Evidence Hub

A Multicenter, International Collaborative Study for AJCC-Staging of Retinoblastoma: Treatment Success and Globe Salvage

A. Tomar, P. Finger, B. Gallie, A. Mallipatna, T. Kivelä, Cheng-Yue Zhang, Jun-Yang Zhao, Matthew W. Wilson et al.

Ophthalmology (Rochester, Minn.), 2020

2,097 participants · 46 citations

Abstract

PURPOSE

To evaluate the ability of the 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Staging to predict local tumor control and globe salvage for children with retinoblastoma (RB).

DESIGN

International, multicenter, registry-based retrospective case series PARTICIPANTS: 2854 eyes of 2097 patients from 18 ophthalmic oncology centers from 13 countries over 6 continents.

METHODS

International, multicenter, registry-based data was pooled from patients enrolled between January 2001-December 2013. All RB eyes with adequate records to allow tumor staging by the AJCC 8th edition criteria and follow-up to ascertain treatment outcomes were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Globe-salvage rates were estimated by AJCC clinical(cTNMH) categories and tumor laterality. Local treatment failure was defined as use of enucleation or external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), with or without plaque brachytherapy or intra-arterial chemotherapy (IAC).

RESULTS

Unilateral RB occurred in 1340 (47%) eyes. Amongst the 2854 eyes, tumor categories were cT1-cT4 in 696 (24%), 1334 (47%), 802 (28%), and 22 (1%) eyes, respectively. Of these, 1275 (45%) eyes were salvaged, and 1179 (41%) and 400 (14%) underwent primary and secondary enucleation, respectively. The 2- and 5-year Kaplan-Meier cumulative globe-salvage rates without use of EBRT by cTNMH categories were 97% and 96% for category cT1a tumors, 94% and 88% for cT1b tumors, 68% and 60% for cT2a tumors, 66% and 57% for cT2b tumors, and 32% and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 2,097 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free