Literature DB >> 23869226

High weight loss during radiation treatment changes the prognosis in under-/normal weight nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients for the worse: a retrospective analysis of 2433 cases.

Lu-Jun Shen1, Chen Chen, Bo-Fei Li, Jin Gao, Yun-Fei Xia.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although weight loss is common in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients receiving radiotherapy, the prognostic influence of weight loss and its impact modified by body mass index (BMI) are still unclear.
METHODS: 2433 NPC patients receiving radical radiotherapy at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center from November, 2000 to December, 2004 were enrolled. Weight change during radiation treatment was categorized into high weight loss (HWL) and low weight loss (LWL). The associations of HWL with overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were analyzed by Cox regression.
RESULTS: Among underweight patients, HWL was independently associated with poor OS (hazard ratio [HR], 2.06; 95% CI 1.36-3.11) and DSS (HR, 2.27; 95% CI 1.38-3.73), as compared with LWL, after adjusting for covariates. In normal weight patients, the impact of HWL on OS (HR, 1.47; 95% CI 1.19-1.80) and DSS (HR, 1.59; 95% CI 1.24-2.03) was moderate. Among overweight/obese patients, no significant association between HWL and OS (HR, 1.22; 95% CI 0.95-1.55), or DSS (HR, 1.23; 95% CI 0.93-1.64) was found.
CONCLUSION: Except for overweight/obese patients, high weight loss during radiation treatment was independently associated with poor survival in NPC. This impact was more prominent in the underweight patient group.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23869226      PMCID: PMC3711826          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0068660

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


Introduction

Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is an endemic head and neck epithelial malignancy. Approximately 60% patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma present stage III or IV disease at initial diagnosis [1], [2]. Although the treatment effect of NPC has improved primarily due to the progress in diagnostic imaging, radiation techniques and chemotherapy regimens, 20–30% of the patients will die due to cancer recurrence or/and distant metastasis [3]–[5]. Identification of those high-risk patients may provide new clues in developing clinical intervention to improve their survival. Body mass index (BMI), a commonly utilized measure for indicating nutritional status in adults, has been shown closely associated with the prognosis of NPC patients [6], [7]. Various studies have focused on the striking association between low BMI at diagnosis and poor prognosis due to higher local-regional recurrence and mortality. As emphasized by Shen et al., the hazard ratio for death was 0.66 for overweight (95% CI, 0.48 to 0.90) and 0.47 (95% CI, 0.23 to 0.97) for obese patients comparing to the baseline of normal weight or underweight patients [7]. In contrast to the considerable amount of research on BMI, the impact of body weight loss on NPC recurrence and death has not been addressed. More than 60% of NPC patients receiving curative-intent radiotherapy suffered from a weight loss greater than 5% during the treatment [8], [9]. Advanced tumors, concurrent chemotherapy, and high BMI are important predisposing factors of weight loss, and it is reported that a critical weight loss (>5%) during the radiation was associated with poorer treatment tolerance and worse prognosis in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients [10], [11]. Is weight loss also an unfavorable prognostic factor for NPC? Since BMI affects both weight loss and survival among NPC patients [9], analysis combining these two weight-related factors may be required. Therefore, in this study, we investigated the prognostic influence of weight loss and its corresponding potential effect-modification by BMI.

Patients and Methods

Patients

The medical records of 2820 newly diagnosed NPC patients without distant metastasis in Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center (SYSUCC) from November, 2000 to December, 2004 were reviewed. Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center Hospital Ethics Committee approved this study (No. YP201012). This was a retrospective analysis of routine data and therefore we requested and were granted a waiver of individual informed consent from the ethics committee. The data were collected by trained SYSUCC interviewers and analyzed anonymously. All patients received radical radiotherapy and completed the prescribed course of treatment. Exclusion criteria are any of the following: (i) missing weight measurement at baseline and/or at the end of radiotherapy (200); (ii) follow-up period less than 5 years (178); (iii) age less than 18 years old (9). A total of 2433 patients were enrolled. All patients received routinely nasopharyngeal CT or MRI examination before treatment and were staged according to the sixth edition of UICC staging system [12].

Measurement and Grouping

Pre-radiation treatment (pre-RT) weight was measured within 7 days before radiotherapy (RT), and post-radiation treatment (post-RT) weight was measured within 7 days after completion of RT. BMI was defined as pre-RT weight (kg) divided by the square of height (meter) and was categorized according to the WHO recommendations for Asian population [13]; because the proportion of obese patients was relatively small (6.5%), we merged overweight and obese patients and obtained three BMI groups: <18.5 kg/m2, underweight, UW; 18.5–<23.0 kg/m2, normal weight, NW; ≥23.0 kg/m2, overweight/obese, OW (Figure 1).
Figure 1

Flowchart of study design.

A total of 2433 patients met the enrollment criteria. The population were first divided into 2×3 subgroups by BMI levels and weight loss status, and analyzed in the multiple-adjusted Cox model. Stratified analysis by BMI levels was further conducted to determine the impact of high weight loss during treatment for NPC patients with different BMI levels. Footnote: d, death; n, number of patients.

Flowchart of study design.

A total of 2433 patients met the enrollment criteria. The population were first divided into 2×3 subgroups by BMI levels and weight loss status, and analyzed in the multiple-adjusted Cox model. Stratified analysis by BMI levels was further conducted to determine the impact of high weight loss during treatment for NPC patients with different BMI levels. Footnote: d, death; n, number of patients. Weight loss (ΔW) was calculated as the relative percent of weight changes between weight measurement before and after the radiation treatment, A number of studies suggest that a greater than 5% body weight loss during radiation for HNC patients indicates malnutrition and is clinically meaningful [9], [14], [15]. ΔW was accordingly categorized into high weight loss (HWL; ≥5%) and low weight loss (LWL; <5%).

Treatment

Radiotherapy included two-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (2D-CRT), three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT), and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Opposing lateral facial-cervical fields were used in the 2D-CRT to cover the nasopharynx and upper cervical lymphatic drainage region, with 1 lower anterior cervical field to cover the lower cervical region. After 36 to 40 Gy, opposing lateral preauricular fields were used for the primary region, and anterior split neck fields were used for the cervical region. The primary tumor was irradiated to a dose of 60 to 78 Gy. The dose of prophylactic irradiation for patients with 2D-CRT was 50–54 Gy to the prophylactic areas. For 3D-CRT, the total prescribed dose was 66–72 Gy to the gross tumor volume of nasopharynx (GTVnx), 60 to 70 Gy to the region involved by the metastatic lymph nodes (GTVnd), 60 Gy to high risk microscopic (CTV1, the GTVnx and an additional 5- to 10-mm margin), and 50–54 Gy to the low risk microscopic (CTV2). For IMRT, the target definition and delineation were the same as for 3D-CRT. The prescription dose was 68 Gy to the GTVnx, 60 to 64 Gy to the GTVnd of neck, 60 Gy to the CTV1, and 54 Gy to CTV2. Chemotherapy included induction chemotherapy, concomitant chemotherapy, and adjuvant chemotherapy. The induction or adjuvant chemotherapy regimen was fluorouracil (5-Fu) plus cisplatin. The concurrent chemotherapy regimens were either 5-Fu plus cisplatin or cisplatin alone; the 5-Fu plus cisplatin regimen was 70 to 100 mg/m2 of cisplatin on day 1 plus 500 to 750 mg/m2 5-Fu on day 2 till day 5 every 3–4 weeks, for 2 to 3 cycles, and the cisplatin regimen was 30 to 40 mg/m2 of cisplatin every week, for 6 to 7 cycles.

Follow-up and End Points

After completion of RT, patients were followed up every 3 months for the first 3 years by clinic visits, telephone, letter and so on. The intervals gradually increased to 6–12 months after 3 years. The data of follow-up was last reviewed on February 2011. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS). Secondary outcomes were local-regional recurrence free survival (LRFS) and distant metastasis free survival (DMFS). OS was defined as time from diagnosis to death by any causes. DSS was defined as the time from the start of RT to death caused by disease progression or treatment-related complications. LRFS was defined as time from the start of RT to the first occurrence of locoregional failure or death from the primary cancer without a documented site of recurrence or metastasis. DMFS was defined as time from the start of RT to the first occurrence of distant failure.

Statistical Analysis

Wilcoxon rank sum and Chi-square test were used to compare ordinal and categorical variables between groups, respectively. Rates of DSS, OS, LRFS, and DMFS were estimated by means of the Kaplan-Meier method and were compared between the subgroups with the use of the log-rank test. Cox regression model including the two main effect parameters (weight loss and BMI; in categorical form) and their interaction effect parameters was utilized to test the interaction effect between weight loss status and BMI levels. The multiple-adjusted Cox regression model was used to evaluate the survival of 2×3 weight-based subgroups divided by weight loss status (HWL vs LWL) and BMI levels (UW vs NW vs OW), with the covariates including age, sex, UICC T stage, UICC N stage, and treatment (with or without chemotherapy) [16], [17]; the 2×3 subgroups were as follows: NW+LWL (group 1, reference), NW+HWL (group 2), UW+LWL (group 3), UW+HWL (group 4), OW+LWL (group 5), and OW+HWL (group 6). Stratified multiple-adjusted Cox model by BMI levels was further conducted to evaluate the prognostic significance of weight loss status in each BMI group. A P value <0.05 was considered significant. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 20.0 software.

Results

Characteristics of the Population

Listed in Table 1 were baseline characteristics of patients. The median age was 46 years (range, 18–78 years). Among all the patients, 2166 (89.0%) had undifferentiated non-keratinizing carcinoma, 203 (8.3%) had differentiated non-keratinizing carcinoma and 64 (2.6%) had other types; 983 (40.4%) had early-stage disease (stage I/II), and 1450 (59.6%) had advanced disease (stage III/IV). All patients received definitive-intent radiotherapy during treatment, with 2194 (90.2%) patients treated with 2D-CRT, 63 (2.6%) patients with 3D-CRT, and 176 (7.2%) patients with IMRT. The duration of RT ranged from 42 to 90 days (median, 50 days). Induction chemotherapy, concurrent chemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy was delivered in 830 (34.1%), 504 (20.7%) and 11 (0.5%) patients, respectively. The median duration of follow-up was 85 months (range, 2–125 months).
Table 1

Baseline characteristics by weight loss status in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (n = 2433).

Patient characteristicsAllLWLHWLP
Duration of RT(days, mean ± SD)51.0±6.350.5±5.951.4±6.50.072Ψ
No.%No.%No.%
Age, years0.210
<46128552.861354.267251.6
≥46114847.251845.863048.4
Gender0.099
Male185176.187777.697474.8
Female58223.925322.432925.2
UICC Stage<0.001
I1275.2807.1473.6
II85635.242537.643133.1
III97940.243038.154942.1
IV47119.419517.327621.2
UICC T Stage0.037
T139516.220418.119114.7
T2102342.048542.953841.3
T362125.527324.234826.7
T439416.216814.922617.3
UICC N Stage<0.001
N063526.135431.328121.6
N197640.143938.853741.2
N273230.130326.842932.9
N3903.7343.0564.3
BMI<0.001
Underweight2128.713111.6816.2
Normal weight115747.655549.160246.2
Overweight/obese106443.744439.362047.6
Treatment<0.001
RT108844.757951.250939.1
RT+CT134555.355148.879460.9

Footnote: UICC, International Union Against Cancer; BMI, body mass index; RT, radiotherapy; CT, chemotherapy; LWL, low weight loss; HWL, high weight loss; Ψ, result of t-test; P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Footnote: UICC, International Union Against Cancer; BMI, body mass index; RT, radiotherapy; CT, chemotherapy; LWL, low weight loss; HWL, high weight loss; Ψ, result of t-test; P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. For the entire population, the mean BMI was 22.60 kg/m2. A total of 212 patients (8.7%) were underweight, 1157 (47.6%) were normal weight, and 1064 (43.7%) were overweight/obese. During radiation treatment, the mean weight loss was 4.33 kg, and 53.6% (1303) patients had high weight loss (HWL; ΔW≥5%). The proportion of HWL was higher in patients with advanced T stage, N stage, high BMI level and who received chemotherapy. No significant differences in age and sex were found across the weight loss subgroups (Table 1).

BMI, Weight Loss, and Survival

572 (23.5%) of the 2433 patients experienced cancer recurrence, 166 (6.8%) had distant metastasis, and 761 (31.3%) died. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival (OS) rates for the whole population were 96.8%, 83.8%, and 74.6%, respectively. In unadjusted analysis, underweight patients had significantly lower 5-year OS rate compared to normal weight (65% vs 73%, P = 0.004) and overweight/obese patients (65% vs 78%, P<0.001); HWL patients presented with significantly lower 5-year OS rate compared to LWL patients (P<0.001). Age, sex, UICC T stage, UICC N stage, and treatment also significantly influenced OS (P<0.001 for all). Results on 5-year DSS and LRFS were similar to that of OS, while no difference in DMFS was found across the weight loss groups (Table 2).
Table 2

Unadjusted analysis for 5-year OS, DSS, LRFS, and DMFS rates.

5-yr OS (%) P 5-yr DSS (%) P 5-yr LRFS (%) P 5-yr DMFS (%) P
Age, years
<4680<0.00180<0.00185<0.001940.324
≥4669717694
Sex
Male73<0.001750.00178<0.001940.350
Female81818595
UICC T Stage
T1–T278<0.00179<0.00182<0.001940.142
T3–T470727693
UICC N Stage
N0–N178<0.00180<0.00182<0.001950.001
N2–N367697591
Treatment
RT79<0.00181<0.001820.00197<0.001
RT+CT71727891
BMI levels
Underweight65677690
Normal weight73<0.001 75<0.001 790.004 940.036
Overweight/obese78798395
Weight loss
LWL78<0.00181<0.00184<0.001940.891
HWL71737894

Footnote: OS, overall survival; DSS, disease-specific survival; LRFS, local-regional recurrent free survival; DMFS, distant metastasis free survival. Other abbreviation as in Table 1;

result of joint test.

Footnote: OS, overall survival; DSS, disease-specific survival; LRFS, local-regional recurrent free survival; DMFS, distant metastasis free survival. Other abbreviation as in Table 1; result of joint test. The BMI×Weight loss interaction terms were tested for OS, and a borderline significance was identified for the differential impact of weight loss between underweight and overweight/obese patients (normal weight×HWL vs underweight×LWL, P = 0.239; overweight/obese×HWL vs underweight×LWL, P = 0.054; Table S1). Therefore, we firstly divided the whole population into 2×3 weight-based subgroups according to BMI and weight loss. OS, DSS and LRFS were identified as significant in unadjusted analysis among the six subgroups, with joint P value <0.001 for all (Figure 2; Figure S1–S2); yet no significant difference was found for DMFS (P = 0.089).
Figure 2

OS for NPC patients after radical radiotherapy in 2×3 grouping by BMI levels and weight loss status.

Multiple-adjusted analysis including 2×3 weight-based subgroups, age, sex, UICC T stage, UICC N stage and treatment was performed. Comparing to NW+LWL patients, patients in UW+HWL group had significantly lower OS (HR, 2.56; 95% CI 1.65–3.56), DSS (HR, 2.66; 95% CI 1.82–3.88) and LRFS (HR, 2.62; 95% CI 1.81–3.78); NW+HWL patients had mildly unfavorable OS (HR, 1.45; 95% CI 1.18–1.78), DSS (HR, 1.57; 95% CI 1.22–2.01) and LRFS (HR, 1.44; 95% CI 1.14–1.82). By contrast, UW+LWL, OW+LWL, and OW+HWL patients did not have significantly different OS, DSS, or LRFS in comparison with NW+LWL patients (Table 3).
Table 3

Multiple-adjusted analysis for OS and DSS among the whole population (n = 2433).

VariablesOSDSS
HR95% CIPHR95% CIP
Age, years<0.001<0.001
<46RefRef
≥461.831.58–2.121.651.40–1.96
Sex<0.001<0.001
MaleRefRef
Female0.680.57–0.820.690.56–0.86
UICC T Stage<0.001<0.001
T1–T2RefRef
T3–T41.351.17–1.571.341.13–1.59
UICC N Stage<0.001<0.001
N0–N1RefRef
N2–N31.441.23–1.671.451.21–1.74
Treatment0.0490.064
RTRefRef
RT+CT1.181.00–1.381.231.02–1.49
BMI+Weight loss(2×3 groups)<0.001 <0.001
NW+LWLRefRef
NW+HWL1.451.18–1.78<0.0011.571.22–2.01<0.001
UW+LWL1.250.89–1.750.1911.230.80–1.880.348
UW+HWL2.561.65–3.56<0.0012.661.82–3.88<0.001
OW+LWL0.820.64–1.050.1160.900.67–1.220.501
OW+HWL0.980.79–1.220.8811.080.83–1.400.577

Footnote: Ref, reference; HR, hazard ratio.

result of joint test.

Footnote: Ref, reference; HR, hazard ratio. result of joint test. To assess the prognostic impact of weight loss for patients with different BMI levels, further stratified analysis was conducted (Table 4). Multiple-adjusted analysis showed HWL was independently associated with adverse OS (HR, 2.06; 95% CI 1.36–3.11), DSS (HR, 2.27; 95% CI 1.38–3.73), and LRFS (HR, 2.93; 95% CI 1.75–4.90) among underweight patients. In the subgroup of normal weight patients, HWL was also significant on OS (HR, 1.47; 95% CI 1.19–1.80), DSS (HR, 1.59; 95% CI 1.24–2.03), and LRFS (HR, 1.45; 95% CI 1.15–1.84). Among overweight/obese patients, no significant association between HWL and survival was found (Figure 3).
Table 4

Outcomes according to weight loss stratified by BMI levels in multiple-adjusted Cox model adjusted for age, sex, UICC T stage, UICC N stage, and treatment.

Weight ChangeNo.OSDSSLRFSDMFS
HR (95% CI)PHR (95% CI)PHR (95% CI)PHR (95% CI)P
Underweight (n = 212)
LWL131RefRefRefRef
HWL812.06 (1.36–3.11)0.0012.27 (1.38–3.73)0.0012.93 (1.75–4.90)<0.0010.60 (0.23–1.53)0.284
Normal weight(n = 1157)
LWL555RefRefRefRef
HWL6021.47 (1.19–1.80)<0.0011.59 (1.24–2.03)<0.0011.45 (1.15–1.84)0.0021.15 (0.74–1.78)0.537
Overweight/obese (n = 1064)
LWL444RefRefRefRef
HWL6201.22 (0.95–1.55)0.1171.23 (0.93–1.64)0.1531.23 (0.93–1.63)0.1460.92 (0.55–1.54)0.761

Footnote: Ref, reference; HR, hazard ratio. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Figure 3

Adjusted hazard ratios of high weight loss for survival in patients stratified by BMI levels.

Hazard ratios of high weight loss for overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) in NPC patients receiving radical radiotherapy, stratified by BMI levels. HR was adjusted for age, sex, UICC T stage, UICC N stage, and treatment; 95% CIs were shown.

Adjusted hazard ratios of high weight loss for survival in patients stratified by BMI levels.

Hazard ratios of high weight loss for overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) in NPC patients receiving radical radiotherapy, stratified by BMI levels. HR was adjusted for age, sex, UICC T stage, UICC N stage, and treatment; 95% CIs were shown. Footnote: Ref, reference; HR, hazard ratio. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Discussion

BMI is one of the criteria commonly used in the assessment of nutritional status, whose prognostic impact has been extensively studied among NPC patients [6], [7]. However, percentage weight loss, a sensitive and specific tool in assessment of recently developed malnutrition [18], [19], has been shown correlated with poor prognosis in head and neck cancer patients [11], [20], and should be taken into account in NPC prognosis. Currently, no data specifically focused on the prognostic impact of weight loss among NPC patients was available. In our series, it’s intriguing to find a potential differential impact of weight loss between underweight and overweight/obese patients (P = 0.054). This indicates that a 2×3 grouping by BMI levels and weight loss and further stratified analysis by BMI levels are necessary to determine the impact of weight loss in NPC. Using the 2×3 grouping, we found that UW+HWL group had significantly lower OS comparing to the other five subgroups. Further stratified analysis by BMI levels showed HWL was independently associated with unfavorable OS and DSS among underweight patients (HR, 2.06; 95% CI 1.36–3.11; HR, 2.27; 95% CI 1.38–3.73). In normal weight patients, the impact of HWL was moderate (HR, 1.47; 95% CI 1.19–1.80; HR, 1.59;95% CI 1.24–2.03); among overweight/obese patients, such impact was weak (HR, 1.22; 95% CI 0.95–1.55; HR, 1.23; 95% CI 0.93–1.64). These novel observations underscore the importance of pretreatment BMI status in the interpretation of weight loss and, to our knowledge, represent the first data showing that high weight loss adversely impacts on survival in NPC patients. The reason underlying the differential prognostic impact of weight loss on NPC patients of different BMI levels may mainly involve malnutrition. During the radiation treatment, underweight patients were more susceptible to severe side effects, such as mucositis, dysphagia, etc., than normal weight patients, which may affect their food intake and lead to body wasting [21]–[23]. Further high weight loss during the treatment may serve as a prominent indicator of malnutrition [20], which is known to be correlated with compromised immunity [23], [24], unplanned treatment breaks and poor treatment outcomes in head and neck cancer [25]–[27]; by contrast, low weight loss in underweight patients may represent a well-tolerant nutritional status and is therefore associated with better prognosis [7], [28]. The unfavorable impact of weight loss was moderate in normal weight patients, and even weaker in overweight/obese patients; some studies reported that NPC patients with normal or higher baseline BMI may be more resistance to malnutrition [7], [29], [30], and this can partly explain our results. Apart from the impact of treatment, factors like advanced tumors, severe comorbidities and even insomnia can also contribute to body weight loss of NPC patients during radiation treatment [9]. Patients with advanced tumor are more likely to develop cancer cachexia syndrome, which is characterized by nutritionally irreversible weight loss and will greatly increase the mortality rate [31]. Comorbidities like diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and cardiovascular diseases will also worsen the prognosis of NPC patients and, on the other hand, exacerbate body wasting [32], [33]. A recent study of 1001 newly diagnosed NPC patients showed that 15.5% elderly NPC patients (≥70 years) presented with moderate to severe comorbidities (ACE-27 score≥2) before radiation treatment; these patients had lower OS (HR, 2.63, 95% CI 1.45–4.76) than patients had none or mild comorbidities [33]. However, in our population, no patients presented with cachexia before treatment, and the proportion of elderly patients was rather small (16pts, 0.8%). Therefore, this explanation may not be the main consideration. Upon 2×3 grouping based on assortment of BMI and weight loss, we found UW+HWL patient group had lowest OS and DSS as compared with the other five groups, while e.g. the difference in survival rate between UW+LWL and NW+LWL patients was small (Figure 2). These data suggested that appropriate intervention towards weight loss, or malnutrition might be beneficial to underweight patients. For the past decade, there has been ample evidence that adequate nutrition support (NS) before and during radiotherapy can decrease the impact of side effect of treatment, minimize weight loss, and improve outcome for head and neck cancer patients [34], [35]. Weight loss of more than 1–2% per week, or 5% in less than a month, should prompt further patient assessment, nutritional counseling, and more aggressive interventions [36]. However, Rabinovitch et al. analyzed the data of 1073 advanced HNC patients treated with definitive radiotherapy and found that patients with nutrition support during treatment had better 5-year locoregional control and 5-year overall survival rate as compared with patients receiving pre-treatment nutrition support, and that the pre-treatment nutritional support group even had poorer survival as compared with those with no nutritional support at all [37]. Therefore, how and when to adopt these nutritional interventions in NPC await further study. Our study has several limitations. First, it is a retrospective study. Second, the proportion of obese patients in this study was relatively small (6.5%), which might impede our interpretation of the prognostic value of HWL in this group; therefore, we merged the overweight and obese group. Third, the modes of chemotherapy applied varied, which might have a confounding effect. For these reasons, we need to validate our finding in a multi-institutional prospective study in the future.

Conclusion

Underweight NPC patients with high weight loss during radiation had worst survival compared with other subgroups assorted by BMI levels and weight loss. High weight loss is independently associated with increased mortality among underweight and normal weight, but not overweight/obese, NPC patients. DSS for NPC patients after radical radiotherapy in 2×3 grouping by BMI levels and weight loss status. (TIF) Click here for additional data file. LRFS for NPC patients after radical radiotherapy in 2×3 grouping by BMI levels and weight loss status. (TIF) Click here for additional data file. Test for interaction between weight loss and BMI levels, T stage, N stage, age and treatment on OS. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file.
  37 in total

1.  Pretreatment levels of peripheral neutrophils and lymphocytes as independent prognostic factors in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Authors:  Jian-Rong He; Guo-Ping Shen; Ze-Fang Ren; Han Qin; Cui Cui; Ying Zhang; Yi-Xin Zeng; Wei-Hua Jia
Journal:  Head Neck       Date:  2012-02-09       Impact factor: 3.147

2.  Definition of terms, style, and conventions used in A.S.P.E.N. guidelines and standards.

Authors:  Daniel Teitelbaum; Peggi Guenter; Wanda H Howell; Martin E Kochevar; Julie Roth; Douglas L Seidner
Journal:  Nutr Clin Pract       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 3.080

3.  Influence of pretreatment ideal body weight percentile and albumin on prognosis of nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Long-term outcomes of 512 patients from a single institution.

Authors:  Guo Li; Jin Gao; Zhi-Gang Liu; Ya-Lan Tao; Bing-Qing Xu; Zi-Wei Tu; Xiu-Ping Zhang; Mu-Sheng Zeng; Yun-Fei Xia
Journal:  Head Neck       Date:  2013-07-30       Impact factor: 3.147

4.  Predictors of severe acute and late toxicities in patients with localized head-and-neck cancer treated with radiation therapy.

Authors:  François Meyer; André Fortin; Chang Shu Wang; Geoffrey Liu; Isabelle Bairati
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2011-06-02       Impact factor: 7.038

5.  Radical radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma in elderly patients: the importance of co-morbidity assessment.

Authors:  Henry C K Sze; W T Ng; Oscar S H Chan; Tracy C Y Shum; Lucy L K Chan; Anne W M Lee
Journal:  Oral Oncol       Date:  2011-09-16       Impact factor: 5.337

6.  Examining prognostic factors and patterns of failure in nasopharyngeal carcinoma following concomitant radiotherapy and chemotherapy: impact on future clinical trials.

Authors:  S H Cheng; K L Yen; J J Jian; S Y Tsai; N M Chu; S Y Leu; K Y Chan; T D Tan; J C Cheng; C Y Hsieh; A T Huang
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2001-07-01       Impact factor: 7.038

7.  Weight loss during radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a prospective study from northern China.

Authors:  Chen Qiu; Ning Yang; Guangliang Tian; Huizhong Liu
Journal:  Nutr Cancer       Date:  2011-06-29       Impact factor: 2.900

8.  The effect of interruptions and prolonged treatment time in radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Authors:  D L Kwong; J S Sham; D T Chua; D T Choy; G K Au; P M Wu
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  1997-10-01       Impact factor: 7.038

9.  Nutritional deterioration in cancer: the role of disease and diet.

Authors:  P Ravasco; I Monteiro-Grillo; P M Vidal; M E Camilo
Journal:  Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol)       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 4.126

10.  Pretreatment lifestyle behaviors as survival predictors for patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Authors:  Guo-Ping Shen; Feng-Hua Xu; Fen He; Hong-Lian Ruan; Cui Cui; Li-Zhen Chen; Yi-Xin Zeng; Wei-Hua Jia
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-05-08       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  29 in total

1.  The value of the Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI) in predicting outcomes and guiding the treatment strategy of nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients receiving intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with or without chemotherapy.

Authors:  Jingjing Miao; Weiwei Xiao; Lin Wang; Fei Han; Haijun Wu; Xiaowu Deng; Xiang Guo; Chong Zhao
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-02-28       Impact factor: 4.553

2.  Effect of Radiotherapy Alone vs Radiotherapy With Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy on Survival Without Disease Relapse in Patients With Low-risk Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Ling-Long Tang; Rui Guo; Ning Zhang; Bin Deng; Lei Chen; Zhi-Bin Cheng; Jing Huang; Wei-Han Hu; Shao Hui Huang; Wei-Jun Luo; Jin-Hui Liang; Yu-Ming Zheng; Fan Zhang; Yan-Ping Mao; Wen-Fei Li; Guan-Qun Zhou; Xu Liu; Yu-Pei Chen; Cheng Xu; Li Lin; Qing Liu; Xiao-Jing Du; Yuan Zhang; Ying Sun; Jun Ma
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2022-08-23       Impact factor: 157.335

Review 3.  Polypharmacy in older adults with cancer undergoing radiotherapy: A review.

Authors:  Jennifer Novak; Annette Goldberg; Kavita Dharmarajan; Arya Amini; Ronald J Maggiore; Carolyn J Presley; Ginah Nightingale
Journal:  J Geriatr Oncol       Date:  2022-02-25       Impact factor: 3.929

4.  The prognostic role of prognostic nutritional index in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Min Tang; Zhongxiong Jia; Ju Zhang
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2020-10-07       Impact factor: 3.402

5.  Food Intake During Cancer Therapy: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Teresa Conigliaro; Lindsay M Boyce; Carlos A Lopez; Emily S Tonorezos
Journal:  Am J Clin Oncol       Date:  2020-11       Impact factor: 2.787

6.  Evaluation of effect of body mass index and weight loss on survival of patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy.

Authors:  Yu-Hsuan Lin; Kuo-Ping Chang; Yaoh-Shiang Lin; Ting-Shou Chang
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2015-06-30       Impact factor: 3.481

7.  Critical weight loss predicts poor prognosis in nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Authors:  Qi Zeng; Lu-Jun Shen; Xiang Guo; Xin-Ming Guo; Chao-Nan Qian; Pei-Hong Wu
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2016-02-29       Impact factor: 4.430

8.  Treatment tolerability and outcomes in elderly patients with head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Daniel R Dickstein; Marc Egerman; Erica Monrose; Achintya Varma; Umut Ozbek; Sonam Sharma; Jerry T Liu; Vishal Gupta; Marshall R Posner; Krzysztof Misiukiewicz; Brett A Miles; Eric Genden; Richard L Bakst
Journal:  Head Neck       Date:  2020-12-08       Impact factor: 3.821

9.  The effects of hemoglobin levels and their interactions with cigarette smoking on survival in nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients.

Authors:  Qi Zeng; Lu-Jun Shen; Sheng Li; Ling Chen; Xiang Guo; Chao-Nan Qian; Pei-Hong Wu
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2016-01-28       Impact factor: 4.452

10.  Efficacy of Concurrent Chemotherapy for Intermediate Risk NPC in the Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy Era: a Propensity-Matched Analysis.

Authors:  Fan Zhang; Yuan Zhang; Wen-Fei Li; Xu Liu; Rui Guo; Ying Sun; Ai-Hua Lin; Lei Chen; Jun Ma
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2015-11-27       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.