INITIAL RESULTS OF APPLYING THE 9th EDITION AJCC STAGING CLASSIFICATION FOR NASOPHARYNGEAL CANCER
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate stage changes when using the 9th edition of the TNM classification compared to the 8th Edition. Methods: A retrospective, descriptive study was conducted on 141 newly diagnosed patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma and treated at the Head and Neck Radiotherapy Department, Vietnam National Cancer Hospital - Tan Trieu Facility from July 2025 to September 2025. Results: The mean patient age was 40.7 ± 12.6 years with a male-to-female ratio of 2.36/1. Regarding histopathology, non-keratinizing squamous cell carcinoma, undifferentiated subtype, accounted for the vast majority (97.9%). According to the 8th edition of the TNM classification, the rates of T1, T2, T3, and T4 were 33.3%, 27.0%, 19.1%, and 20.6%, respectively; the rates of N0, N1, N2, and N3 were 10.6%, 38.3%, 34.8%, and 16.3%, respectively; and stage III - IV accounted for the vast majority (74.5%). When reassessed using the 9th edition, no changes were observed in the T stage; 6 patients (4.3%) experienced changes in N stage, and there were changes in the clinical overall stage in 92.9% of patients. Conclusion: The 9th edition of the TNM classification has been published with various modifications compared to the 8th edition in terms of prognostic value and patient stratification.
Keywords
Nasopharyngeal carcinoma, TNM staging, 8th edition, 9th edition
Article Details
References
2. Amin MB, Greene FL, Edge SB, et al. The Eighth Edition AJCC Cancer Staging Manual: Continuing to build a bridge from a population-based to a more "personalized" approach to cancer staging. CA Cancer J Clin. Mar 2017; 67(2):93-99.
3. Du XJ, Wang GY, Zhu XD, et al. Refining the 8th edition TNM classification for EBV related nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Cancer Cell. Mar 11 2024; 42(3):464-473 e3.
4. Pan JJ, Mai HQ, Ng WT, et al. Ninth Version of the AJCC and UICC Nasopharyngeal Cancer TNM Staging Classification. JAMA Oncol. Oct 10 2024; 10(12):1627-1635.
5. Chen Y, Chang ET, Liu Z, et al. Residence characteristics and risk of nasopharyngeal carcinoma in southern China: A population-based case-control study. Environment International. 2021; 151:106455.
6. Stelow EB, Wenig BM. Update From The 4th Edition of the World Health Organization Classification of Head and Neck Tumours: Nasopharynx. Head Neck Pathol. Mar 2017; 11(1):16-22.
7. Li S, Luo C, Huang W, et al. Value of skull base invasion subclassification in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Implication for prognostic stratification and use of induction chemotherapy. European Radiology. 2022; 32(11):7767-7777.
8. Mao Y, Wang S, Lydiatt W, et al. Unambiguous advanced radiologic extranodal extension determined by MRI predicts worse outcomes in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Potential improvement for future editions of N category systems. Radiotherapy and Oncology. 2021/04/01/ 2021; 157:114-121.
9. Lu T, Hu Y, Xiao Y, et al. Prognostic value of radiologic extranodal extension and its potential role in future N classification for nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Oral Oncology. 2019; 99:104438.
10. Zou X, You R, Liu H, et al. Establishment and validation of M1 stage subdivisions for de novo metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma to better predict prognosis and guide treatment. European Journal of Cancer. 2017; 77:117-126.