Comparative impact of grade on mortality across salivary cancers: A novel, unifying staging system
Allen S. Ho, Michael Luu, Bonnie Balzer, Katri Aro, Julie K. Jang, Alain C. Mita, Kevin S. Scher, Jon Mallen‐St. Clair, Missael Vasquez, Amanda J. Bastien, Joel B. Epstein, De‐Chen Lin, Michelle Chen, Zachary S. Zumsteg
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The comparative impact of histologic variants and grade has not been well described. METHODS: Salivary cancer histologies were profiled using hospital and population-based cancer registries. Multivariable models were employed to assess relationships between histology, grade, and survival. RESULTS: On univariate analysis, histologic variants exhibited a wide spectrum of mortality risk (5-year overall survival (OS): 86% (acinic cell carcinoma), 78% (mucoepidermoid carcinoma), 72% (adenoid cystic carcinoma), 64% (carcinoma ex-pleomorphic adenoma), 52% (adenocarcinoma NOS), and 47% (salivary duct carcinoma) (p < 0.001). However, on multivariable analysis these differences largely vanished. Worsening grade corresponded with deteriorating survival (5-year OS: 89% [low-grade], 81% [intermediate-grade], 45% [high-grade]; p < 0.001), which was upheld on multivariable analysis and propensity score matching. Recursive partitioning analysis generated TNM + G schema (c-index 0.75) superior to the existing system (c-index 0.73). CONCLUSION: Grade represents a primary determinant of salivary cancer prognosis. Integrating grade into stage strengthens current staging systems.