| Literature DB >> 31366905 |
Richard Schwameis1, Magdalena Postl1, Christine Bekos1, Lukas Hefler2,3, Alexander Reinthaller1,4, Veronika Seebacher1, Christoph Grimm5, Stephan Polterauer1,4, Samir Helmy-Bader1.
Abstract
Vulvar cancer is a rare malignancy with poor prognosis that generally occurs in elderly patients. The individual prognosis is difficult to assess. Serum creatinine levels are frequently elevated in elderly patients. Recent evidence have shown shown that - besides indicating kidney impairment - serum creatinine levels may be used to predict the survival in cancer patients. Several studies observed an association between elevated serum creatinine levels and poor prognosis in patients with solid tumors. In this retrospective cohort study, serum creatinine levels were evaluated in 170 patients with invasive vulvar cancer. Serum creatinine levels were correlated to established clinicopathologic factors. Univariate and multivariate survival analysis were performed. Elevated serum creatinine levels (>1.2 mg/dl) were significantly associated with both poor disease specific and overall survival. Three year overall survival rates were 74.8% and 32.5% for patients with serum creatinine levels of ≤ and >1.2 mg/dl, respectively. In a multivariate survival model, serum creatinine levels were significantly associated with overall survival independent of tumor stage and patients' age. In conclusion, pretherapeutic serum creatinine levels may be useful as an independent prognostic parameter in patients with vulvar cancer.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31366905 PMCID: PMC6668438 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-47560-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Study patient characteristics.
| Parameter | N (%) or mean (SD) |
|---|---|
| No. of patients | 170 |
| Mean creatinine value | 0.91 (0.28) |
| Patients’ age | 67.7 (14.0) |
| FIGO Tumor stage | |
| FIGO I | 95 (55.9) |
| FIGO II | 30 (17.6) |
| FIGO III | 32 (18.8) |
| FIGO IV | 13 (7.6) |
| Histologic Grading | |
| G1 | 42 (24.7) |
| G2 | 97 (57.1) |
| G3 | 29 (17.1) |
| unknown | 2 (1.2) |
| Nodal involvement | |
| N0 | 90 (52.9) |
| N1 | 56 (32.9) |
| Not assessed | 20 (11.8) |
| unknown | 4 (2.4) |
| ECOG status | |
| 0 | 92 (54.1) |
| 1 | 48 (28.2) |
| 2 | 13 (7.6) |
| 3 | 5 (2.9) |
| unknown | 12 (7.1) |
| BMI | 28.0 (6.9) |
| Metastatic disease | |
| M0 | 163 (95.9) |
| M1 | 7 (4.1) |
| Time of follow-up (months) | 26.5 (IQR 10–62)* |
| Status at last observation | |
| Alive with no evidence of disease | 94 (55.3) |
| Alive with stable disease | 4 (2.4) |
| Progression | 13 (7.6) |
| Deceased | 59 (34.7) |
*Given as median and interquartile range.
FIGO International Federation of Gynecologists and Obstetrics, ECOG European cooperative oncology group.
Mean (SD) pre-treatment serum creatinine levels in patients with vulva cancer categorized by clinico-pathologic findings.
| Parameter | Mean Creatinine (mg/dl) | p-value | Missing values |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | <0.001a | 0 | |
| ≤67.7 | 0.79 (0.16) | ||
| >67.7 | 0.99 (0.33) | ||
| Tumor stage | 0.49b | 0 | |
| FIGO I | 0.90 (0.28) | ||
| FIGO II | 0.97 (0.34) | ||
| FIGO III | 0.87 (0.20) | ||
| FIGO IV | 0.86 (0.36) | ||
| Grading | 0.02a | 2 | |
| G1 | 0.73 (0.44) | ||
| G2-3 | 0.88 (0.32) | ||
| Nodal involvement | 0.44a | 4 | |
| N0 | 0.89 (0.25) | ||
| N1 | 0.93 (0.30) | ||
| Performance Status | |||
| 0 | 0.88 (0.22) | <0.001b | 12 |
| 1 | 0.86 (0.22) | ||
| 2 | 1.15 (0.43) | ||
| 3 | 1.35 (0.77) | ||
astudents’ t-test, bOne-way Anova, FIGO International Federation of Gynecologists and Obstetrics, ECOG European cooperative oncology group.
Univariate and multivariate overall survival analysis in 170 patients with invasive vulvar cancer.
| Parameter | univariate | multivariate | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3-ys OS | p-value | Comparison | HR | 95%-CI | p-value | |
| Serum Creatinine | <0.001 | 2.6 | 1.3–5.3 | 0.006 | ||
| ≤1.20 | 74.8% | |||||
| >1.20 | 32.5% | |||||
| Serum Creatinine | 0.01 | |||||
| FIGO tumor stage | <0.001 | I vs. II vs. III vs. IV | 1.8 | 1.40–2.30 | <0.001 | |
| FIGO I | 82.1% | |||||
| FIGO II | 59.9% | |||||
| FIGO III | 50.4% | |||||
| FIGO IV | 52.7% | |||||
| Age | <0.001 | >vs. ≤ 66.5 years | 2.9 | 1.6–5.2 | <0.001 | |
| ≤67.7 | 82.3% | |||||
| >67.7 | 59.9% | |||||
| Grading | 0.64 | |||||
| G1 | 78.2% | |||||
| G2/G3 | 67.5% | |||||
| Nodal involvement | <0.001 | |||||
| N0 | 81.7% | |||||
| N1 | 51.7% | |||||
FIGO International Federation of Gynecologists and Obstetrics, OS disease specific survival, HR hazard ratio, CI confidence interval.
Nodal involvement was not included into the multivariate model, since the nodal status is a crucial part of FIGO stage.
Figure 1Kaplan–Meier analysis of overall survival of patients with vulvar cancer dependent on serum creatinine level using a cut-off of 1.2 mg/dI.
Figure 2Kaplan–Meier analysis of disease specific of patients with vulvar cancer dependent on serum creatinine level using a cut-off of 1.2 mg/dI.
Univariate and multivariate disease specific survival analysis in 170 patients with invasive vulvar cancer.
| Parameter | univariate | multivariate | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3-ys DSS | p-value | Comparison | HR | 95%-CI | p-value | |
| Serum Creatinine | <0.001 | >vs. ≤ 1.2 mg/dl | 3.8 | 1.6–9.0 | 0.002 | |
| ≤1.20 | 85.1% | |||||
| >1.20 | 42.8% | |||||
| Serum Creatinine | 0.005 | |||||
| FIGO tumor stage | <0.001 | I vs. II vs. III vs. IV | 2.0 | 1.5–2.8 | <0.001 | |
| FIGO I | 93.6% | |||||
| FIGO II | 59.9% | |||||
| FIGO III | 63.1% | |||||
| FIGO IV | 72.5% | |||||
| Age | 0.014 | >vs. ≤ 67.7 years | 2.3 | 1.0–5.0 | 0.038 | |
| ≤67.7 | 86.7% | |||||
| >67.7 | 76.5% | |||||
| Grading | 0.07 | |||||
| G1 | 89.2% | |||||
| G2/3 | 78.6% | |||||
| Nodal involvement | <0.001 | |||||
| N0 | 92.1% | |||||
| N1 | 60.7% | |||||
FIGO International Federation of Gynecologists and Obstetrics, DSS disease specific survival, HR hazard ratio, CI confidence interval.
Nodal involvement was not included into the multivariate model, since the nodal status is a crucial part of FIGO stage.