| Literature DB >> 30837449 |
Xiaoliang Huang1, Jungang Liu1, Guo Wu1, Shaomei Chen1, Franco Jeen Pc1, Weishun Xie1, Weizhong Tang1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND In colorectal cancer (CRC), perineural invasion (PNI) is usually identified histologically in biopsy or resection specimens and is considered a high-risk feature for recurrence of CRC and is an indicator for adjuvant therapy. Preoperative identification of PNI could help determine the need for adjuvant therapy and the approach to surgical resection. This study aimed to develop and validate a nomogram for the preoperative prediction of PNI in patients with CRC. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 664 patients with CRC from a single center were classified into a training dataset (n=468) and a validation dataset (n=196). The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression model was used to select potentially relevant features. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to develop the nomogram. The performance of the nomogram was assessed based on its calibration, discrimination, and clinical utility. RESULTS The nomogram consisted of five clinical features and provided good calibration and discrimination in the training dataset, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.704 (95% CI, 0.657-0.751). Application of the nomogram in the validation cohort showed acceptable discrimination, with the AUC of 0.692 (95% CI, 0.617-0.766) and good calibration. Decision curve analysis (DCA) showed that the nomogram was clinically useful. CONCLUSIONS The nomogram developed in this study might allow clinicians to predict the risk of PNI in patients with CRC preoperatively. The nomogram showed favorable discrimination and calibration values, which may help optimize preoperative treatment decision-making for patients with CRC.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30837449 PMCID: PMC6415589 DOI: 10.12659/MSM.914900
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Med Sci Monit ISSN: 1234-1010
Clinicopathologic characteristics of the patients with colorectal cancer (CRC).
| Characteristics | Training set (n = 468) | Validation set (n = 196) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PNI-positive n (%) | PNI-negative n (%) | P-value | PNI-positive n (%) | PNI-negative n (%) | P-value | |
| Age | 0.61 | 0.65 | ||||
| Median (IQR) (year) | 59 (49.75, 67) | 60 (51, 67) | 63 (53, 70.5) | 62 (52, 68) | ||
| Gender | 0.83 | 0.11 | ||||
| Male | 137 (51.7) | 128 (48.3) | 63 (50.8) | 61 (49.2) | ||
| Female | 107 (52.7) | 96 (47.3) | 28 (38.9) | 44 (61.1) | ||
| BMI | 0.30 | 0.86 | ||||
| Median (IQR) (kg/m2) | 21.54 (19.89, 23.75) | 22.08 (19.98,2 4.14) | 21.87 (19.65, 24.05) | 22.31 (20.49, 23.71) | ||
| Primary site | 0.88 | 0.73 | ||||
| Rectum | 116 (51.8) | 108 (48.2) | 43 (47.8) | 47 (52.2) | ||
| Colon | 128 (52.5) | 116 (47.5) | 48 (45.3) | 58 (54.7) | ||
| Weight loss | ||||||
| Median (IQR) (kg) | 0 (0, 3) | 0 (0, 2) | 0.0047 | 0 (0, 5) | 0 (0, 3) | 0.042 |
| FDR tumor history | 0.009 | 0.62 | ||||
| Yes | 33 (39.3) | 51 (60.7) | 24 (43.6) | 31 (56.4) | ||
| No | 211 (54.9) | 173 (45.124) | 67 (47.5) | 74 (52.5) | ||
| CT T-stage | 0.031 | 0.082 | ||||
| T1–T2 | 23 (39.0) | 36 (61.0) | 6 (28.6) | 15 (71.4) | ||
| T3–T4 | 221 (54.0) | 188 (46.0) | 85 (48.6) | 90 (51.4) | ||
| CT N-stage | 0.004 | 0.001 | ||||
| N0 | 120 (46.2) | 140 (53.8) | 40 (36.0) | 71 (64.0) | ||
| N1–N2 | 124 (59.6) | 84 (40.4) | 51 (60.0) | 34 (40.0) | ||
| Differentiation (endoscopic biopsy) | 9.65×10−8 | 0.002 | ||||
| Well | 2 (10.0) | 18 (90.0) | 0 (0.0) | 5 (100.0) | ||
| Moderately | 185 (49.6) | 188 (50.4) | 72 (43.9) | 92 (56.1) | ||
| Poorly | 57 (76.0) | 18 (24.0) | 19 (70.4) | 8 (29.6) | ||
| Tumor gross type | 0.028 | 0.195 | ||||
| Ulceration | 136 (58.9) | 95 (41.1) | 56 (52.8) | 50 (47.2) | ||
| Infiltrative | 16 (53.3) | 14 (46.7) | 4 (30.8) | 9 (69.2) | ||
| Ulceration and Infiltrative | 11 (42.3) | 15 (57.7) | 6 (42.9) | 8 (57.1) | ||
| Protruded | 78 (44.1) | 99 (55.9) | 24 (38.7) | 38 (61.3) | ||
| Other | 3 (75.0) | 1 (25.0) | 1 (100.0) | 0 (0.0) | ||
| CEA | ||||||
| Median (IQR) (ng/ml) | 3.14 (1.82, 7.91) | 2.88 (1.64, 6.11) | 0.28 | 2.90 (1.71, 6.30) | 2.60 (1.71, 6.61) | 0.69 |
Weight loss during the three months before diagnosis;
P<0.05.
IQR – interquartile range; FDR – first-degree relative; BMI – body mass index; CEA – carcinoembryonic antigen.
Figure 1Feature selection using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) logistic regression. (A) Tuning parameter (λ) selection in the LASSO logistic regression performed using 10-fold cross-validation via the minimum criteria. The binomial deviance is plotted versus log (λ). The black vertical lines are plotted at the optimal λ based on the minimum criteria and 1 standard error for the minimum criteria. (B) The LASSO coefficient profiles of the 114 clinical features. A coefficient profile plot is produced versus the log (λ).
Multivariate logistic regression analysis of the selected clinical features in the training set.
| Variable | Odds ratio (95% CI) | P-value |
|---|---|---|
| Differentiation (biopsy) | ||
| Well | 1 | |
| Moderately | 6.66 (1.85–42.73) | 0.013* |
| Poorly | 21.42 (5.35–145.17) | 1.36×10−4* |
| CT N-stage | ||
| N0 | 1 | |
| N1/N2 | 1.46 (0.99–2.16) | 0.058 |
| FDR tumor history | ||
| Yes | 1 | |
| No | 1.85 (1.11–3.11) | 0.018* |
| Gross tumor appearance | ||
| Ulcerating | 1 | |
| Infiltrative | 0.58 (0.25–1.32) | 0.19 |
| Ulceration & infiltration | 0.40 (0.16–0.96) | 0.042* |
| Polypoid | 0.55 (0.36–0.84) | 0.0054* |
| Other | 1.58 (0.17–33.58) | 0.70 |
| Weight loss (kg) | 0.088 (0.013–0.34) | 0.013* |
FDR – first-degree relative; CRC – colorectal cancer.
Figure 2The nomogram for preoperative prediction of perineural invasion (PNI) in colorectal cancer (CRC). Points are assigned for differentiation, computed tomography-based N status, first-degree relative (FDR) tumor history, weight loss during the three months before diagnosis and gross tumor type. The score for each value is assigned by drawing a line upward to the Points line, and the sum of the five scores is plotted on the Total points line (probability of PNI).
Figure 3The performance of the nomogram in the training dataset. (A) The calibration plot of the nomogram in the training dataset. The x-axis is the nomogram-predicted probability of perineural invasion (PNI) and the y-axis is the actual rate of PNI. The reference line is 45° and indicates perfect calibration. (B) The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of the nomogram in the training dataset.
Figure 4The performance of the nomogram in the validation dataset. (A) The calibration plot of the nomogram in the validation dataset. The x-axis is the nomogram-predicted probability of perineural invasion (PNI) and the y-axis is the actual rate of PNI. The reference line is 45° and indicates perfect calibration. (B) The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of the nomogram in the validation dataset.
Figure 5The decision curve analysis (DCA) for the nomogram. The net benefit was plotted versus the threshold probability. The dotted line represents the nomogram. The gray line represents the treat-all-patients scheme and the black line represents the treat-none scheme.