A

Results from the UNITED study: a multicenter study validating the prognostic effect of the tumor–stroma ratio in colon cancer

ESMO Open, vol. 9, pp. 102988

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The TNM (tumor-node-metastasis) Evaluation Committee of Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) and College of American Pathologists (CAP) recommended to prospectively validate the cost-effective and robust tumor-stroma ratio (TSR) as an independent prognostic parameter, since high intratumor stromal percentages have previously predicted poor patient-related outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The 'Uniform Noting for International application of Tumor-stroma ratio as Easy Diagnostic tool' (UNITED) study enrolled patients in 27 participating centers in 12 countries worldwide. The TSR, categorized as stroma-high (>50%) or stroma-low (≤50%), was scored through standardized microscopic assessment by certified pathologists, and effect on disease-free survival (DFS) was evaluated with 3-year median follow-up. Secondary endpoints were benefit assessment of adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 1537 patients were included, with 1388 eligible stage II/III patients curatively operated between 2015 and 2021. DFS was significantly shorter in stroma-high (n = 428) than in stroma-low patients (n = 960) (3-year rates 70% versus 83%; P < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, TSR remained an independent prognosticator for DFS (P < 0.001, hazard ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.17-1.90). As secondary outcome, DFS was also worse in stage II and III stroma-high patients despite adjuvant treatment (3-year rates stage II 73% versus 92% and stage III 66% versus 80%; P = 0.008 and P = 0.011, respectively). In stage II patients not receiving ACT (n = 322), the TSR outperformed the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) criteria in identifying patients at risk of events (event rate 21% versus 9%), with a higher discriminatory 3-year DFS rate (stroma-high 80% versus ASCO high risk 91%). A trend toward worse 5-year OS in stroma-high was noticeable (74% versus 83% stroma-low; P = 0.102). CONCLUSION: The multicenter UNITED study unequivocally validates the TSR as an independent prognosticator, confirming worse outcomes in stroma-high patients. The TSR improved current selection criteria for patients at risk of events, and stroma-high patients potentially experienced chemotherapy resistance. TSR implementation in pathology diagnostics and international guidelines is highly recommended as aid in personalized treatment.

Authors 64

  1. Leiden University Medical Center

    Affiliation as printed

    Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden

  2. Leiden University Medical Center

    Affiliation as printed

    Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden

  3. Leiden University Medical Center

    Affiliation as printed

    Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden

  4. Leiden University Medical Center

    Affiliation as printed

    Clinical Research Center, Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden

  5. Leiden University Medical Center

    Affiliation as printed

    Clinical Research Center, Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden

  6. Affiliation as printed

    Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden

  7. Leiden University Medical Center

    Affiliation as printed

    Department of Medical Oncology, Leiden

  8. Leiden University Medical Center

    Affiliation as printed

    Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden

  9. Medisch Centrum Haaglanden · Stichting Haaglanden Medisch Centrum

    Affiliation as printed

    Department of Pathology, Haaglanden Medical Center, The Hague, The Netherlands

  10. Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje

    Affiliation as printed

    Department of Pathology, Medical Faculty of Ss. Cyril and Methodius University, Skopje, Republic of North Macedonia

  11. Institute of Oncology Ljubljana

    Affiliation as printed

    Department of Pathology, Onkološki inštitut-Institute of Oncology, Ljubljana, Slovenia

    Department of Pathology, Onkološki inštitut—Institute of Oncology, Ljubljana, Slovenia

  12. Vejle Sygehus · Lillebaelt Hospital

    Affiliation as printed

    Department of Pathology, Vejle Sygehus-Sygehus Lillebælt, Vejle, Denmark

    Department of Pathology, Vejle Sygehus–Sygehus Lillebælt, Vejle, Denmark

  13. Affiliation as printed

    PATHAN Laboratories, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

  14. Spaarne Gasthuis

    Affiliation as printed

    Department of Pathology, Spaarne Gasthuis, Haarlem

  15. Utrecht University · University Medical Center Utrecht · Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation

    Affiliation as printed

    Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht; Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht

    Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands

  16. Affiliation as printed

    European Society of Pathology, Brussels, Belgium

  17. Leiden University Medical Center

    Affiliation as printed

    Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden

  18. Radboud University Medical Center

    Affiliation as printed

    Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

  19. Leiden University Medical Center

    Affiliation as printed

    Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden. Electronic address: w.e.mesker@lumc.nl

    Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden

  20. Leiden University Medical Center

    Affiliation as printed

    Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden

  21. Leiden University Medical Center

    Affiliation as printed

    Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden;

Cited by 28 stored of 28

No patents citing this paper on Lens.org (checked 2026-10-11).

References 53