2017
DOI: 10.1089/thy.2017.0102
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Updated American Joint Committee on Cancer/Tumor-Node-Metastasis Staging System for Differentiated and Anaplastic Thyroid Cancer (Eighth Edition): What Changed and Why?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

6
453
4
14

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 584 publications
(477 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
6
453
4
14
Order By: Relevance
“…This is dramatically lower than the 10‐year DSS of 60%‐70% for stage III and <50% for stage IV DTC patients estimated by Tuttle et al . On the other hand, PDTC patients staged I or II according to the 8th edition did not achieve excellent or good outcomes, as estimated by Tuttle et al . In the present study, the 10‐year DSS was 83% and 55% for patients staged I and II, respectively; this finding was unexpected, as the 10‐year DSS was previously estimated at 98%‐100% for stage I and 85%‐95% for stage II DTC patients regardless of the cut‐off age .…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 76%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This is dramatically lower than the 10‐year DSS of 60%‐70% for stage III and <50% for stage IV DTC patients estimated by Tuttle et al . On the other hand, PDTC patients staged I or II according to the 8th edition did not achieve excellent or good outcomes, as estimated by Tuttle et al . In the present study, the 10‐year DSS was 83% and 55% for patients staged I and II, respectively; this finding was unexpected, as the 10‐year DSS was previously estimated at 98%‐100% for stage I and 85%‐95% for stage II DTC patients regardless of the cut‐off age .…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 76%
“…We predicted worse outcomes for patients staged III or IV according to the 8th edition criteria; however, the 5‐ and 10‐year DSS in these patients was 0%. This is dramatically lower than the 10‐year DSS of 60%‐70% for stage III and <50% for stage IV DTC patients estimated by Tuttle et al . On the other hand, PDTC patients staged I or II according to the 8th edition did not achieve excellent or good outcomes, as estimated by Tuttle et al .…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 55%
“…Factors such as age, gender, histologic category, extrathyroidal extension, vascular invasion, lymph node metastases, AJCC/TNM staging [24], distant metastases, and final status were assessed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression models.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Patients were classified by the AJCC/TNM-8th edition [24] and ATA risk classification [9]. Distant metastases were assessed by cross-sectional images and considered present when there were highly suspicious images on computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and/or XRay.…”
Section: Evaluation Of Outcomesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Patients with persistence/recurrence tended to be younger (p = 0.08) and to present with multifocal tumors (p = 0.07), but only ETE (univariate analysis, p = 0.019) and lymph node involvement (multivariate analysis, p = 0.001) were significantly associated with persistence/recurrence. Comparisons of stratification using the 7 th and 8 th AJCC/ TNM systems (9) indicated that when switching from the former system to the latter system, the percentage of patients classified as stage I increased from 89% to 95.2% and the percentage of patients classified as stage II decreased from 10% to 4.8%. Unfortunately, only 33% of patients with recurrent/persistent disease underwent…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%