| Article Access Statistics | | | Viewed | 3695 | | | Printed | 130 | | | Emailed | 1 | | | PDF Downloaded | 321 | | | Comments | [Add] | | |
|
Click on image for details.
|
|
| COMMITTEE REPORT |
|
| Year : 2009 | Volume
: 57
| Issue : 3 | Page : 247--251 |
A pragmatic clinicopathobiological grouping/staging system for gliomas: Proposal of the Indian TNM subcommittee on brain tumors
Tejpal Gupta1, Rajiv Sarin1, Rakesh Jalali1, Suash Sharma2, Purna Kurkure3, Atul Goel4
1 Department of Radiation Oncology, ACTREC/TMH, Mumbai, India
2 Department of Pathology, TMH, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
3 Department of Pediatric Oncology, TMH, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
4 Department of Neuro-Surgery, KEM Hospital, Mumbai, India
Correspondence Address:
Rajiv Sarin
Advanced Centre for Treatment Research and Education in Cancer Tata Memorial Centre, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai - 410210
India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/0028-3886.53261
Background: There is no universally accepted staging system for primary brain tumors wherein prognostication is mainly based on complex composite indices . Aim: To develop a simple, pragmatic, and widely applicable grouping/staging system for gliomas, the most common primary brain tumor. Materials and Methods: An expert neurooncology panel with representation from radiation oncology, neurosurgery, pathology, radiology, and medical oncology had several rounds of discussion on issues pertinent to brain tumor staging. The trade off was between the accuracy of prognostic categorization and a pragmatic, widely applicable approach. Results and Recommendations: The Tumor-Node-Metastasis staging was considered irrelevant for gliomas that seldom metastasize to lymphatics or outside the neuraxis. Instead, a 4-point staging/grouping system is proposed, using histological grade as the main prognostic variable and at least one stage migration based on other unfavorable features such as tumor location (brainstem); age (<5 years for all grades, >50 years for high-grade, and >40 years for low-grade gliomas); poor neurological performance status (NPS 2-4); multicentricity and/or gliomatosis; and adverse biological parameters (proliferative index, angiogenesis markers, apoptotic index, cytogenetic abnormalities, and molecular markers). Conclusion: In absence of a grouping/staging system for primary brain tumors, prognostification is mostly based on complex composite indices. The proposed clinicopathobiological grouping/staging system for gliomas is a simple, pragmatic, and user-friendly tool with a potential to fulfill the objectives of staging classification.
[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
|
