RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재 SCOPUS

      Tumor volume/metabolic information can improve the prognostication of anatomy based staging system for nasopharyngeal cancer? Evaluation of the 8th edition of the AJCC/UICC staging system for nasopharyngeal cancer

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A105973096

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      Purpose: We evaluated prognostic value of the 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer/International Union for Cancer Control (AJCC/UICC) staging system for nasopharyngeal cancer and investigated whether tumor volume/metabolic information refined prognostication of anatomy based staging system.
      Materials and Methods: One hundred thirty-three patients with nasopharyngeal cancer who were staged with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) between 2004 and 2013 were reviewed.
      Multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate prognostic value of the 8th edition of the AJCC/UICC staging system and other factors including gross tumor volume and maximum standardized uptake value of primary tumor (GTV-T and SUV-T).
      Results: Median follow-up period was 63 months. In multivariate analysis for overall survival (OS), stage group (stage I-II vs. IIIIVA) was the only significant prognostic factor. However, 5-year OS rates were not significantly different between stage I and II (100% vs. 96.2%), and between stage III and IVA (80.1% vs. 71.7%). Although SUV-T and GTV-T were not significant prognostic factors in multivariate analysis, those improved prognostication of stage group. The 5-year OS rates were significantly different between stage I-II, III-IV (SUV-T ≤ 16), and III-IV (SUV-T > 16) (97.2% vs. 78% vs. 53.8%), and between stage I, II-IV (GTV-T ≤ 33 mL), and II-IV (GTV-T > 33 mL) (100% vs. 87.3% vs. 66.7%).
      Conclusion: Current anatomy based staging system has limitations on prognostication for nasopharyngeal cancer despite the most accurate assessment of tumor extent by MRI. Tumor volume/metabolic information seem to improve prognostication of current anatomy based staging system, and further studies are needed to confirm its clinical significance.
      번역하기

      Purpose: We evaluated prognostic value of the 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer/International Union for Cancer Control (AJCC/UICC) staging system for nasopharyngeal cancer and investigated whether tumor volume/metabolic information...

      Purpose: We evaluated prognostic value of the 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer/International Union for Cancer Control (AJCC/UICC) staging system for nasopharyngeal cancer and investigated whether tumor volume/metabolic information refined prognostication of anatomy based staging system.
      Materials and Methods: One hundred thirty-three patients with nasopharyngeal cancer who were staged with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) between 2004 and 2013 were reviewed.
      Multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate prognostic value of the 8th edition of the AJCC/UICC staging system and other factors including gross tumor volume and maximum standardized uptake value of primary tumor (GTV-T and SUV-T).
      Results: Median follow-up period was 63 months. In multivariate analysis for overall survival (OS), stage group (stage I-II vs. IIIIVA) was the only significant prognostic factor. However, 5-year OS rates were not significantly different between stage I and II (100% vs. 96.2%), and between stage III and IVA (80.1% vs. 71.7%). Although SUV-T and GTV-T were not significant prognostic factors in multivariate analysis, those improved prognostication of stage group. The 5-year OS rates were significantly different between stage I-II, III-IV (SUV-T ≤ 16), and III-IV (SUV-T > 16) (97.2% vs. 78% vs. 53.8%), and between stage I, II-IV (GTV-T ≤ 33 mL), and II-IV (GTV-T > 33 mL) (100% vs. 87.3% vs. 66.7%).
      Conclusion: Current anatomy based staging system has limitations on prognostication for nasopharyngeal cancer despite the most accurate assessment of tumor extent by MRI. Tumor volume/metabolic information seem to improve prognostication of current anatomy based staging system, and further studies are needed to confirm its clinical significance.

      더보기

      참고문헌 (Reference)

      1 Wong FC, "Whole-field simultaneous integrated-boost intensity-modulated radiotherapy for patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma" 76 : 138-145, 2010

      2 Feng M, "Tumor volume is an independent prognostic indicator of local control in nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy" 8 : 208-, 2013

      3 Kam MK, "Treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma with intensity-modulated radiotherapy: the Hong Kong experience" 60 : 1440-1450, 2004

      4 Tham IW, "Treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma using intensity-modulated radiotherapy: the National Cancer Centre Singapore experience" 75 : 1481-1486, 2009

      5 Chen L, "The seventh edition of the UICC/AJCC staging system for nasopharyngeal carcinoma is prognostically useful for patients treated with intensitymodulated radiotherapy from an endemic area in China" 104 : 331-337, 2012

      6 Chen C, "Significance of primary tumor volume and T-stage on prognosis in nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy" 41 : 537-542, 2011

      7 Liang ZG, "Recommendations for updating T and N staging systems for nasopharyngeal carcinoma in the era of intensity-modulated radiotherapy" 11 : e0168470-, 2016

      8 Pan JJ, "Proposal for the 8th edition of the AJCC/UICC staging system for nasopharyngeal cancer in the era of intensity-modulated radiotherapy" 122 : 546-558, 2016

      9 Wu Z, "Prognostic value of tumor volume for patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with concurrent chemotherapy and intensitymodulated radiotherapy" 140 : 69-76, 2014

      10 Lin J, "Prognostic value of 18F-FDG-PET/CT in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis" 8 : 33884-33896, 2017

      1 Wong FC, "Whole-field simultaneous integrated-boost intensity-modulated radiotherapy for patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma" 76 : 138-145, 2010

      2 Feng M, "Tumor volume is an independent prognostic indicator of local control in nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy" 8 : 208-, 2013

      3 Kam MK, "Treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma with intensity-modulated radiotherapy: the Hong Kong experience" 60 : 1440-1450, 2004

      4 Tham IW, "Treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma using intensity-modulated radiotherapy: the National Cancer Centre Singapore experience" 75 : 1481-1486, 2009

      5 Chen L, "The seventh edition of the UICC/AJCC staging system for nasopharyngeal carcinoma is prognostically useful for patients treated with intensitymodulated radiotherapy from an endemic area in China" 104 : 331-337, 2012

      6 Chen C, "Significance of primary tumor volume and T-stage on prognosis in nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy" 41 : 537-542, 2011

      7 Liang ZG, "Recommendations for updating T and N staging systems for nasopharyngeal carcinoma in the era of intensity-modulated radiotherapy" 11 : e0168470-, 2016

      8 Pan JJ, "Proposal for the 8th edition of the AJCC/UICC staging system for nasopharyngeal cancer in the era of intensity-modulated radiotherapy" 122 : 546-558, 2016

      9 Wu Z, "Prognostic value of tumor volume for patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with concurrent chemotherapy and intensitymodulated radiotherapy" 140 : 69-76, 2014

      10 Lin J, "Prognostic value of 18F-FDG-PET/CT in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis" 8 : 33884-33896, 2017

      11 He YX, "Prognostic value and predictive threshold of tumor volume for patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma receiving intensity-modulated radiotherapy" 35 : 96-, 2016

      12 Chen YP, "Prognostic value and grading of MRI-based T category in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma without lymph node metastasis undergoing intensity-modulated radiation therapy" 94 : e1624-, 2015

      13 Pan JJ, "Prognostic nomogram for refining the prognostication of the proposed 8th edition of the AJCC/UICC staging system for nasopharyngeal cancer in the era of intensity-modulated radiotherapy" 122 : 3307-3315, 2016

      14 Shen C, "Prognostic impact of primary tumor volume in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated by definitive radiation therapy" 118 : 1206-1210, 2008

      15 Sze WM, "Primary tumor volume of nasopharyngeal carcinoma: prognostic significance for local control" 59 : 21-27, 2004

      16 Lee CC, "Primary tumor volume calculation as a predictive factor of prognosis in nasopharyngeal carcinoma" 128 : 93-97, 2008

      17 Lee SW, "Prediction of prognosis using standardized uptake value of 2-[(18)F]fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography for nasopharyngeal carcinomas" 87 : 211-216, 2008

      18 Jeong Y, "Lymph node standardized uptake values at pre-treatment (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography as a valuable prognostic factor for distant metastasis in nasopharyngeal carcinoma" 90 : 20160239-, 2017

      19 Guo R, "Is primary tumor volume still a prognostic factor in intensity modulated radiation therapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma?" 104 : 294-299, 2012

      20 Lee N, "Intensity-modulated radiotherapy in the treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma:an update of the UCSF experience" 53 : 12-22, 2002

      21 Wolden SL, "Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for nasopharynx cancer: update of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering experience" 64 : 57-62, 2006

      22 Zong J, "Impact of intensity-modulated radiotherapy on nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Validation of the 7th edition AJCC staging system" 51 : 254-259, 2015

      23 Chen MK, "Better prediction of prognosis for patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma using primary tumor volume" 100 : 2160-2166, 2004

      24 Zhou Q, "A study of 358 cases of locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma receiving intensity-modulated radiation therapy: improving the seventh edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer T-staging system" 2017 : 1419676-, 2017

      25 Kang M, "A new staging system for nasopharyngeal carcinoma based on intensity-modulated radiation therapy: results of a prospective multicentric clinical study" 7 : 15252-15261, 2016

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

      학술지 이력

      학술지 이력
      연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
      2024 평가예정 해외DB학술지평가 신청대상 (해외등재 학술지 평가)
      2021-01-01 평가 등재학술지 선정 (해외등재 학술지 평가) KCI등재
      2020-12-01 평가 등재후보로 하락 (해외등재 학술지 평가) KCI등재후보
      2015-01-01 평가 SCOPUS 등재 (기타) KCI등재
      2013-01-01 평가 등재후보 1차 FAIL (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
      2012-04-01 평가 등재후보로 하락 (기타) KCI등재후보
      2012-01-01 평가 등재후보학술지 유지 (기타) KCI등재후보
      2011-12-30 학회명변경 영문명 : The Korean Society For Therapeutic Radiology And Oncology -> The Korean Society for Radiation Oncology KCI등재
      2011-08-22 학술지명변경 한글명 : 대한방사선종양학회지 -> Radiation oncology journal
      외국어명 : The Journal of the Korean Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology -> Radiation oncology journal
      KCI등재
      2009-01-01 평가 등재 1차 FAIL (등재유지) KCI등재
      2006-01-01 평가 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
      2005-01-01 평가 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
      2004-01-01 평가 등재후보학술지 유지 (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
      2002-01-01 평가 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
      더보기

      학술지 인용정보

      학술지 인용정보
      기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
      2016 0.31 0.31 0.25
      KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
      0.23 0.22 0.864 0.05
      더보기

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼