期刊文献+

咽后淋巴结转移在鼻咽癌分期中的意义 被引量:28

The Role of Retropharyngeal Lymph Node Metastasis in Staging of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma
下载PDF
导出
摘要 背景与目的:鼻咽癌咽后淋巴结转移的发生率高,X92分期系统未明确其在临床分期中的意义,本研究旨在分析咽后淋巴结转移对鼻咽癌预后的影响及评价它在鼻咽癌分期中的意义。方法:收集1999年1月至1999年12月间中山大学肿瘤防治中心放疗科收治的经病理证实、治疗前进行鼻咽和颈部增强CT扫描的初诊鼻咽癌749例。多因素分析采用Cox风险比例模型,根据临床分期的原则,采用风险一致性、风险差异性、预后预测及分布均衡性等指标进行评价。结果:咽后淋巴结转移的发生率为51.5%。T分期、N分期及临床分期晚的患者咽后淋巴结转移发生率分别为57.8%、60.3%和57.9%,高于早期患者的发生率(45.2%、47.6%和38.9%),其差异均有统计学意义(P值分别为0.001、0.001、<0.001)。咽后淋巴结转移患者和无咽后淋巴结转移患者5年总生存率分别为58.7%和72.2%,5年无远处转移生存率分别为74.5%和84.9%,其差异有统计学意义(P均<0.001);多因素分析,咽后淋巴结转移并不是影响鼻咽癌总生存率的独立预后因素,对无远处转移生存率的影响有临界意义(P=0.053)。N0合并咽后淋巴结转移的死亡及远处转移的风险比分别为0.540及0.411,与N1组(0.601及0.555)相似。将其归为N1或T2比较,前者N分期预后的风险一致性较好,但N分期分布极不均衡,N1患者比例达50.2%。后者N分期及临床分期预后的风险差异性明显,且T、N分期及临床分期分布均衡性较好。结论:咽后淋巴结转移对鼻咽癌无远处转移生存率可能有影响,在目前&92分期系统及现行的鼻咽癌原发灶放射治疗模式的情况下,将咽后淋巴结转移归为T2分期内容更符合分期的原则。 BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE. The prevalence of retropharyngeal lymph node (RLN) metastasis in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is high, but its role in '92 Fuzhou staging system for NPC is uncertain. This study was to identify the prognostic value of RLN metastasis in NPC, and to evaluate its role in the staging system. METHODS: Clinical data of 749 untreated patients with histologically diagnosed NPC, without metastasis, presented between Jan. 1999 and Dec. 1999 at the Department of Radioation Oncology of Cancer Center of Sun Yat-sen University, were reviewed. All patients received enhanced spiral CT scan on the nasopharynx and whole neck before treatment. Cox regression model was used to investigate the prognostic value of RLN metastasis. According to the principle of the staging system, the indices of hazard consistency, hazard discrimination, and distribution were evaluated to identify the role of RLN metastasis in the staging system for NPC. RESULTS: The occurrence rate of RLN metastasis was 51.5%; the occurrence rates were significantly higher in the patients in advanced T stage, N stage, and clinical stage than in the patients in early stages (57.8% vs. 45.2%, P=0.001 ; 60.3% vs. 47.6%, P=0.001; 57.9% vs. 38.9%, P〈0.001). The 5-year overall survival rate and 5-year distant metastasis-freely survival rate were significantly lower in the patients with RLN metastasis than in the patients without RLN metastasis (58.7% vs. 72.2%, P〈 0.001; 74.5% vs. 84.9%, P〈0.001). In multivariate analysis, RLN metastasis was not a prognostic factor for overall survival, but borderline significant difference was observed for distant metastasis-freely survival (P=0.053). The hazard ratios of death and distant metastasis for NO stage with RLN metastasis were 0.540 and 0.411, respectively, which was similar to those for N1 stage (0.601 and 0.555, respectively). Classifying RLN metastasis to N1 stage improved the hazard consistency in the N classification, but the distribution was unsatisfactory, and the proportion of N1 stage patients was 50.2%. Classifying RLN metastasis to T2 stage improved the hazard discrimination, with good balances of distribution found in T classification, N classification, and clinical staging. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the enhanced CT image, RLN metastasis tends to affect distant metastasis-freely survival of NPC patients. According to the principle of '92 Fuzhou staging system and present patterns of radiotherapy for the primary tumor, classifying RLN metastasis to T2 stage is more reasonable.
出处 《癌症》 SCIE CAS CSCD 北大核心 2006年第2期129-135,共7页 Chinese Journal of Cancer
基金 国家自然科学基金(No.30470505) 广东省科技厅项目(No.2004B50301005) 广州市科技局科技攻关引导项目(No.2004Z3-E0451)~~
关键词 鼻咽肿瘤 咽后淋巴结 肿瘤转移 肿瘤分期 Nasopharyngeal neoplasms Retropharyngeal lymph node Metastasis Tumor staging
  • 相关文献

参考文献14

  • 1Lee A W M, Au J S, Teo P M, et al. Staging of nasopharyngeal carcinoma:suggestions for improving the current UICC/AJCC staging system [J]. Clin Oncol, 2004, 16(4) :269-276.
  • 2Som P M. Detection of metastasis in cervical lymph nodes: CT and MR criteria and differential diagnosis [J]. Am J Radiol,1992, 158(5) :961-969.
  • 3Van den Brekel M W, Stel H V, Castelijns J A, et al. Cervical lymph node metastasis: assessment of radiologic criteria [J].Radiology, 1990, 177(2) :379-384.
  • 4Van Hasselt A. Nasopharyngeal carcinoma [M]. 2nd edition.Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press, 1999: 127-160.
  • 5Sham J S, Cheung Y K, Choy D, et al. Nasopharyngeal carcinoma: CT evaluation of pattern of tumor spread [Jl. Am J Neuroradiol, 1991,12(2) : 265-270.
  • 6孙颖,马骏,卢泰祥,王岩,黄莹,唐玲珑.512例鼻咽癌颈淋巴结转移规律的研究[J].癌症,2004,23(z1):1523-1527. 被引量:57
  • 7King A D, Ahuja A T, Leung S F, et al. Neck node metastases from nasopharyngeal carcinoma: MR imaging ofpatterns of disease [J]. Head Neck, 2000,22(3):275-281.
  • 8麦海强,马骏,张锦明,黄腾波,莫运仙.CT扫描对鼻咽癌N分期的作用[J].癌症,2000,19(9):907-910. 被引量:14
  • 9McLaughlin M P, Mendenhall W M, Mancuso A A, et al.Retropharyngeal adenopathy as a predictor of outcome in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck [J]. Head Neck, 1995,17(3) : 190-198.
  • 10Sakata K, Hareyama M, Tamakawa M, et al. Prognostic factors of nasopharynx tumors investigated by MR imaging and the value of MR imaging in the newly published TNM staging [J].Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 1999,43(2):273-278.

二级参考文献36

  • 1刘泰福,徐国镇.全国鼻咽癌会议纪要[J].中华放射肿瘤学杂志,1992,0(4):5-10. 被引量:132
  • 2汪卫东,罗济程,邱蔚六,孙大熙.头颈部恶性肿瘤隐匿性颈淋巴结转移的CT诊断[J].中华放射学杂志,1995,29(8):543-546. 被引量:12
  • 3田野,宋建荣,钱铭辉.鼻咽癌放疗前后转移淋巴结的MRI分析[J].实用放射学杂志,1996,12(9):523-526. 被引量:3
  • 4管迅行,张恩罴,王启华.鼻咽癌淋巴系统扩散的临床探讨[J].实用癌症杂志,1996,11(4):241-243. 被引量:4
  • 5[1]Robbins KT, Medina JE, Wolfe GT, et al. Standardizing neck dissection terminology. Official report of the academy's committee for head and neck surgery and oncology [J]. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 1991, 117 (6): 601 - 605.
  • 6[2]Robbins KT. Integrating radiological criteria into the classification of cervical lymph node disease [J]. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 1999, 125(4): 385 -387.
  • 7[3]Robbins KT, Clayman G, Levine PA, et al. Neck dissection classification update: revisions proposed by the American Head and Neck Society and the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery [J]. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 2002; 128(7): 751 -758.
  • 8[4]Gregoire V, Coche E, Cosnard G, et al. Selection and delineation of lymph node target volumes in head and neck conformal radiotherapy. Proposal for standardizing terminology and procedure based on the surgical experience [J]. Radiother Oncol, 2000, 56(2): 135 - 150.
  • 9[5]Nowak PJ, Wijers OB, Lagerwaard FJ, et al. A three dimensional CT-based target definition for elective irradiation of the neck [J]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 1999, 45(1): 33 -39.
  • 10[6]Gregoire V, Levendag P, Ang KK, et al. CT-based delineation of lymph node levels and related CTVs in the node-negative neck:DAHANCA, EORTC, GORTEC, NCIC, RTOG consensusguidelines [ J]. Radiother Oncol, 2003, 69 (3): 227 - 236.

共引文献114

同被引文献267

引证文献28

二级引证文献138

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部