ArticleJournal of breast cancer2020
Assessment of the Prognostic Staging System of American Joint Committee on Cancer 8th Edition for Breast Cancer: Comparisons with the Conventional Anatomic Staging System.
Article in Journal of breast cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- A comparison of tumour characteristics of screen-detected and interval cancers and their relationship with breast density and AJCC prognostic stage in a UK screening cohort.European radiology · 2026Article
- Review
- Validation of the AJCC 8th Edition Breast Cancer Prognostic Staging System in Legacy Alliance Trials (AFT-01).Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- The Predictive Effect of the 8th AJCC Pathological Prognostic Staging on the Benefit of Postmastectomy Radiotherapy in N2/N3 Breast Cancer.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2022Article
- Histopathological analysis of mucinous breast cancer subtypes and comparison with invasive carcinoma of no special type.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- L-Glucose: Another Path to Cancer Cells.Cancers · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging manual introduced a new prognostic staging system for breast cancer. This study aimed to evaluate the changes in staging distribution and predictive power of the new staging system.
methodsOf the 12,275 patients with breast cancer identified from the Severance Breast Cancer Registry who underwent surgery between 1978 and 2016, 12,125 patients met the inclusion criteria.
resultsIn both the 7th and 8th staging systems, stage I patients constituted the largest proportion (38.2% and 48.4%). Migration from the 7th to 8th edition of the AJCC manual resulted in a decrease in stage II population and an increase in stage I and III populations. A total of 1,293 (15.4%) patients were upstaged, and 1,201 (14.3%) were downstaged. Downstaged patients had better recurrence-free and overall survival (
conclusionsStaging migrations are common in early breast cancer under the prognostic staging system. The prognostic staging system of the 8th edition of the AJCC manual discriminates survival outcomes better than the anatomical staging system of the 7th edition of the AJCC manual.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.