Close

Cervical Esophageal Cancer

Determining the Grade of the Tumor

Pathologists will typically report on the grade of the tumor. This is a qualitative interpretation by the pathologist of how much the cancerous cells resemble normal tissue from that site. There are a number of different grading systems that might be used. The most common system is as follows:

  • GX: Grade cannot be assessed
  • G1: Well differentiated
  • G2: Moderately differentiated
  • G3: Poorly differentiated
  • G4: Undifferentiated

Differentiation refers to how closely the cells taken from a tumor or lesion resemble normal cells from the healthy tissue surrounding the tumor. “Well differentiated” means the cells look similar to normal cells in that area. “Undifferentiated” means the cells look nothing like normal cells in that area.

While it is important to report the tumor’s grade, few doctors use this information to make decisions regarding treatment or prognosis for this particular cancer type.

References

1 Krause CJ, Carey TE, Ott RW, Hurbis C, McClatchey KD, Regezi JA. Human squamous cell carcinoma. Establishment and characterization of new permanent cell lines. Arch Otolaryngol. Nov 1981;107(11):703-710.

2 Moore C. Smoking and cancer of the mouth, pharynx, and larynx. JAMA: the journal of the American Medical Association. Jan 25 1965;191(4):283-286.

3 Pelucchi C, Gallus S, Garavello W, Bosetti C, La Vecchia C. Cancer risk associated with alcohol and tobacco use: focus on upper aero-digestive tract and liver. Alcohol research & health: the journal of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. 2006;29(3):193-198.

4 Little MP. Cancer after exposure to radiation in the course of treatment for benign and malignant disease. The lancet oncology. Apr 2001;2(4):212-220.

5 Modlin IM, Shapiro MD, Kidd M. An analysis of rare carcinoid tumors: clarifying these clinical conundrums. World J Surg. 2005 Jan;29(1):92-101.

6 Vinik, A. I., Thompson, N., Eckhauser, F., & Moattari, A. R. (1989). Clinical features of carcinoid syndrome and the use of somatostatin analogue in its management. Acta Oncologica, 28(3), 389-402.

7 Mariette C, Balon J-M, Piessen G, Fabre S, Van Seuningen I, Triboulet J-P. Pattern of recurrence following complete resection of esophageal carcinoma and factors predictive of recurrent disease. Cancer. 2003;97:1616-1623.

8 Key C and Meisner ALW. Chapter 3: Cancer of the Esophagus, Stomach, and Small Intestine. Ries LAG, Young JL, Keel GE, Eisner MP, Lin YD, Horner M-J (editors). SEER Survival Monograph: Cancer Survival Among Adults: U.S. SEER Program, 1988-2001, Patient and Tumor Characteristics. National Cancer Institute, SEER Program, NIH Pub. No. 07-6215, Bethesda, MD, 2007.

9 Leggett CL, Lewis JT, Wu TT, et al. Clinical and histologic determinants of mortality for patients with Barrett’s esophagus-related T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015;13:658-664.

10 Leers JM, DeMeester SR, Oezcelik A, et al. The prevalence of lymph node metastases in patients with T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma a retrospective review of esophagectomy specimens. Ann Surg 2011;253:271-278.

11 Alvarez Herrero L, Pouw RE, van Vilsteren FG, et al. Risk of lymph node metastasis associated with deeper invasion by early adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and cardia: study based on endoscopic resection specimens. Endoscopy 2010;42:1030-1036.

12 Lee L, Ronellenfitsch U, Hofstetter WL, et al. Predicting lymph node metastases in early esophageal adenocarcinoma using a simple scoring system. J Am Coll Surg 2013;217:191-199.

13 Cen P, Hofstetter WL, Correa AM, et al. Lymphovascular invasion as a tool to further subclassify T1b esophageal adenocarcinoma. Cancer 2008;112:1020-1027.

14 Nentwich MF, von Loga K, Reeh M, et al. Depth of submucosal tumor infiltration and its relevance in lymphatic metastasis formation for T1b squamous cell and adenocarcinomas of the esophagus. J Gastrointest Surg 2014;18:242-249; discussion 249.

15 Newaishy GA, Read GA, Duncan W, Kerr GR. Results of radical radiotherapy of squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus. Clin Radiol 1982;33:347-352.

16 Okawa T, Kita M, Tanaka M, Ikeda M. Results of radiotherapy for inoperable locally advanced esophageal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1989;17:49-54.

17 Sun DR. Ten-year follow-up of esophageal cancer treated by radical radiation therapy: analysis of 869 patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1989;16:329-334.

18 Oppedijk V, van der Gaast A, van Lanschot JJ, et al. Patterns of recurrence after surgery alone versus preoperative chemoradiotherapy and surgery in CROSS trials. J Clin Oncol 2014;32:385-391.

19 Lou F, Sima CS, Adusumilli PS, et al. Esophageal cancer recurrence patterns and implications for surveillance. J Thorac Oncol 2013;8:1558-1562.

20 Sudo K, Taketa T, Correa AM, et al. Locoregional failure rate after preoperative chemoradiation of esophageal adenocarcinoma and the outcomes of salvage strategies. J Clin Oncol 2013;31:4306-4310.

21 Dorth JA, Pura JA, Palta M, et al. Patterns of recurrence after trimodality therapy for esophageal cancer. Cancer 2014;120:2099-2105.

22 Sudo K, Xiao L, Wadhwa R, et al. Importance of surveillance and success of salvage strategies after definitive chemoradiation in patients with esophageal cancer. J Clin Oncol 2014;32:3400-3405.

23 Taketa T, Sudo K, Correa AM, et al. Post-chemoradiation surgical pathology stage can customize the surveillance strategy in patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2014;12:1139-1144.

Important: Privacy Update

Your privacy and the protection of your personal information is important to the THANC (Thyroid, Head and Neck Cancer) Foundation and the Head & Neck Cancer Guide (HNCG). For this reason, we have updated our privacy policy to align with the GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation).

Please click below to see an updated privacy policy that describes how we collect and use your personal information and respect your privacy.

Privacy Policy