Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Eighth Edition of the UICC Classification of Malignant Tumours: an overview of the changes in the pathological TNM classification criteria—What has changed and why?

  • Review and Perspectives
  • Published:
Virchows Archiv Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The TNM classification of malignant tumours is a mainstay tool in clinical practice and research for prognostic assessment of patients, treatment allocation and trial enrolment, as well as for epidemiological studies and data collection by cancer registries worldwide. Pathological TNM (pTNM) represents the pathological classification of a tumor, assigned after surgical resection or adequate sampling by biopsy, and periodical updates to the relative classification criteria are necessary to preserve its clinical relevance by integrating newly reported data. A structured approach has been put in place to fulfil this need and, based upon this process, the Eighth Edition of Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours has been published, introducing many significant changes, including novel classification criteria for specific tumour types. In this review, we aim to describe the major changes introduced in the pTNM classification criteria and to summarize the evidence supporting these changes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Webber C, Gospodarowicz M, Sobin LH, Wittekind C, Greene FL, Mason MD, Compton C, Brierley J, Groome PA (2014) Improving the TNM classification: findings from a 10-year continuous literature review. Int J Cancer 135(2):371–378. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.28683

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Amin MB, Edge SB, Greene FL, Byrd DR, Brookland RK, Washington MK, Gershenwald JE, Compton CC, Hess KR, Sullivan DC (2016) AJCC cancer staging manual. Springer International Publishing

  3. Brierley J, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C (2017) TNM classification of malignant tumours. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  4. Sobin LH, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C, International Union against Cancer (2010) TNM classification of malignant tumours. Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  5. International Consortium for Outcome Research in H, Neck C, Ebrahimi A, Gil Z, Amit M, Yen TC, Liao CT, Chaturvedi P, Agarwal JP, Kowalski LP, Kreppel M, Cernea CR, Brandao J, Bachar G, Bolzoni Villaret A, Fliss D, Fridman E, Robbins KT, Shah JP, Patel SG, Clark JR (2014) Primary tumor staging for oral cancer and a proposed modification incorporating depth of invasion: an international multicenter retrospective study. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 140(12):1138–1148. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoto.2014.1548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Matos LL, Dedivitis RA, Kulcsar MAV, de Mello ES, Alves VAF, Cernea CR (2017) External validation of the AJCC cancer staging manual, 8th edition, in an independent cohort of oral cancer patients. Oral Oncol 71:47–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oraloncology.2017.05.020

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Huang SH, Xu W, Waldron J, Siu L, Shen X, Tong L, Ringash J, Bayley A, Kim J, Hope A, Cho J, Giuliani M, Hansen A, Irish J, Gilbert R, Gullane P, Perez-Ordonez B, Weinreb I, Liu FF, O'Sullivan B (2015) Refining American Joint Committee on Cancer/Union for International Cancer Control TNM stage and prognostic groups for human papillomavirus-related oropharyngeal carcinomas. J Clin Oncol 33(8):836–845. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2014.58.6412

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dahlstrom KR, Calzada G, Hanby JD, Garden AS, Glisson BS, Li G, Roberts DB, Weber RS, Sturgis EM (2013) An evolution in demographics, treatment, and outcomes of oropharyngeal cancer at a major cancer center: a staging system in need of repair. Cancer 119(1):81–89. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.27727

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Haughey BH, Sinha P, Kallogjeri D, Goldberg RL, Lewis JS Jr, Piccirillo JF, Jackson RS, Moore EJ, Brandwein-Gensler M, Magnuson SJ, Carroll WR, Jones TM, Wilkie MD, Lau A, Upile NS, Sheard J, Lancaster J, Tandon S, Robinson M, Husband D, Ganly I, Shah JP, Brizel DM, O'Sullivan B, Ridge JA, Lydiatt WM (2016) Pathology-based staging for HPV-positive squamous carcinoma of the oropharynx. Oral Oncol 62:11–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oraloncology.2016.09.004

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Sinha P, Kallogjeri D, Gay H, Thorstad WL, Lewis JS Jr, Chernock R, Nussenbaum B, Haughey BH (2015) High metastatic node number, not extracapsular spread or N-classification is a node-related prognosticator in transorally-resected, neck-dissected p16-positive oropharynx cancer. Oral Oncol 51(5):514–520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oraloncology.2015.02.098

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. El-Naggar AK, Westra WH (2012) p16 expression as a surrogate marker for HPV-related oropharyngeal carcinoma: a guide for interpretative relevance and consistency. Head Neck 34(4):459–461. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.21974

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Pan JJ, Ng WT, Zong JF, Chan LL, O'Sullivan B, Lin SJ, Sze HC, Chen YB, Choi HC, Guo QJ, Kan WK, Xiao YP, Wei X, Le QT, Glastonbury CM, Colevas AD, Weber RS, Shah JP, Lee AW (2016) Proposal for the 8th edition of the AJCC/UICC staging system for nasopharyngeal cancer in the era of intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Cancer 122(4):546–558. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.29795

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Mermod M, Tolstonog G, Simon C, Monnier Y (2016) Extracapsular spread in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Oral Oncol 62:60–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oraloncology.2016.10.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Shin JH, Ha TK, Park HK, Ahn MS, Kim KH, Bae KB, Kim TH, Choi CS, Kim TK, Bae SK, Kim SH (2013) Implication of minimal extrathyroidal extension as a prognostic factor in papillary thyroid carcinoma. Int J Surg 11(9):944–947. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2013.06.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Moon HJ, Kim EK, Chung WY, Yoon JH, Kwak JY (2011) Minimal extrathyroidal extension in patients with papillary thyroid microcarcinoma: is it a real prognostic factor? Ann Surg Oncol 18(7):1916–1923. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-011-1556-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Rice TW, Patil DT, Blackstone EH (2017) 8th edition AJCC/UICC staging of cancers of the esophagus and esophagogastric junction: application to clinical practice. Ann Cardiothorac Surg 6:119–130. 10.21037/acs.2017.03.14

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Hayakawa Y, Sethi N, Sepulveda AR, Bass AJ, Wang TC (2016) Oesophageal adenocarcinoma and gastric cancer: should we mind the gap? Nat Rev Cancer 16(5):305–318. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc.2016.24

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Misdraji J (2015) Mucinous epithelial neoplasms of the appendix and pseudomyxoma peritonei. Mod Pathol 28(Suppl 1):S67–S79. https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.2014.129

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Davison JM, Choudry HA, Pingpank JF, Ahrendt SA, Holtzman MP, Zureikat AH, Zeh HJ, Ramalingam L, Zhu B, Nikiforova M, Bartlett DL, Pai RK (2014) Clinicopathologic and molecular analysis of disseminated appendiceal mucinous neoplasms: identification of factors predicting survival and proposed criteria for a three-tiered assessment of tumor grade. Mod Pathol 27(11):1521–1539. https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.2014.37

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Nagtegaal ID, Knijn N, Hugen N, Marshall HC, Sugihara K, Tot T, Ueno H, Quirke P (2017) Tumor deposits in colorectal cancer: improving the value of modern staging—a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol 35(10):1119–1127. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2016.68.9091

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Franko J, Shi Q, Meyers JP, Maughan TS, Adams RA, Seymour MT, Saltz L, Punt CJ, Koopman M, Tournigand C, Tebbutt NC, Diaz-Rubio E, Souglakos J, Falcone A, Chibaudel B, Heinemann V, Moen J, De Gramont A, Sargent DJ, Grothey A, Analysis, Research in Cancers of the Digestive System G (2016) Prognosis of patients with peritoneal metastatic colorectal cancer given systemic therapy: an analysis of individual patient data from prospective randomised trials from the analysis and research in cancers of the digestive system (ARCAD) database. Lancet Oncol. 17(12):1709–1719. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30500-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Franko J, Shi Q, Goldman CD, Pockaj BA, Nelson GD, Goldberg RM, Pitot HC, Grothey A, Alberts SR, Sargent DJ (2012) Treatment of colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis with systemic chemotherapy: a pooled analysis of north central cancer treatment group phase III trials N9741 and N9841. J Clin Oncol 30(3):263–267. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2011.37.1039

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kinoshita A, Onoda H, Fushiya N, Koike K, Nishino H, Tajiri H (2015) Staging systems for hepatocellular carcinoma: current status and future perspectives. World J Hepatol 7(3):406–424. https://doi.org/10.4254/wjh.v7.i3.406

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Goh BK, Teo JY, Chan CY, Lee SY, Jeyaraj P, Cheow PC, Chow PK, Ooi LL, Chung AY (2016) Importance of tumor size as a prognostic factor after partial liver resection for solitary hepatocellular carcinoma: implications on the current AJCC staging system. J Surg Oncol 113(1):89–93. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.24099

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Shindoh J, Andreou A, Aloia TA, Zimmitti G, Lauwers GY, Laurent A, Nagorney DM, Belghiti J, Cherqui D, Poon RT, Kokudo N, Vauthey JN (2013) Microvascular invasion does not predict long-term survival in hepatocellular carcinoma up to 2 cm: reappraisal of the staging system for solitary tumors. Ann Surg Oncol 20(4):1223–1229. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2739-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Arii S, Yamaoka Y, Futagawa S, Inoue K, Kobayashi K, Kojiro M, Makuuchi M, Nakamura Y, Okita K, Yamada R (2000) Results of surgical and nonsurgical treatment for small-sized hepatocellular carcinomas: a retrospective and nationwide survey in Japan. The Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan Hepatology 32(6):1224–1229. https://doi.org/10.1053/jhep.2000.20456

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Yamashita Y, Tsuijita E, Takeishi K, Fujiwara M, Kira S, Mori M, Aishima S, Taketomi A, Shirabe K, Ishida T, Maehara Y (2012) Predictors for microinvasion of small hepatocellular carcinoma </= 2 cm. Ann Surg Oncol 19(6):2027–2034. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-011-2195-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Shindoh J, Vauthey JN (2014) Staging of biliary tract and primary liver tumors. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 23(2):313–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soc.2013.11.003

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Igami T, Ebata T, Yokoyama Y, Sugawara G, Takahashi Y, Nagino M (2011) Staging of peripheral-type intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: appraisal of the new TNM classification and its modifications. World J Surg 35(11):2501–2509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-011-1242-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Mavros MN, Economopoulos KP, Alexiou VG, Pawlik TM (2014) Treatment and prognosis for patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Surg 149(6):565–574. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2013.5137

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Ali SM, Clark CJ, Mounajjed T, Wu TT, Harmsen WS, Reid-Lombardo KM, Truty MJ, Kendrick ML, Farnell MB, Nagorney DM, Que FG (2015) Model to predict survival after surgical resection of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: the Mayo Clinic experience. HPB (Oxford) 17(3):244–250. https://doi.org/10.1111/hpb.12333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Kim Y, Moris DP, Zhang XF, Bagante F, Spolverato G, Schmidt C, Dilhoff M, Pawlik TM (2017) Evaluation of the 8th edition American joint commission on cancer (AJCC) staging system for patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) analysis. J Surg Oncol 116(6):643–650. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.24720

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Shindoh J, de Aretxabala X, Aloia TA, Roa JC, Roa I, Zimmitti G, Javle M, Conrad C, Maru DM, Aoki T, Vigano L, Ribero D, Kokudo N, Capussotti L, Vauthey JN (2015) Tumor location is a strong predictor of tumor progression and survival in T2 gallbladder cancer: an international multicenter study. Ann Surg 261(4):733–739. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000000728

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Moon A, Choi DW, Choi SH, Heo JS, Jang KT (2015) Validation of T stage according to depth of invasion and N stage subclassification based on number of metastatic lymph nodes for distal extrahepatic bile duct (EBD) carcinoma. Medicine (Baltimore) 94(50):e2064. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000002064

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. You D, Heo J, Choi S, Choi D, Jang KT (2014) Pathologic T1 subclassification of ampullary carcinoma with perisphincteric or duodenal submucosal invasion: is it T1b? Arch Pathol Lab Med 138(8):1072–1076. https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2013-0324-OA

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Adsay NV, Bagci P, Tajiri T, Oliva I, Ohike N, Balci S, Gonzalez RS, Basturk O, Jang KT, Roa JC (2012) Pathologic staging of pancreatic, ampullary, biliary, and gallbladder cancers: pitfalls and practical limitations of the current AJCC/UICC TNM staging system and opportunities for improvement. Semin Diagn Pathol 29(3):127–141. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semdp.2012.08.010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Balci S, Basturk O, Saka B, Bagci P, Postlewait LM, Tajiri T, Jang KT, Ohike N, Kim GE, Krasinskas A, Choi H, Sarmiento JM, Kooby DA, El-Rayes BF, Knight JH, Goodman M, Akkas G, Reid MD, Maithel SK, Adsay V (2015) Substaging nodal status in ampullary carcinomas has significant prognostic value: proposed revised staging based on an analysis of 313 well-characterized cases. Ann Surg Oncol 22(13):4392–4401. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4499-y

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Kang HJ, Eo SH, Kim SC, Park KM, Lee YJ, Lee SK, Yu E, Cho H, Hong SM (2014) Increased number of metastatic lymph nodes in adenocarcinoma of the ampulla of Vater as a prognostic factor: a proposal of new nodal classification. Surgery 155(1):74–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2013.08.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Saka B, Balci S, Basturk O, Bagci P, Postlewait LM, Maithel S, Knight J, El-Rayes B, Kooby D, Sarmiento J, Muraki T, Oliva I, Bandyopadhyay S, Akkas G, Goodman M, Reid MD, Krasinskas A, Everett R, Adsay V (2016) Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is spread to the peripancreatic soft tissue in the majority of resected cases, rendering the AJCC T-stage protocol (7th edition) inapplicable and insignificant: a size-based staging system (pT1: </=2, pT2: >2-</=4, pT3: >4 cm) is more valid and clinically relevant. Ann Surg Oncol 23(6):2010–2018. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5093-7

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Strobel O, Hinz U, Gluth A, Hank T, Hackert T, Bergmann F, Werner J, Buchler MW (2015) Pancreatic adenocarcinoma: number of positive nodes allows to distinguish several N categories. Ann Surg 261(5):961–969. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000000814

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Murakami Y, Uemura K, Sudo T, Hayashidani Y, Hashimoto Y, Nakashima A, Yuasa Y, Kondo N, Ohge H, Sueda T (2010) Number of metastatic lymph nodes, but not lymph node ratio, is an independent prognostic factor after resection of pancreatic carcinoma. J Am Coll Surg 211(2):196–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.03.037

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Allen PJ, Kuk D, Castillo CF, Basturk O, Wolfgang CL, Cameron JL, Lillemoe KD, Ferrone CR, Morales-Oyarvide V, He J, Weiss MJ, Hruban RH, Gonen M, Klimstra DS, Mino-Kenudson M (2017) Multi-institutional validation study of the American joint commission on cancer (8th edition) changes for T and N staging in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg 265(1):185–191. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001763

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Kamarajah SK, Burns WR, Frankel TL, Cho CS, Nathan H (2017) Validation of the American joint commission on cancer (AJCC) 8th edition staging system for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a surveillance, epidemiology and end results (SEER) analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 24(7):2023–2030. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-5810-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Rindi G, Kloppel G, Alhman H, Caplin M, Couvelard A, de Herder WW, Erikssson B, Falchetti A, Falconi M, Komminoth P, Korner M, Lopes JM, McNicol AM, Nilsson O, Perren A, Scarpa A, Scoazec JY, Wiedenmann B, all other Frascati Consensus Conference p, European Neuroendocrine Tumor S (2006) TNM staging of foregut (neuro)endocrine tumors: a consensus proposal including a grading system. Virchows Arch 449(4):395–401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-006-0250-1

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Rindi G, Falconi M, Klersy C, Albarello L, Boninsegna L, Buchler MW, Capella C, Caplin M, Couvelard A, Doglioni C, Delle Fave G, Fischer L, Fusai G, de Herder WW, Jann H, Komminoth P, de Krijger RR, La Rosa S, Luong TV, Pape U, Perren A, Ruszniewski P, Scarpa A, Schmitt A, Solcia E, Wiedenmann B (2012) TNM staging of neoplasms of the endocrine pancreas: results from a large international cohort study. J Natl Cancer Inst 104(10):764–777. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djs208

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Rami-Porta R, Bolejack V, Crowley J, Ball D, Kim J, Lyons G, Rice T, Suzuki K, Thomas CF Jr, Travis WD, Wu YL, Staging I, Prognostic Factors Committee AB, Participating I (2015) The IASLC lung cancer staging project: proposals for the revisions of the T descriptors in the forthcoming eighth edition of the TNM classification for lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 10(7):990–1003. https://doi.org/10.1097/JTO.0000000000000559

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Eberhardt WE, Mitchell A, Crowley J, Kondo H, Kim YT, Turrisi A 3rd, Goldstraw P, Rami-Porta R, International Association for Study of Lung Cancer S, Prognostic Factors Committee ABM, Participating I (2015) The IASLC lung cancer staging project: proposals for the revision of the M descriptors in the forthcoming eighth edition of the TNM classification of lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 10(11):1515–1522. https://doi.org/10.1097/JTO.0000000000000673

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Nowak AK, Chansky K, Rice DC, Pass HI, Kindler HL, Shemanski L, Bille A, Rintoul RC, Batirel HF, Thomas CF, Friedberg J, Cedres S, de Perrot M, Rusch VW, Staging, Prognostic Factors Committee AB, Participating I (2016) The IASLC mesothelioma staging project: proposals for revisions of the T descriptors in the forthcoming eighth edition of the TNM classification for pleural mesothelioma. J Thorac Oncol 11(12):2089–2099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2016.08.147

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Rice D, Chansky K, Nowak A, Pass H, Kindler H, Shemanski L, Opitz I, Call S, Hasegawa S, Kernstine K, Atinkaya C, Rea F, Nafteux P, Rusch VW, Mesothelioma Domain of the IS, Prognostic Factors Committee ab, participating i (2016) The IASLC mesothelioma staging project: proposals for revisions of the N descriptors in the forthcoming eighth edition of the TNM classification for pleural mesothelioma. J Thorac Oncol 11(12):2100–2111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2016.09.121

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Yang L, Wang S, Zhou Y, Lai S, Xiao G, Gazdar A, Xie Y (2017) Evaluation of the 7th and 8th editions of the AJCC/UICC TNM staging systems for lung cancer in a large North American cohort. Oncotarget. 10.18632/oncotarget.18158

  51. Chansky K, Detterbeck FC, Nicholson AG, Rusch VW, Vallieres E, Groome P, Kennedy C, Krasnik M, Peake M, Shemanski L, Bolejack V, Crowley JJ, Asamura H, Rami-Porta R, Staging I, Prognostic Factors Committee AB, Participating I (2017) The IASLC lung cancer staging project: external validation of the revision of the TNM stage groupings in the eighth edition of the TNM classification of lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 12(7):1109–1121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2017.04.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Kondo K, Van Schil P, Detterbeck FC, Okumura M, Stratton K, Giroux D, Asamura H, Crowley J, Falkson C, Filosso PL, Giaccone G, Huang J, Kim J, Lucchi M, Marino M, Marom EM, Nicholson AG, Ruffini E, Staging, Prognostic Factors C, Members of the Advisory B, Participating Institutions of the Thymic D (2014) The IASLC/ITMIG Thymic epithelial tumors staging project: proposals for the N and M components for the forthcoming (8th) edition of the TNM classification of malignant tumors. J Thorac Oncol 9(9):S81–S87. https://doi.org/10.1097/JTO.0000000000000291

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Nicholson AG, Detterbeck FC, Marino M, Kim J, Stratton K, Giroux D, Asamura H, Crowley J, Falkson C, Filosso PL, Giaccone G, Huang J, Kondo K, Lucchi M, Marom EM, Okumura M, Ruffini E, Van Schil P, Staging, Prognostic Factors C, Members of the Advisory B, Participating Institutions of the Thymic D (2014) The IASLC/ITMIG Thymic epithelial tumors staging project: proposals for the T component for the forthcoming (8th) edition of the TNM classification of malignant tumors. J Thorac Oncol 9(9):S73–S80. https://doi.org/10.1097/JTO.0000000000000303

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Park JT, Roh JL, Kim SO, Cho KJ, Choi SH, Nam SY, Kim SY (2015) Prognostic factors and oncological outcomes of 122 head and neck soft tissue sarcoma patients treated at a single institution. Ann Surg Oncol 22(1):248–255. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-3870-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Jambusaria-Pahlajani A, Kanetsky PA, Karia PS, Hwang WT, Gelfand JM, Whalen FM, Elenitsas R, Xu X, Schmults CD (2013) Evaluation of AJCC tumor staging for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma and a proposed alternative tumor staging system. JAMA Dermatol 149(4):402–410. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamadermatol.2013.2456

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Clayman GL, Lee JJ, Holsinger FC, Zhou X, Duvic M, El-Naggar AK, Prieto VG, Altamirano E, Tucker SL, Strom SS, Kripke ML, Lippman SM (2005) Mortality risk from squamous cell skin cancer. J Clin Oncol 23(4):759–765. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2005.02.155

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Schmults CD, Karia PS, Carter JB, Han J, Qureshi AA (2013) Factors predictive of recurrence and death from cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma: a 10-year, single-institution cohort study. JAMA Dermatol 149(5):541–547. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamadermatol.2013.2139

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Brantsch KD, Meisner C, Schonfisch B, Trilling B, Wehner-Caroli J, Rocken M, Breuninger H (2008) Analysis of risk factors determining prognosis of cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma: a prospective study. Lancet Oncol 9(8):713–720. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(08)70178-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Pecorelli S (2009) Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 105(2):103–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2009.02.012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Oncology FCoG (2009) Current FIGO staging for cancer of the vagina, fallopian tube, ovary, and gestational trophoblastic neoplasia. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 105(1):3–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2008.12.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Prat J (2009) FIGO staging for uterine sarcomas. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 104(3):177–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2008.12.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Committee FO (2002) FIGO staging for gestational trophoblastic neoplasia 2000. FIGO Oncology Committee Int J Gynaecol Obstet 77(3):285–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7292(02)00063-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Prat J, Oncology FCoG (2014) Staging classification for cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, and peritoneum. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 124(1):1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2013.10.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Onda T, Yoshikawa H, Yasugi T, Mishima M, Nakagawa S, Yamada M, Matsumoto K, Taketani Y (1998) Patients with ovarian carcinoma upstaged to stage III after systematic lymphadenctomy have similar survival to stage I/II patients and superior survival to other stage III patients. Cancer 83(8):1555–1560. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19981015)83:8<1555::AID-CNCR10>3.0.CO;2-R

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Kanazawa K, Suzuki T, Tokashiki M (1999) The validity and significance of substage IIIC by node involvement in epithelial ovarian cancer: impact of nodal metastasis on patient survival. Gynecol Oncol 73(2):237–241. https://doi.org/10.1006/gyno.1999.5349

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Cliby WA, Aletti GD, Wilson TO, Podratz KC (2006) Is it justified to classify patients to stage IIIC epithelial ovarian cancer based on nodal involvement only? Gynecol Oncol 103(3):797–801. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2006.08.047

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Ferrandina G, Scambia G, Legge F, Petrillo M, Salutari V (2007) Ovarian cancer patients with “node-positive-only” stage IIIC disease have a more favorable outcome than stage IIIA/B. Gynecol Oncol 107(1):154–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2007.05.016

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Baek SJ, Park JY, Kim DY, Kim JH, Kim YM, Kim YT, Nam JH (2008) Stage IIIC epithelial ovarian cancer classified solely by lymph node metastasis has a more favorable prognosis than other types of stage IIIC epithelial ovarian cancer. J Gynecol Oncol 19(4):223–228. https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2008.19.4.223

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Velazquez EF, Chaux A, Cubilla AL (2012) Histologic classification of penile intraepithelial neoplasia. Semin Diagn Pathol 29(2):96–102. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semdp.2011.08.009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. van der Kwast TH, Amin MB, Billis A, Epstein JI, Griffiths D, Humphrey PA, Montironi R, Wheeler TM, Srigley JR, Egevad L, Delahunt B, Group IPC (2011) 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 24(1):16–25. https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.2010.156

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Kordan Y, Chang SS, Salem S, Cookson MS, Clark PE, Davis R, Herrell SD, Baumgartner R, Phillips S, Smith JA Jr, Barocas DA (2009) Pathological stage T2 subgroups to predict biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy. J Urol 182(5):2291–2295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.07.020

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Moch H, Humphrey P, Ulbright T, Reuter V (2016) WHO classification of tumours of the urinary system and male genital organs, 4th edn. International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon

    Google Scholar 

  73. Delahunt B, Egevad L, Samaratunga H, Varma M, Verrill C, Cheville J, Kristiansen G, Corbishley C, Berney DM (2017) UICC drops the ball in the 8th edition TNM staging of urological cancers. Histopathology 71(1):5–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/his.13200

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Trpkov K, Grignon DJ, Bonsib SM, Amin MB, Billis A, Lopez-Beltran A, Samaratunga H, Tamboli P, Delahunt B, Egevad L, Montironi R, Srigley JR, members of the IRTP (2013) Handling and staging of renal cell carcinoma: the International Society of Urological Pathology Consensus (ISUP) conference recommendations. Am J Surg Pathol 37(10):1505–1517. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0b013e31829a85d0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Delahunt B, Egevad L, Samaratunga H, Martignoni G, Nacey JN, Srigley JR (2016) Gleason and Fuhrman no longer make the grade. Histopathology 68(4):475–481. https://doi.org/10.1111/his.12803

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the Rete Oncologica Piemonte e Valle d’Aosta (to P.C.).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pathology Unit, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin and Città della Salute e della Scienza Hospital, Via Santena 7, 10126, Turin, Italy

    Luca Bertero, Isabella Castellano & Paola Cassoni

  2. Pathology Unit, Department of Oncology, University of Turin and Città della Salute e della Scienza Hospital, Via Santena 7, 10126, Turin, Italy

    Federica Massa, Jasna Metovic & Mauro Papotti

  3. Piedmont Cancer Registry, CPO - Centre for Cancer Prevention, Via San Massimo 24, 10123, Turin, Italy

    Roberto Zanetti

  4. Radiation Oncology Unit, Department of Oncology, University of Turin and Città della Salute e della Scienza Hospital, Via Genova 3, 10126, Turin, Italy

    Umberto Ricardi

  5. Italian National Committee, Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) – TNM, Turin, Italy

    Umberto Ricardi & Paola Cassoni

Authors
  1. Luca Bertero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Federica Massa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jasna Metovic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Roberto Zanetti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Isabella Castellano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Umberto Ricardi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Mauro Papotti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Paola Cassoni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luca Bertero.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bertero, L., Massa, F., Metovic, J. et al. Eighth Edition of the UICC Classification of Malignant Tumours: an overview of the changes in the pathological TNM classification criteria—What has changed and why?. Virchows Arch 472, 519–531 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-017-2276-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-017-2276-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation