通过临床分期和分子预测的综合评分提高葡萄膜黑色素瘤的预测精度。

Pub Date : 2022-02-01 DOI:10.1159/000520218
Andrew W Stacey, Vaidehi S Dedania, Miguel Materin, Hakan Demirci
{"title":"通过临床分期和分子预测的综合评分提高葡萄膜黑色素瘤的预测精度。","authors":"Andrew W Stacey,&nbsp;Vaidehi S Dedania,&nbsp;Miguel Materin,&nbsp;Hakan Demirci","doi":"10.1159/000520218","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Prognosis of uveal melanoma (UM) is assessed using clinical staging or molecular testing. Two modalities often used for prognostication are the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging and a tumor gene expression profile (GEP), the outcomes of which are often discordant. This article discusses a total risk score created to combine the discordant information from both sources.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective case series was conducted of all patients presenting with UM over 6 years to 2 referral centers. Each tumor was classified using the AJCC and the GEP. A total risk score was calculated for each patient using results from both AJCC and GEP. Kaplan-Meier analysis of metastasis-free survival was used to compare groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 294 patients were included in the study. Kaplan-Meier estimates showed significant curve separation between individual AJCC and GEP risk groups. The combined total risk score provided an accurate estimate of prognosis that incorporated results from both AJCC and GEP.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Clinical staging and molecular prognostication of UM can be discordant. There is important information provided by each system that is not provided by the other. The total risk score provides a simple method to combine information from both AJCC stage and the GEP class in order to provide patients and care teams with a more complete understanding of metastatic risk.</p>","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8914271/pdf/oop-0008-0035.pdf","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Improved Prognostic Precision in Uveal Melanoma through a Combined Score of Clinical Stage and Molecular Prognostication.\",\"authors\":\"Andrew W Stacey,&nbsp;Vaidehi S Dedania,&nbsp;Miguel Materin,&nbsp;Hakan Demirci\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000520218\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Prognosis of uveal melanoma (UM) is assessed using clinical staging or molecular testing. Two modalities often used for prognostication are the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging and a tumor gene expression profile (GEP), the outcomes of which are often discordant. This article discusses a total risk score created to combine the discordant information from both sources.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective case series was conducted of all patients presenting with UM over 6 years to 2 referral centers. Each tumor was classified using the AJCC and the GEP. A total risk score was calculated for each patient using results from both AJCC and GEP. Kaplan-Meier analysis of metastasis-free survival was used to compare groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 294 patients were included in the study. Kaplan-Meier estimates showed significant curve separation between individual AJCC and GEP risk groups. The combined total risk score provided an accurate estimate of prognosis that incorporated results from both AJCC and GEP.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Clinical staging and molecular prognostication of UM can be discordant. There is important information provided by each system that is not provided by the other. The total risk score provides a simple method to combine information from both AJCC stage and the GEP class in order to provide patients and care teams with a more complete understanding of metastatic risk.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8914271/pdf/oop-0008-0035.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000520218\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000520218","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

简介:葡萄膜黑色素瘤(UM)的预后是通过临床分期或分子检测来评估的。两种常用的预测方法是美国癌症联合委员会(AJCC)分期和肿瘤基因表达谱(GEP),两者的结果往往不一致。本文讨论了创建一个总风险评分,以组合来自两个来源的不一致信息。方法:对所有6年以上的UM患者进行回顾性病例系列研究。每个肿瘤采用AJCC和GEP进行分类。使用AJCC和GEP的结果计算每个患者的总风险评分。采用Kaplan-Meier无转移生存分析进行组间比较。结果:共纳入294例患者。Kaplan-Meier估计显示AJCC个体和GEP风险组之间存在显著的曲线分离。综合总风险评分提供了AJCC和GEP结果的准确预后估计。结论:UM的临床分期与分子预后可能不一致。每个系统提供的重要信息都是其他系统所不提供的。总风险评分提供了一种简单的方法来结合AJCC分期和GEP分类的信息,以便为患者和护理团队提供更完整的转移风险理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
Improved Prognostic Precision in Uveal Melanoma through a Combined Score of Clinical Stage and Molecular Prognostication.

Introduction: Prognosis of uveal melanoma (UM) is assessed using clinical staging or molecular testing. Two modalities often used for prognostication are the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging and a tumor gene expression profile (GEP), the outcomes of which are often discordant. This article discusses a total risk score created to combine the discordant information from both sources.

Methods: A retrospective case series was conducted of all patients presenting with UM over 6 years to 2 referral centers. Each tumor was classified using the AJCC and the GEP. A total risk score was calculated for each patient using results from both AJCC and GEP. Kaplan-Meier analysis of metastasis-free survival was used to compare groups.

Results: A total of 294 patients were included in the study. Kaplan-Meier estimates showed significant curve separation between individual AJCC and GEP risk groups. The combined total risk score provided an accurate estimate of prognosis that incorporated results from both AJCC and GEP.

Conclusions: Clinical staging and molecular prognostication of UM can be discordant. There is important information provided by each system that is not provided by the other. The total risk score provides a simple method to combine information from both AJCC stage and the GEP class in order to provide patients and care teams with a more complete understanding of metastatic risk.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1