| Literature DB >> 26147805 |
Yasuhito Iseki1, Masatsune Shibutani1, Kiyoshi Maeda1, Hisashi Nagahara1, Hiroshi Ohtani1, Kenji Sugano1, Tetsuro Ikeya1, Kazuya Muguruma1, Hiroaki Tanaka1, Takahiro Toyokawa1, Katsunobu Sakurai1, Kosei Hirakawa1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recently, the preoperative immune-nutritional status has been reported to correlate with the survival rate in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). However, there have been no reports on the relationship between the controlling nutritional status (CONUT) score and the clinical outcome after curative surgery for CRC. We herein evaluated the prognostic significance of the CONUT score in patients with CRC, and then compared the accuracy of the CONUT score and the prognostic nutritional index (PNI) as a predictor of survival.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26147805 PMCID: PMC4492767 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0132488
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Assessment of the nutritional status using the CONUT score.
| None | Light | Moderate | Severe | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Serum albumin (g/dL) | ≥3.50 | 3.00–3.49 | 2.50–2.99 | <2.50 |
| Score | 0 | 2 | 4 | 6 |
| Total lymphocyte count (/mm3) | ≥1600 | 1200–1599 | 800–1199 | <800 |
| Score | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Total cholesterol (mg/dL) | ≥180 | 140–179 | 100–139 | <100 |
| Score | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Add scores | ≤2 Low CONUT group | |||
| 3≤ High CONUT group | ||||
CONUT: controlling nutritional status; PNI: prognostic nutritional index; SD: Standard deviation de Ulibarri Perez JI, et al. (2005) Nutr Hosp.[10]
Fig 1The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for the controlling nutritional status (CONUT).
We used the continuous variable Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) as the test variable and 5-year cancer-specific survival as the state variable. An investigation of the cut-off value for the CONUT score using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve showed the most appropriate cut-off value for the CONUT score to be 3 (AUC; 0.624, 95%CI: 0.476–0.771, p = 0.076, the sensitivity was 0.5263 and the specificity was 0.7622.). We indicated the ROC curve on Fig 1. Therefore, we set 3 as the cut-off value for the CONUT score in this study and classified the patients into high CONUT (≥3) and low CONUT (≤2) groups.
The relationships between the CONUT score and PNI and the clinical background of the patients.
| The CONUT score | PNI | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High (N = 54) | Low(N = 150) | p-value | ≥40 (N = 177) | <40 (N = 27) | p-value | |
| Sex | ||||||
| Male | 27 | 85 | 0.7110 | 101 | 11 | 0.1131 |
| Female | 27 | 65 | 76 | 16 | ||
| Age (years) | ||||||
| mean ± SD | 66.09±9.23 | 71.13±11.57 | 0.0001 | 66.37±9.99 | 74.33±8.15 | 0.0001 |
| Tumor location | ||||||
| Colon | 41 | 87 | 0.0169 | 106 | 22 | 0.0224 |
| Rectum | 13 | 63 | 71 | 5 | ||
| Tumor size (cm) | ||||||
| mean ± SD | 5.05±0.26 | 4.38±0.15 | 0.1068 | 4.47±1.80 | 5.09±2.35 | 0.2611 |
| Depth of tumor invasion | ||||||
| T1,2,3 | 32 | 105 | 0.1539 | 120 | 17 | 0.6213 |
| T4 | 22 | 45 | 57 | 10 | ||
| Lymph node metastasis | ||||||
| Negative | 30 | 89 | 0.6298 | 104 | 15 | 0.7539 |
| Positive | 24 | 61 | 73 | 12 | ||
| Lymphatic vessel invasion | ||||||
| Negative | 14 | 40 | 0.9266 | 46 | 8 | 0.6834 |
| Positive | 38 | 105 | 125 | 18 | ||
| Venous invasion | ||||||
| Negative | 44 | 116 | 0.4573 | 138 | 22 | 0.6267 |
| Positive | 8 | 29 | 33 | 4 | ||
| Adjuvant chemotherapy | ||||||
| No | 31 | 66 | 0.0907 | 77 | 20 | 0.0030 |
| Yes | 23 | 84 | 100 | 7 | ||
| Complications | ||||||
| No | 44 | 120 | 0.8141 | 145 | 19 | 0.1591 |
| Yes | 10 | 30 | 32 | 8 | ||
CONUT: controlling nutritional status; PNI: prognostic nutritional index; SD: Standard deviation
The distribution according to the CONUT score/PNI and the five-year survival rate.
| The CONUT score | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Low | High | ||
| PNI | Low | 0 | 27 (71.2%) |
| High | 150 (92.7%) | 27 (89.1%) | |
Number (five-year cancer-specific survival rate, %), (p<0.0001)
CONUT: controlling nutritional status; PNI: prognostic nutritional index
Fig 2The Kaplan-Mayer survival curves for the relapse-free survival (RFS).
A) The survival curves according to the CONUT score. The relapse-free survival rates were significantly worse in the high CONUT group compared to the low CONUT group (p = 0.0018). B) The survival curves according to the PNI. The relapse-free survival rates were significantly worse in the low PNI group compared to the high PNI group (p = 0.0162).
Fig 3The Kaplan-Mayer survival curves for the cancer-specific survival (CSS).
A) The survival curves according to the controlling nutritional status (CONUT) score. The cancer-specific survival rates were significantly worse in the high CONUT group compared to the low CONUT group (p = 0.0016). B) The survival curves according to the prognostic nutritional index (PNI). The cancer-specific survival rates were significantly worse in the low PNI group compared to the high PNI group (p = 0.0155).
The results of the univariate and multivariate analyses of the prognostic factors for the relapse-free survival (RFS).
| Univariate | Multivariate | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95%CI | p-value | OR | 95%CI | p-value | |
| Sex (male) | 1.718 | 1.027–3.960 | 0.0391 | 2.135 | 1.177–4.036 | 0.0121 |
| Age (≥70) | 2.193 | 1.326–3.689 | 0.0022 | 1.864 | 1.009–3.482 | 0.0469 |
| Tumor locatiom (rectum) | 1.778 | 0.851–3.963 | 0.1280 | |||
| Tumor size (≥4.0cm) | 1.019 | 0.600–1.692 | 0.9415 | |||
| Depth of tumor invasion (T4) | 1.479 | 0.885–2.440 | 0.1335 | 1.548 | 0.812–3.020 | 0.1861 |
| Lymphatic vessel invasion (positive) | 2.085 | 1.102–4.369 | 0.0225 | 1.838 | 0.832–4.643 | 0.1379 |
| Venous invasion (positive) | 2.332 | 1.320–3.974 | 0.0043 | 2.069 | 1.051–3.955 | 0.0359 |
| Lymph node metastasis (positive) | 2.167 | 1.313–3.623 | 0.0025 | 1.783 | 0.929–3.470 | 0.0822 |
| Preoperative CEA (>5ng/ml) | 1.268 | 0.762–2.097 | 0.3576 | 1.137 | 0.628–2.117 | 0.6750 |
| PreoperativeCA19-9 (>37U/ml) | 3.080 | 1.554–5.645 | 0.0021 | 2.816 | 1.252–5.997 | 0.0134 |
| Adjuvant chemotherapy (No) | 1.277 | 0.774–2.137 | 0.3394 | 1.002 | 0.508–2.013 | 0.9952 |
| The CONUT score (≥3) | 2.210 | 1.307–3.662 | 0.0036 | 1.836 | 0.844–3.713 | 0.1206 |
| PNI (<40) | 2.130 | 1.082–3.867 | 0.0301 | 1.011 | 0.384–2.600 | 0.9825 |
OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval; CEA: carcinoembryonic antigen; CA19-9: carbohydrate antigen 19–9; CONUT: controlling Nutritional status; PNI: prognostic nutritional index
The results of the univariate and multivariate analyses of the prognostic factors for the cancer-specific survival (CSS).
| univarate | multivariate | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95%CI | p-value | OR | 95%CI | p-value | |
| Sex(male) | 1.297 | 0.521–3.489 | 0.5820 | |||
| Age (≥70) | 2.435 | 0.977–6.560 | 0.0563 | |||
| Tumor location (rectum) | 1.081 | 0.324–3.764 | 0.8982 | |||
| Tumor size (≥4.0cm) | 0.783 | 0.311–1.944 | 0.5950 | |||
| Depth of tumor invasion (T4) | 1.325 | 0.513–3.275 | 0.5487 | 1.140 | 0.409–3.279 | 0.8017 |
| Lymphatic vessel invasion (positive) | 2.067 | 0.688–8.890 | 0.2118 | |||
| Venous invasion (positive) | 1.640 | 0.530–4.290 | 0.3630 | |||
| Lymph node metastasis (positive) | 4.390 | 1.677–13.601 | 0.0022 | 3.680 | 1.106–14.914 | 0.0330 |
| Preoperative CEA (>5ng/ml) | 1.514 | 0.591–3.879 | 0.3807 | 0.934 | 0.319–2.928 | 0.9027 |
| Preoperative CA19-9 (>37U/ml) | 3.734 | 1.197–9.910 | 0.0256 | 2.405 | 0.670–7.614 | 0.1687 |
| Adjuvant chemotherapy (No) | 2.417 | 0.924–7.487 | 0.0733 | 2.208 | 0.645–8.972 | 0.2139 |
| The CONUT score (≥3) | 3.839 | 1.546–9.673 | 0.0043 | 4.212 | 1.215–13.350 | 0.0251 |
| PNI (<40) | 3.300 | 1.063–8.634 | 0.0400 | 1.119 | 0.271–4.330 | 0.8700 |
OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval; CEA: carcinoembryonic antigen; CA19-9: carbohydrate antigen 19–9; CONUT: controlling Nutritional Status; PNI: prognostic nutritional index
The results of univariate analysis of the albmin, total cholesterol level and total peripheral lymphocytes count for the survival.
| Relapse free survival | Cancer specific survival | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95%CI | p-value | OR | 95%CI | p-value | |
| Albumin (<3.5g/dL) | 2.013 | 1.105–3.481 | 0.0235 | 2.889 | 1.013–7.300 | 0.0475 |
| Total cholesterol level (<168mg/dL) | 1.783 | 1.049–2.963 | 0.0332 | 2.339 | 0.903–5.798 | 0.0784 |
| Total peripheral lymphocyte count (<1170mm3) | 1.431 | 0.744–2.558 | 0.2681 | 4.003 | 1.548–9.905 | 0.0054 |
OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval; CONUT: controlling Nutritional Status
The results of the multivariate analysis of the association between the CONUT score and the albumin level with relapse-free survival and cancer-specific survival.
| Relapse-free survival | Cancer-specific survival | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95%CI | p-value | OR | 95%CI | p-value | |
| CONUT (≥3) | 2.04 | 0.962–3.989 | 0.0621 | 3.637 | 1.071–10.915 | 0.0393 |
| Albumin (<3.5) | 1.141 | 0.524–2.555 | 0.741 | 1.102 | 0.322–3.945 | 0.8764 |
OR: odds ratio; CI: Confidence interval.
The results of the multivariate analysis of the association between the CONUT score and the total cholesterol level with relapse-free survival and cancer-specific survival.
| Relapse-free survival | Cancer-specific survival | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95%CI | p-value | OR | 95%CI | p-value | |
| CONUT (≥3) | 1.966 | 1.127–3.363 | 0.0178 | 3.327 | 1.242–8.952 | 0.8017 |
| Total cholesterol level (<168mg/dL) | 1.440 | 0.821–2.474 | 0.1996 | 1.488 | 0.539–3.977 | 0.4340 |
OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval: CONUT: controlling nutritional status.
The results of the multivariate analysis of the association between the CONUT score and the total peripheral lymphocyte count with relapse-free survival and the cancer-specific survival.
| Relapse-free survival | Cancer-specific survival | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95%CI | p-value | OR | 95%CI | p-value | |
| CONUT (≥3) | 2.374 | 1.289–4.219 | 0.0062 | 2.513 | 0.825–7.449 | 0.104 |
| Total peripheral lymphocyte count (<1170) | 0.848 | 0.407–1.689 | 0.6452 | 2.332 | 0.767–7.106 | 0.1343 |
OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval; CONUT: controlling nutritional status