Rethinking TNM : Tumor deposit-based prognostic models may improve N-staging in colorectal cancer
(2025) In European Journal of Surgical Oncology 51(11). p.1-9- Abstract
Introduction: Tumor deposits are an important negative prognostic factor for long-term oncological outcomes in colorectal cancer patients, independent of lymph node status. Several novel models have been proposed to further integrate tumor deposits into the TNM-staging system, but their comparative performance remains unclear. The aim of this study was to identify, compare and validate novel prognostic models incorporating tumor deposits for N-stage classification. Methods: A scoping literature review identified novel prognostic models that incorporated tumor deposits or tumor deposit count into N-staging. The identified models were validated using patient data from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry, assessing overall survival,... (More)
Introduction: Tumor deposits are an important negative prognostic factor for long-term oncological outcomes in colorectal cancer patients, independent of lymph node status. Several novel models have been proposed to further integrate tumor deposits into the TNM-staging system, but their comparative performance remains unclear. The aim of this study was to identify, compare and validate novel prognostic models incorporating tumor deposits for N-stage classification. Methods: A scoping literature review identified novel prognostic models that incorporated tumor deposits or tumor deposit count into N-staging. The identified models were validated using patient data from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry, assessing overall survival, distant metastasis, and local recurrence. Prognostic performance was compared to the TNM N-staging using Kaplan-Meier curves for visual analysis, Harrell's C-index for discriminative ability, and Bayesian information criterion for model fit. Results: Of 792 articles, seventeen met the inclusion criteria, resulting in ten unique models in addition to TNM. For the patient cohort, 26,970 patients remained after exclusion, of whom 3,312 (12 %) had tumor deposits. All models were superior to TNM with two models standing out; an integrated model combining lymph node and tumor deposit count, and a ratio model considering number of tumor deposits, positive lymph nodes, and total number of extracted nodal structures. All models provided prognostic value, but differences were modest. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that although all models outperformed TNM, prognostic differences between the models were small. While tumor deposits provide valuable prognostic information for high-risk patients, additional risk factors are required to further enhance the staging system.
(Less)
- author
- Lundström, Simon
LU
; Agger, Erik LU
; Lydrup, Marie-Louise LU ; Jörgren, Fredrik LU and Buchwald, Pamela LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2025-08-29
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Colorectal neoplasm, Extra nodal extension, Lymph nodes, Neoplasm staging, Prognosis
- in
- European Journal of Surgical Oncology
- volume
- 51
- issue
- 11
- article number
- 110420
- pages
- 1 - 9
- publisher
- Elsevier
- external identifiers
-
- pmid:40916311
- scopus:105014844059
- ISSN
- 0748-7983
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.ejso.2025.110420
- project
- Tumor deposits – a novel approach for improved survival in colorectal cancer
- Tumor deposits in rectal cancer: from diagnostics to staging and treatment
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- additional info
- Publisher Copyright: © 2025 The Author(s)
- id
- 317a6b47-58a2-4051-bfbb-5ce7ab3da097
- date added to LUP
- 2025-09-12 09:11:42
- date last changed
- 2025-10-14 11:22:21
@article{317a6b47-58a2-4051-bfbb-5ce7ab3da097, abstract = {{<p>Introduction: Tumor deposits are an important negative prognostic factor for long-term oncological outcomes in colorectal cancer patients, independent of lymph node status. Several novel models have been proposed to further integrate tumor deposits into the TNM-staging system, but their comparative performance remains unclear. The aim of this study was to identify, compare and validate novel prognostic models incorporating tumor deposits for N-stage classification. Methods: A scoping literature review identified novel prognostic models that incorporated tumor deposits or tumor deposit count into N-staging. The identified models were validated using patient data from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry, assessing overall survival, distant metastasis, and local recurrence. Prognostic performance was compared to the TNM N-staging using Kaplan-Meier curves for visual analysis, Harrell's C-index for discriminative ability, and Bayesian information criterion for model fit. Results: Of 792 articles, seventeen met the inclusion criteria, resulting in ten unique models in addition to TNM. For the patient cohort, 26,970 patients remained after exclusion, of whom 3,312 (12 %) had tumor deposits. All models were superior to TNM with two models standing out; an integrated model combining lymph node and tumor deposit count, and a ratio model considering number of tumor deposits, positive lymph nodes, and total number of extracted nodal structures. All models provided prognostic value, but differences were modest. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that although all models outperformed TNM, prognostic differences between the models were small. While tumor deposits provide valuable prognostic information for high-risk patients, additional risk factors are required to further enhance the staging system.</p>}}, author = {{Lundström, Simon and Agger, Erik and Lydrup, Marie-Louise and Jörgren, Fredrik and Buchwald, Pamela}}, issn = {{0748-7983}}, keywords = {{Colorectal neoplasm; Extra nodal extension; Lymph nodes; Neoplasm staging; Prognosis}}, language = {{eng}}, month = {{08}}, number = {{11}}, pages = {{1--9}}, publisher = {{Elsevier}}, series = {{European Journal of Surgical Oncology}}, title = {{Rethinking TNM : Tumor deposit-based prognostic models may improve N-staging in colorectal cancer}}, url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2025.110420}}, doi = {{10.1016/j.ejso.2025.110420}}, volume = {{51}}, year = {{2025}}, }