» Articles » PMID: 24366933

Evaluation of American Joint Committee on Cancer, International Union Against Cancer, and Brigham and Women's Hospital Tumor Staging for Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Overview
Journal J Clin Oncol
Specialty Oncology
Date 2013 Dec 25
PMID 24366933
Citations 96
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: To compare American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC), International Union Against Cancer (UICC), and Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH) tumor (T) staging systems for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma and validate BWH staging against prior data.

Patients And Methods: Primary tumors diagnosed from 2000 to 2009 at BWH (n = 1,818) were analyzed. Poor outcomes (local recurrence [LR], nodal metastasis [NM], and disease-specific death [DSD]) were analyzed by T stage with regard to each staging system's distinctiveness (outcome differences between stages), homogeneity (outcome similarity within stages), and monotonicity (outcome worsening with increasing stage).

Results: AJCC and UICC T3 and T4 were indistinct with overlapping 95% CIs for 10-year cumulative incidences of poor outcomes, but all four BWH stages were distinct. AJCC and UICC high-stage tumors (T3/T4) were rare at 0.3% and 3% of the cohort, respectively. Most poor outcomes occurred in low stages (T1/T2; AJCC: 86% [95% CI, 77% to 91%]; UICC: 70% [61% to 79%]) resulting in heterogeneous outcomes in T1/T2. Conversely, in BWH staging, only 5% of tumors were high stage (T2b/T3), but they accounted for 60% (95% CI, 50% to 69%) of poor outcomes (70% of NMs and 83% of DSDs) indicating superior homogeneity and monotonicity as previously defined. Cumulative incidences of poor outcomes were low for BWH low-stage (T1/T2a) tumors (LR, 1.4% [95% CI, 1% to 2%]; NM, 0.6% [95% CI, 0% to 1%]; DSD, 0.2% [95% CI, 0% to 0.5%]) and higher for high-stage (T2b/T3) tumors (LR, 24% [95% CI, 16% to 34%]; NM, 24% [95% CI, 16% to 34%]; and DSD, 16% [95% CI, 10% to 25%], which validated an earlier study of an alternative staging system.

Conclusion: BWH staging offers improved distinctiveness, homogeneity, and monotonicity over AJCC and UICC staging. Population-based validation is needed. BWH T2b/T3 tumors define a high-risk group requiring further study for optimal management.

Citing Articles

Effectiveness and Toxicity of Cemiplimab Therapy for Advanced Cutaneous Squamous Cell Skin Cancer in a Community Oncology Practice.

Fung T, Samlowski W, Meoz R Cancers (Basel). 2025; 17(5).

PMID: 40075670 PMC: 11899135. DOI: 10.3390/cancers17050823.


Dual-center retrospective cohort analysis of high-risk cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma tumors.

Calley B, Trieglaff K, Boswell N, Vu A, Popatia S, Rivera D Arch Dermatol Res. 2025; 317(1):300.

PMID: 39833534 DOI: 10.1007/s00403-024-03712-8.


Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy: Is There a Role in Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer? A Systematic Review.

Borgognoni L, Susini P, Gerlini G, Brandani P, Giannotti V, Sestini S Cancers (Basel). 2025; 16(24.

PMID: 39766177 PMC: 11674682. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16244279.


Recommendations for the management of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic multidisciplinary Delphi consensus approach.

Munoz Couselo E, Canueto J, Jerviz Guia V, Lopez Lopez A, Bermejo Segu J, Garcia Castano A Clin Transl Oncol. 2024; .

PMID: 39699741 DOI: 10.1007/s12094-024-03826-5.


The Role of Gene Expression Profiling in the Management of Cutaneous Squamous Cell Cancer: A Review.

Durgham R, Badders J, Nguyen S, Olinde L, Pang J, Nathan C Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(23).

PMID: 39682114 PMC: 11640394. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16233925.


References
1.
Rowe D, Carroll R, Day Jr C . Prognostic factors for local recurrence, metastasis, and survival rates in squamous cell carcinoma of the skin, ear, and lip. Implications for treatment modality selection. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1992; 26(6):976-90. DOI: 10.1016/0190-9622(92)70144-5. View

2.
Brantsch K, Meisner C, Schonfisch B, Trilling B, Wehner-Caroli J, Rocken M . Analysis of risk factors determining prognosis of cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma: a prospective study. Lancet Oncol. 2008; 9(8):713-20. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(08)70178-5. View

3.
Jambusaria-Pahlajani A, Kanetsky P, Karia P, Hwang W, Gelfand J, Whalen F . Evaluation of AJCC tumor staging for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma and a proposed alternative tumor staging system. JAMA Dermatol. 2013; 149(4):402-10. DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2013.2456. View

4.
Breuninger H, Brantsch K, Eigentler T, Hafner H . Comparison and evaluation of the current staging of cutaneous carcinomas. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. 2012; 10(8):579-86. DOI: 10.1111/j.1610-0387.2012.07896.x. View

5.
Brougham N, Dennett E, Cameron R, Tan S . The incidence of metastasis from cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma and the impact of its risk factors. J Surg Oncol. 2012; 106(7):811-5. DOI: 10.1002/jso.23155. View