Preview

Онкоурология

Расширенный поиск

О стадировании онкоурологических заболеваний по обновленной TNM-классификации 8-го издания

https://doi.org/10.17650/1726-9776-2018-14-1-166-172

Полный текст:

Аннотация

С 1 января 2018 г. вступает в силу действие обновленной международной TNM-классификации злокачественных опухолей 8-го издания, созданной 2 ведущими организациями: Американским объединенным комитетом по изучению рака (AJCC) и Международным противораковым союзом (UICC). На основании консенсусных конференций Международного общества уропатологов (ISUP), пересмотревших текущие подходы к патоморфологии и стадированию злокачественных опухолей предстательной железы (2009 г.), почек (2012 г.), яичек и полового члена (2015 г.), Всемирной организацией здравоохранения утверждена современная морфологическая классификация опухолей мочевыделительной и мужской половой систем. Впервые в TNM-классификации указан уровень доказательности.

Об авторах

А. А. Киричек
ФГБУ «Национальный медицинский исследовательский центр онкологии им. Н.Н. Блохина» Минздрава России
Россия

Андрей Андреевич Киричек - аспирант урологического отделения.

115478 Москва, Каширское шоссе, 24



Б. Ш. Камолов
АО Европейский медицинский центр
Россия

129090 Москва, ул. Щепкина, 35



Н. А. Савёлов
ГБУЗ Московская городская онкологическая больница № 62 Департамента здравоохранения г. Москвы
Россия

143423 Московская обл., Красногорский район, пос. Истра, 27



В. Б. Матвеев
ФГБУ «Национальный медицинский исследовательский центр онкологии им. Н.Н. Блохина» Минздрава России
Россия

Всеволод Борисович Матвеев.

115478 Москва, Каширское шоссе, 24



Список литературы

1. Amin M.B., Greene F.L., Edge S.B. et al. The eighth edition AJCC cancer staging manual: continuing to build a bridge from a population-based to a more “personalized” approach to cancer staging. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67(2):93–9. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21388. PMID: 28094848.

2. Kattan M.W., Hess K.R., Amin M.B. et al. American Joint Committee on Cancer acceptance criteria for inclusion of risk models for individualized prognosis in the practice of precision medicine. CA Cancer J Clin 2016;66(5):370–4. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21339. PMID: 26784705.

3. Brierley J.D., Gospodarowicz M.K., Wittekind C. TNM classification of malignant tumours. 8th edn. Oxford, UK: Wiley Blackwell, 2017.

4. Epstein J.I., Egevad L., Amin M.B. et al. The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: definition of grading patterns and proposal for a new grading system. Am J Surg Pathol 2016;40(2):244–52. DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000000530. PMID: 26492179.

5. Epstein J.I., Amin M.B., Reuter V.E., Humphrey P.A. Contemporary Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: an update with discussion on practical issues to implement the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 2017;41(4):e1–7. DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000000820. PMID: 28177964.

6. Epstein J.I., Zelefsky M.J., Sjoberg D.D. et al. A contemporary prostate cancer grading system: a validated alternative to the Gleason score. Eur Urol 2016;69(3):428–35. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.046. PMID: 26166626.

7. Moch H., Humphrey P.A., Ulbright T.M., Reuter V.E. WHO Classification of Tumours of the Urinary System and Male Genital Organs. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO Press, 2016.

8. Sanda M.G., Chen R.C., Crispino T. et al. Clinically localized prostate cancer: AUA/ ASTRO/SUO Guideline, 2017. Available at: http://www.auanet.org/guidelines/clinically-localized-prostate-cancer-new-(aua/astro/suo-guideline-2017).

9. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines). Published February 21, 2017. Available at: https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_guidelines.asp.

10. Kordan Y., Chang S.S., Salem S. et al. Pathological stage T2 subgroups to predict biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy. J Urol 2009;182(5):2291–5. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2009.07.020. PMID: 19758638.

11. Chun F.K., Briganti A., Lebeau T. et al. The 2002 AJCC pT2 substages confer no prognostic information on the rate of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2006;49(2):273–8. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.12.009. PMID: 16413103.

12. Epstein J.I. Prognostic significance of tumor volume in radical prostatectomy and needle biopsy specimens. J Urol 2011;186(3): 790–7. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.02.2695. PMID: 21788055.

13. van der Kwast T.H., Amin M.B., Billis A. et al. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Handling and Staging of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens. Working group 2: T2 substaging and prostate cancer volume. Mod Pathol 2011;24(1):16–25. DOI: 10.1038/modpathol.2010.156. PMID: 20818340.

14. Ettel M., Kong M., Lee P. et al. Modification of the pT2 substage classification in prostate adenocarcinoma. Hum Pathol 2016;56:57–63. DOI: 10.1016/j.humpath.2016.05.016. PMID: 27251951.

15. Buyyounouski M.K., Choyke P.L., McKenney J.K. et al. Prostate cancer – major changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67(3): 245–53. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21391. PMID: 28222223.

16. Bhindi B., Karnes R.J., Rangel L.J. et al. Independent validation of the American Joint Committee on Cancer 8th edition prostate cancer staging classification. J Urol 2017;198(6):1286–94. DOI: 10.1016/j. juro.2017.06.085. PMID: 28669765.

17. Halabi S., Lin C.Y., Kelly W.K. et al. Updated prognostic model for predicting overall survival in first-line chemotherapy for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2014;32(7):671–7. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2013.52.3696. PMID: 24449231.

18. Halabi S., Lin C.Y., Small E.J. et al. Prognostic model predicting metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer survival in men treated with second-line chemotherapy. J Natl Cancer Inst 2013;105(22):1729–37. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djt280. PMID: 24136890.

19. Delahunt B., Cheville J.C., Martignoni G. et al. The International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grading system for renal cell carcinoma and other prognostic parameters. Am J Surg Pathol 2013;37(10):1490–504. DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0b013e318299f0fb. PMID: 24025520.

20. Przybycin C.G., McKenney J.K., Reynolds J.P. et al. Rhabdoid differentiation is associated with aggressive behavior in renal cell carcinoma: a clinicopathologic analysis of 76 cases with clinical follow-up. Am J Surg Pathol 2014;38(9):1260–5. DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000000251. PMID: 25127094.

21. Михайленко Д.С., Телешова М.В., Перепечин Д.В. и др. Герминальные нонсенсмутации в гене SMARCB1 у российских пациентов с рабдоидными опухолями почек. Онкоурология 2017;13(2):14–9. DOI: 10.17650/1726-9776-2017-13-2-14-19.

22. Leivo M.Z., Sahoo D., Hamilton Z. et al. Analysis of T1 bladder cancer on biopsy and transurethral resection specimens: comparison and ranking of T1 quantification approaches to predict progression to muscularis propria invasion. Am J Surg Pathol 2018;42(1):e1–10. DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000000964. PMID: 29076872.

23. Babjuk M., Bohle A., Burger M. et al. EAU Guidelines on non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder: update 2016. Eur Urol 2017;71:447–61. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.05.041.

24. Knoedler J.J., Boorjian S.A., Tollefson M.K. et al. Urothelial carcinoma involving the prostate: the association of revised tumour stage and coexistent bladder cancer with survival after radical cystectomy. BJU Int 2014;114(6):832–6. DOI: 10.1111/bju.12486. PMID: 24119219.

25. Patel A.R., Cohn J.A., Abd El Latif A. et al. Validation of new AJCC exclusion criteria for subepithelial prostatic stromal invasion from pT4a bladder urothelial carcinoma. J Urol 2013;189:53–8. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.09.006. PMID: 23164389.

26. Hu B., Satkunasivam R., Schuckman A. et al. Urothelial carcinoma in bladder diverticula: outcomes after radical cystectomy. World J Urol 2015;33(10):1397–402. DOI: 10.1007/ s00345-014-1472-5. PMID: 25549760.

27. Bella A.J., Stitt L.W., Chin J.L., Izawa J.I. The prognostic significance of metastatic perivesical lymph nodes identified in radical cystectomy specimens for transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. J Urol 2003; 170(6 Pt 1):2253–7. DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000095804.33714.ea. PMID: 14634391.

28. Galsky M.D., Moshier E., Krege S. et al. Nomogram for predicting survival in patients with unresectable and/or metastatic urothelial cancer who are treated with cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Cancer 2013;119(16):3012–9. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.28146. PMID: 23720216.

29. Verrill C., Yilmaz A., Srigley J.R. et al. Reporting and staging of testicular germ cell tumors: the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) testicular cancer consultation conference recommendations. Am J Surg Pathol 2017;41(6):e22–32. DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000000844. PMID: 28368923.

30. Williamson S.R., Delahunt B., Magi-Galluzzi C. et al. The World Health Organization 2016 classification of testicular germ cell tumours: a review and update from the International Society of Urological Pathology Testis Consultation Panel. Histopathology 2017;70(3):335–46. DOI: 10.1111/his.13102. PMID: 27747907.

31. Chung P., Daugaard G., Tyldesley S. et al. Evaluation of a prognostic model for risk of relapse in stage I seminoma surveillance. Cancer Med 2015;4(1):155–60. DOI: 10.1002/cam4.324. PMID: 25236854.

32. Yilmaz A., Cheng T., Zhang J., Trpkov K. Testicular hilum and vascular invasion predict advanced clinical stage in nonseminomatous germ cell tumors. Mod Pathol 2013;26:579–86. DOI: 10.1038/modpathol.2012.189. PMID: 23238629.

33. Aparicio J., Maroto P., Garcia del Muro X. et al. Prognostic factors for relapse in stage I seminoma: a new nomogram derived from three consecutive, risk-adapted studies from the Spanish Germ Cell Cancer Group (SGCCG). Ann Oncol 2014;25:2173–8. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdu437. PMID: 25210015.

34. Kamba T., Kamoto T., Okubo K. et al. Outcome of different post-orchiectomy management for stage I seminoma: Japanese multiinstitutional study including 425 patients. Int J Urol 2010;17(12):980–7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-2042.2010.02645.x. PMID: 20955354.

35. Sun M., Djajadiningrat R.S., Alnajjar H.M. et al. Development and external validation of a prognostic tool for prediction of cancerspecific mortality after complete loco-regional pathological staging for squamous cell carcinoma of the penis. BJU Int 2015;116:734–43. DOI: 10.1111/bju.12677. PMID: 24552303.

36. Velazquez E.F., Ayala G., Liu H. et al. Histologic grade and perineural invasion are more important than tumor thickness as predictor of nodal metastasis in penile squamous cell carcinoma invading 5 to 10 mm. Am J Surg Pathol 2008;32(7):974–9. DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0b013e3181641365. PMID: 18460979.

37. Li Z.S., Yao K., Chen P. et al. Modification of N staging systems for penile cancer: a more precise prediction of prognosis. Br J Cancer 2015;113(12):1746. DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2015.457. PMID: 26695555.

38. Hakenberg O.W., Comperat E.M., Minhas S. et al. EAU guidelines on penile cancer: 2014 update. Eur Urol 2015;67(1):142–50. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.10.017. PMID: 25457021.

39. Li Z., Guo S., Wu Z. et al. Subclassification of pN3 staging systems for penile cancer: proposal for modification of the current TNM classification. Urol Oncol 2017;35(9):543. DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2017.04.009. PMID: 28578871.


Для цитирования:


Киричек А.А., Камолов Б.Ш., Савёлов Н.А., Матвеев В.Б. О стадировании онкоурологических заболеваний по обновленной TNM-классификации 8-го издания. Онкоурология. 2018;14(1):166-172. https://doi.org/10.17650/1726-9776-2018-14-1-166-172

For citation:


Kirichek A.A., Kamolov B.S., Savyolov N.A., Matveev V.B. On staging of urologic cancers in accordance with the updated 8th edition of the TNM Classification. Cancer Urology. 2018;14(1):166-172. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17650/1726-9776-2018-14-1-166-172

Просмотров: 656


Creative Commons License
Контент доступен под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 1726-9776 (Print)
ISSN 1996-1812 (Online)