazzo, Francesco, van Dam, Jacob L., Kent, Tara S., Busch, Olivier R., van Eijck, Casper H., Koerkamp, Bas Groot, Abu Hilal, Mohammed, Bassi, Claudio, Tseng, Jennifer F., Besselink, Marc G.·2018·JAMA Surgery

Abstract

Importance: The recently released eighth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM staging system for pancreatic cancer seeks to improve prognostic accuracy but lacks international validation. Objective: To validate the eighth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM staging system in an international cohort of patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: This international multicenter cohort study took place in 5 tertiary centers in Europe and the United States from 2000 to 2015. Patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for nonmetastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma were eligible. Data analysis took place from December 2017 to April 2018. Exposures: Patients were retrospectively staged according to the seventh and eighth editions of the TNM staging system. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prognostic accuracy on survival rates, assessed by Kaplan-Meier and multivariate Cox proportional hazards analyses and concordance statistics. Results: A total of 1525 consecutive patients were included (median [IQR] age, 66 (58-72) years; 802 (52.6%) male). Distribution among stages via the seventh edition was stage IA in 41 patients (2.7%), stage IB in 42 (2.8%), stage IIA in 200 (13.1%), stage IIB in 1229 (80.6%), and stage III in 12 (0.8%); this changed with use of the eighth edition to stage IA in 118 patients (7.7%), stage IB in 144 (9.4%), stage IIA in 22 (1.4%), stage IIB in 643 (42.2%), and stage III in 598 (39.2%). With the eighth edition, 774 patients (50.8%) migrated to a different stage; 183 (12.0%) were reclassified to a lower stage and 591 (38.8%) to a higher stage. Median overall survival for the entire cohort was 24.4 months (95% CI, 23.4-26.2 months). On Kaplan-Meier analysis, 5-year survival rates changed from 38.2% for patients in stage IA, 34.7% in IB, 35.3% in IIA, 16.5% in IIB, and 0% in stage III (log-rank P < .001) via classification with the seventh edition to 39.2% for patients in stage IA, 33.9% in IB, 27.6% in IIA, 21.0% in IIB, and 10.8% in stage III (log-rank P < .001) with the eighth edition. For patients who were node negative, the T stage was not associated with prognostication of survival in either edition. In the eighth edition, the N stage was associated with 5-year survival rates of 35.6% in N0, 20.8% in N1, and 10.9% in N2 (log-rank P < .001). The C statistic improved from 0.55 (95% CI, 0.53-0.57) for the seventh edition to 0.57 (95% CI, 0.55-0.60) for the eighth edition. Conclusions and Relevance: The eighth edition of the TNM staging system demonstrated a more equal distribution among stages and a modestly increased prognostic accuracy in patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma compared with the seventh edition. The revised T stage remains poorly associated with survival, whereas the revised N stage is highly prognostic.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamasurg.2018.3617

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 23 references

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Tol, 2015, Impact of lymph node ratio on survival in patients with pancreatic and periampullary cancer., Br J Surg, 102, 237, 10.1002/bjs.2015.102.issue-3 · doi:10.1002/bjs.2015.102.issue-3
  2. Schlitter, 2017, pT but not pN stage of the 8th TNM classification significantly improves prognostication in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma., Eur J Cancer, 84, 121, 10.1016/j.ejca.2017.06.034 · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2017.06.034
  3. Soer, 2018, Dilemmas for the pathologist in the oncologic assessment of pancreatoduodenectomy specimens: an overview of different grossing approaches and the relevance of the histopathological characteristics in the oncologic assessment of pancreatoduodenectomy specimens., Virchows Arch, 472, 533, 10.1007/s00428-018-2321-5 · doi:10.1007/s00428-018-2321-5
  4. Adsay, 2014, Whipple made simple for surgical pathologists: orientation, dissection, and sampling of pancreaticoduodenectomy specimens for a more practical and accurate evaluation of pancreatic, distal common bile duct, and ampullary tumors., Am J Surg Pathol, 38, 480, 10.1097/PAS.0000000000000165 · doi:10.1097/pas.0000000000000165

Cited by

See all 308

Metadata

Authors
van Roessel, S., Kasumova, G. G., Verheij, J., Najarian, R. M., Maggino, L., de Pastena, M., Malleo, G., Marchegiani, G., Salvia, R., Ng, S. C., de Geus, S. W., Lof, S., Giovinazzo, F., van Dam, J. L., Kent, T. S., Busch, O. R., van Eijck, C. H., Koerkamp, B. G., Abu Hilal, M., Bassi, C., Tseng, J. F., & Besselink, M. G.
Venue
JAMA Surgery
Published
2018-12-19
Volume
153
Issue
12
Pages
e183617
ISSN
2168-6254 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2894694766
Cited by
308
References
23
FWCI
11.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: International Validation of the Eighth Edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM Staging System in Patients With Resected Pancreatic Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jamasurg.2018.3617
The paper
van Roessel, S., Kasumova, G. G., Verheij, J., Najarian, R. M., Maggino, L., de Pastena, M., Malleo, G., Marchegiani, G., Salvia, R., Ng, S. C., de Geus, S. W., Lof, S., Giovinazzo, F., van Dam, J. L., Kent, T. S., Busch, O. R., van Eijck, C. H., Koerkamp, B. G., Abu Hilal, M., . . . Besselink, M. G. (2018). International Validation of the Eighth Edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM Staging System in Patients With Resected Pancreatic Cancer. JAMA Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2018.3617

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.