Verification of the prognostic precision of the new 2023 FIGO staging system in endometrial cancer patients - An international pooled analysis of three ESGO accredited centres

BACKGROUND

Recently, the new 2023 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging system for endometrial cancer (EC) critically integrating new pathological and molecular features was published. The present study evaluated the clinical impact of the new 2023 FIGO staging system by comparing it to the previous 2009 system.

METHODS

This is an international, pooled retrospective study of 519 EC patients who underwent primary treatment (and molecular characterisation) at three European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) accredited centres in Austria/Italy. Patients were categorised according to the 2009 and the 2023 FIGO staging systems. Stage shifts were analysed and (sub)stage specific 5-year progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were calculated and compared. Different statistical tests were applied to evaluate the prognostic precision of the two FIGO staging systems and to compare them to each other.

RESULTS

(Sub)stage shifts occurred in 143/519 (27.6%) patients: 123 upshifts (23.7%) and 20 (3.9%) downshifts. 2023 FIGO staging system identified a stage I cohort with a notably higher 5-year PFS rate compared to 2009 (93.0% versus 87.4%, respectively). For stage II disease, the 5-year PFS rate was similar in the 2023 and the 2009 FIGO staging systems (70.2% versus 71.2%, respectively). The two new molecularly defined 2023 FIGO substages IAmPOLEmut and IICmp53abn displayed distinct, particularly favourable and adverse oncologic outcomes within early stage disease, respectively. A remarkably lower 5-year PFS rate for stage III patients was revealed in the 2023 FIGO staging system compared to 2009 (44.4% versus 54.1%, respectively). All applied statistical tests confirmed a more accurate prediction of PFS and OS by the 2023 FIGO staging system compared to 2009.

CONCLUSION

The new 2023 FIGO stating system led to a substantial stage shift in about one quarter of patients leading to a higher prognostic precision. In early stage disease, the new substages added further prognostic granularity and identified treatment relevant subgroups.

Stage Shift Improves Lung Cancer Survival: Real-World Evidence

INTRODUCTION

Lung cancer is the global leading cause of cancer death. Taiwan initiated several health policies including smoking cessation, precision therapy, and low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening in 1997. We aimed to investigate the effect of public policies on lung cancer survival.

METHODS

We retrieved the nationwide cancer registry from the Ministry of Health and Welfare to evaluate the smoking prevalence and lung cancer incidence and mortality from 1994 to 2020. We also conducted a retrospective analysis of clinical characteristics and survival on 17,298 patients with lung cancer from 2006 to 2019 using the National Taiwan University Hospital database.

RESULTS

Taiwan initiated an anti-smoking campaign in 1997, reimbursed tyrosine kinase inhibitors since 2004, and conducted an LDCT screening trial in 2015. Lung cancer incidence keeps rising but the annual percent change in mortality rate gradually decreased from 0.41% to -2.41%. The National Taiwan University Hospital data revealed that the 5-year survival substantially improved from 22.1% in 2006 to 2011 to 54.9% in 2015 to 2020. Improvement was observed in all stages, especially late stages (stage III: from 17.2% to 35.2%; stage IV: from 7.9% to 16.5%). Furthermore, a remarkable shift in cancer stage was observed (stage 0, I, and IIincreased from 19.3% to 62.8%, and stage III and IV decreased from 70.9% to 33.8%). The prominent improvement in survival was primarily driven by the stage shift from advanced to localized, potentially curable disease.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world evidence suggested an association between improved survival and LDCT screening and the diagnostic shift from late to early-stage of lung cancer, highlighting the importance of early detection for lung cancer control.

Incidental Pulmonary Nodules - What Do We Know in 2022

Lung cancer (LC) is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide, and early LC diagnosis can significantly improve outcomes and survival rates in affected patients. Implementation of LC screening programs using low-dose computed tomography CT in high-risk subjects aims to detect LC as early as possible, but so far, adoption of screening programs into routine clinical care has been very slow. In recent years, the use of CT has significantly increased the rate of incidentally detected pulmonary nodules. Although most of those incidental pulmonary nodules (IPNs) are benign, some of them represent early-stage LC. Given the large number of IPNs detected in the range of several millions each year, this represents an additional, maybe even larger, opportunity to drive stage shift in LC diagnosis, next to LC screening programs. Comprehensive evaluation and targeted work-up of IPNs are mandatory to identify the malignant nodules from the crowd, and several guidelines provide radiologists and physicians' guidance on IPN assessment and management. However, IPNs still seem to be inadequately processed due to various reasons including insufficient reporting in the radiological report, missing communication between stakeholders, absence of patient tracking systems, and uncertainty regarding responsibilities for the IPN management. In recent years, several approaches such as lung nodule programs, patient tracking software, artificial intelligence, and communication software were introduced into clinical practice to address those shortcomings. This review evaluates the current situation of IPN management and highlights recent developments in process improvement to achieve first steps toward stage shift in LC diagnosis.

[Trivialization of prostate cancer? : Stage shift and possible causes]

BACKGROUND

According to the strongly negative grade D recommendation of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force in 2012, the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test was not only not recommended but was also warned against. As a result in the USA there was a stage shift towards more advanced tumor stages under the newly detected prostate cancers; however, in contrast to the highly questionable American PLCO study, the European ERSPC study showed a clear reduction in prostate cancer-related mortality.

OBJECTIVE

In this patient cohort it was investigated whether the tumor stage distribution in curatively treated prostate cancer has significantly changed, whether this has an influence on the perioperative results and complication rates and how these changes could have occurred.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients after radical prostatectomy from 2008 to 2010 were compared to those from 2017. Demographic data, intraoperative courses, perioperative and postoperative complications and histopathological results were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 1276 operations were analyzed. Preoperative PSA levels showed a significant increase in 2017 (10.5 ± 13.4 ng/ml vs. 8.4 ± 9.1 ng/ml, p = 0.032). The pathological staging revealed a 20% increase in T3 tumors (49.4% versus 29.0%, p < 0.001). Correspondingly, moderately and poorly differentiated cancers and therefore those with higher aggressiveness were significantly more frequent with 11.2% (p < 0.001) and 10.4% (p < 0.001), respectively. The number of patients with lymph node metastases at prostatectomy even increased fourfold (4.5% vs. 16.9%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In the radical prostatectomy group, there was a shift to unfavorable and metastatic tumor stages. This negative trend seems largely to be caused by a lower acceptance of early detection by means of PSA determination.

The Will Rogers phenomenon in the staging of breast cancer - does it matter?

INTRODUCTION

Changes in the American Joint Commission on Cancer staging for breast cancer occurred when the 5th Edition was updated to the 6th Edition.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate how these changes affected stage and survival.

METHODS

3127 cases of breast cancer were restaged.

RESULTS

Late stages increased from 27.7% to 38.1%. The five-year survival improved in Stage 2 (82.9-86.1%) and Stage 3 (50.6-59%).

DISCUSSION

Stage shift leads to an erroneous impression that women are presenting with later stages and stage-specific survival is improving.

CONCLUSION

Standardizing cancer staging is important when reporting stage and survival in different time periods.