Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30285076›Full record

ArticleJAMA surgery2018

International Validation of the Eighth Edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM Staging System in Patients With Resected Pancreatic Cancer.

Stijn van Roessel, Gyulnara G Kasumova, Joanne Verheij, Robert M Najarian, Laura Maggino, Matteo de Pastena, Giuseppe Malleo, Giovanni Marchegiani, Roberto Salvia, Sing Chau Ng and 12 more

Erratum issued Registry-linked trialAbstract readMulticenter StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT05006131 (Pancreatic Cancer Screening for At-risk Individuals), which is not on this map. Cited by 153 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
153citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT05006131 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Pancreatic Cancer Screening for At-risk Individuals (The Pancreas Scan Study)

TypeobservationalSponsorBeth Israel Deaconess Medical CenterRan2020 to 2032Enrolled1,395ConditionsPancreatic Cancer, AdultArmsScreening for pancreatic cancer
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

153 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Prognostic value of albumin-bilirubin grade in patients with pancreatic cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Diagnostic value of endoscopic ultrasound in staging of pancreatic cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

93 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

22 authors.

Stijn van RoesselDepartment of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Gyulnara G KasumovaSurgical Outcomes Analysis and Research, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Joanne VerheijDepartment of Pathology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Robert M NajarianDepartment of Pathology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Laura MagginoDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy.
Matteo de PastenaDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy.
Giuseppe MalleoDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy.
Giovanni MarchegianiDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy.
Roberto SalviaDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy.
Sing Chau NgDepartment of Surgery, Boston Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Susanna W de GeusDepartment of Surgery, Boston Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Sanne LofDepartment of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital National Health Service Foundation Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Francesco GiovinazzoDepartment of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital National Health Service Foundation Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Jacob L van DamDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Tara S KentSurgical Outcomes Analysis and Research, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Olivier R BuschDepartment of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Casper H van EijckDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Bas Groot KoerkampDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Mohammed Abu HilalDepartment of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital National Health Service Foundation Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Claudio BassiDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy.
Jennifer F TsengSurgical Outcomes Analysis and Research, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Marc G BesselinkDepartment of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Funding

RESEARCH TRAINING IN ALIMENTARY TRACT SURGERYT32DK007754 · NIDDK · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI HODIN, RICHARD A. · 1997 to 2025
$6.5M
NIDDK NIH HHS T32 DK007754
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The recently released eighth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM staging system for pancreatic cancer seeks to improve prognostic accuracy but lacks international validation. Objective: To validate the eighth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM staging system in an international cohort of patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: This international multicenter cohort study took place in 5 tertiary centers in Europe and the United States from 2000 to 2015. Patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for nonmetastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma were eligible. Data analysis took place from December 2017 to April 2018. Exposures: Patients were retrospectively staged according to the seventh and eighth editions of the TNM staging system. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prognostic accuracy on survival rates, assessed by Kaplan-Meier and multivariate Cox proportional hazards analyses and concordance statistics. Results: A total of 1525 consecutive patients were included (median [IQR] age, 66 (58-72) years; 802 (52.6%) male). Distribution among stages via the seventh edition was stage IA in 41 patients (2.7%), stage IB in 42 (2.8%), stage IIA in 200 (13.1%), stage IIB in 1229 (80.6%), and stage III in 12 (0.8%); this changed with use of the eighth edition to stage IA in 118 patients (7.7%), stage IB in 144 (9.4%), stage IIA in 22 (1.4%), stage IIB in 643 (42.2%), and stage III in 598 (39.2%). With the eighth edition, 774 patients (50.8%) migrated to a different stage; 183 (12.0%) were reclassified to a lower stage and 591 (38.8%) to a higher stage. Median overall survival for the entire cohort was 24.4 months (95% CI, 23.4-26.2 months). On Kaplan-Meier analysis, 5-year survival rates changed from 38.2% for patients in stage IA, 34.7% in IB, 35.3% in IIA, 16.5% in IIB, and 0% in stage III (log-rank P < .001) via classification with the seventh edition to 39.2% for patients in stage IA, 33.9% in IB, 27.6% in IIA, 21.0% in IIB, and 10.8% in stage III (log-rank P < .001) with the eighth edition. For patients who were node negative, the T stage was not associated with prognostication of survival in either edition. In the eighth edition, the N stage was associated with 5-year survival rates of 35.6% in N0, 20.8% in N1, and 10.9% in N2 (log-rank P < .001). The C statistic improved from 0.55 (95% CI, 0.53-0.57) for the seventh edition to 0.57 (95% CI, 0.55-0.60) for the eighth edition. Conclusions and Relevance: The eighth edition of the TNM staging system demonstrated a more equal distribution among stages and a modestly increased prognostic accuracy in patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma compared with the seventh edition. The revised T stage remains poorly associated with survival, whereas the revised N stage is highly prognostic.

Indexed as

Advisory CommitteesAgedCarcinoma, Pancreatic DuctalCohort StudiesFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPancreatic NeoplasmsPrognosisUnited States

Identifiers

PMID30285076
PMCPMC6583013

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.