| Literature DB >> 31468203 |
Christine Bekos1, Stephan Polterauer2,3, Veronika Seebacher1, Thomas Bartl1, Elmar Joura1, Alexander Reinthaller1,4, Alina Sturdza5, Reinhard Horvat6, Richard Schwameis1, Christoph Grimm1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Hypoalbuminemia, a known marker for malnutrition, has been associated with an increased risk for perioperative morbidity and poor prognosis in patients with solid tumors. The aim of this study was to investigate the prognostic and predictive value of pre-treatment serum albumin levels for survival and postoperative complications in patients with vulvar cancer undergoing surgery.Entities:
Keywords: Albumin; Complication; Hypoalbuminemia; Prognosis; Vulvar cancer
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31468203 PMCID: PMC6759670 DOI: 10.1007/s00404-019-05278-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arch Gynecol Obstet ISSN: 0932-0067 Impact factor: 2.344
Patients' characteristics in 103 patients with vulvar cancer
| Parameter | |
|---|---|
| Total number of patients enrolled | 103 |
| Age at diagnosis (years) | 69.04 (13.97) |
| ECOG status | |
| 0 | 40 (38.8%) |
| 1 | 26 (25.2%) |
| 2 | 5 (4.9%) |
| 3 | 4 (3.9%) |
| Unknown | 28 (27.2%) |
| BMI | 28.34 (5.10) |
| Histological type | |
| Squamous cell carcinoma | 97 (94.2%) |
| Others | 6 (5.8%) |
| Histological grade | |
| G1 | 24 (23.3%) |
| G2 | 63 (61.2%) |
| G3 | 16 (15.5%) |
| Tumor stage | |
| FIGO IA | 17 (16.5%) |
| FIGO IB | 45 (43.7%) |
| FIGO II | 10 (9.7%) |
| FIGO IIIA | 13 (12.6%) |
| FIGO IIIB | 9 (8.7%) |
| FIGO IIIC | 5 (4.9%) |
| FIGO IVA | 4 (3.9%) |
| Treatment—surgery | |
| Radical local excision | 35 (34.0%) |
| Modified radical hemivulvectomy | 18 (17.5%) |
| Modified radical posterior vulvectomy | 10 (9.7%) |
| Modified radical anterior vulvectomy | 31 (30.1%) |
| Radical vulvectomy | 9 (8.7%) |
| Lymphadenectomy—surgery | |
| No lymphadenectomy | 20 (19.4%) |
| Unilateral lymph node dissection | 24 (23.3%) |
| Bilateral lymph node dissection | 59 (57.3%) |
| Systematic lymph node dissection (per groin) | 66 (46.5%) |
| Sentinel lymph node dissection (per groin) | 76 (53.5%) |
| Lymph node involvement | |
| Negative or not evaluated | 75 (72.8%) |
| Positive | 28 (27.2%) |
| Recurrence status | |
| No. of patients with recurrent disease | 37 (35.9%) |
| Type of recurrence | |
| Local | 28 (27.2%) |
| Distant | 8 (7.7%) |
| Mean time to recurrent disease (months) | 35.43 (34.80) |
| Status at last observation | |
| Alive with no evidence of disease or stable disease | 56 (54.4%) |
| Progressive disease | 5 (4.9%) |
| Tumor related death | 22 (21.4%) |
| Dead as a result of other causes | 20 (19.4%) |
| Mean time of follow-up (months) | 44.08 (37.10) |
SD standard deviation, FIGO International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, CDC Clavien–Dindo Classification
Relationship between clinico-pathological parameters and serum albumin in 103 patients with vulvar cancer
| Albumin ≤ 35 mg/dl | Albumin > 35 mg/dl | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Tumor stage | 0.577 | ||
| FIGO I | 4 (44.4%) | 58 (61.7%) | |
| FIGO II | 1 (11.1%) | 9 (9.6%) | |
| FIGO III and IV | 4 (44.4%) | 27 (28.7%) | |
| Lymph node involvement | 0.664 | ||
| Negative or not evaluated | 6 (66.7%) | 69 (73.4%) | |
| Positive | 3 (33.3%) | 25 (26.6%) | |
| Age at first diagnosis (years) | 0.214 | ||
| ≤ 69.04 | 2 (22.2%) | 41 (43.6%) | |
| > 69.04 | 7 (77.8%) | 56 (56.4%) | |
| ECOG | 0.324 | ||
| Unknown | 2 (22.2%) | 26 (28.7%) | |
| 0–1 | 5 (55.6%) | 61 (64.9%) | |
| 2–3 | 2 (22.2%) | 7 (7.4%) | |
| Histological grade | 0.158 | ||
| G1 | 3 (33.3%) | 21 (22.3%) | |
| G2 | 3 (33.3%) | 60 (63.8%) | |
| G3 | 3 (33.3%) | 13 (13.8%) | |
| Histological type | 0.479 | ||
| Squamous cell carcinoma | 8 (88.9%) | 89 (94.7%) | |
| Others | 1 (11.1%) | 5 (5.3%) |
FIGO International Federation of Gynecologists and Obstetricians, ECOG Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group) performance status
1Chi-square test
Numbers of postoperative complications classified according to Clavien–Dindo-Classification (CDC) broken down by pre-operative serum albumin levels (103 patients)
| Perioperative complications (CDC) | Albumin ≤ 35 mg/dl | Albumin > 35 mg/dl | Complete cohort |
|---|---|---|---|
| None | 4 (44.4%) | 57 (60.6%) | 61 (59.2%) |
| Grade 1 | 2 (22.2%) | 17 (18.1%) | 19 (18.4%) |
| Grade 2 | 3 (33.3%) | 16 (17.0%) | 19 (18.4%) |
| Grade 3a | 0 (0%) | 1 (1.1%) | 1 (1.0%) |
| Grade 3b | 0 (0%) | 2 (2.1%) | 2 (1.9%) |
| Grade 4 | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
| Grade 5 | 0 (0%) | 1 (1.1%) | 1 (1.0%) |
| Total | 9 | 94 | 103 |
Multivariate regression analysis of prognostic factors for complications (CDC 1–5), N = 102
| Variable | CDC 1–5 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95% CI | ||
| Age (years) | |||
| ≤ 69.04 | 1 | ||
| > 69.04 | 0.75 | 0.27–2.04 | 0.563 |
| Albumin (mg/dl) | |||
| > 35 | 1 | ||
| ≤ 35 | 0.24 | 0.04–1.45 | 0.119 |
| ECOG-status | |||
| 0 | 1 | ||
| > 0 | 0.65 | 0.24–1.73 | 0.387 |
| Lymphadenectomy | |||
| No | 1 | ||
| Yes | 4.22 | 1.04–17.05 | 0.043 |
FIGO International Federation of Gynecologists and Obstetricians, ECOG (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group) performance status
Univariate and multivariate overall survival analyses in 103 patients with vulvar cancer
| Overall survival | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Univariatea | Multivariateb | |||
| 5 year OS rate | HR (95% CI) | |||
| Serum albumin (≤ 35 mg/dl vs. > 35 mg/dl) | 0.004 | 17.1% vs. 58.6% | 0.023 | 0.3 (0.1–0.8) |
| FIGO stage (I vs. II vs. III–IV) | 0.003 | 63.8% vs. 64.3% vs. 34.3% | 0.009 | 1.6 (1.1–2.3) |
| Patients’ age (< 69.04 vs. ≥ 69.04 years) | 0.003 | 79.2% vs. 36.6% | 0.015 | 2.4 (1.2–4.8) |
| Histological grade (G1 vs. G2 vs. G3) | 0.574 | 68.2% vs. 54.0% vs. 45.5% | 0.642 | 1.1 (0.7–2.0) |
| Type of surgery (local vs. radical) | 0.463 | 54.3% vs. 56.5% | 0.491 | 0.8 (0.4–1.5) |
| Type of Histology (squamous cell vs. others) | 0.753 | 55.1% vs. 50.0% | 0.129 | 0.3 (0.1–1.5) |
HR hazard ratio, 95% CI 95% confidence interval, OS overall survival
aLog rank test
bMultivariate Cox-regression analysis
Patients' characteristics in nine vulvar cancer patients with hypoalbuminemia
| PAT ID | Age | BMI | ASA | FIGO | N | OP | LNE | RT | Complication rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 80 | n.a | 3 | III | Pos | Radical local excision | Systematic bilateral | Yes | CDC 1 |
| 2 | 33 | n.a | 1 | III | Pos | Radical local excision | Systematic bilateral | Yes | CDC 1 |
| 3 | 86 | 18 | 4 | I | Neg | Radical local excision | SLN unilateral | No | CDC 2 |
| 4 | 79 | 31.4 | 4 | II | Neg | Modified radical ant vulvectomy | SLN unilateral | No | CDC 2 |
| 5 | 70 | 25.4 | 2 | III | Pos | Radical local excision | Systematic bilateral | Yes | CDC2 |
| 6 | 80 | 26.5 | 2 | I | Neg | Radical local excision | No | No | No |
| 7 | 79 | n.a | 2 | I | Neg | Modified radical anterior vulvectomy | Systematic bilateral | No | No |
| 8 | 65 | n.a | n.a | III | Neg | Radical local excision | No | Yes | No |
| 9 | 83 | n.a | n.a | I | Neg | Modified radical ant vulvectomy | SLN bilateral | No | No |
BMI body mass index, ASA American Society of Anesthesiologists, N nodal status, LNE lymphadenectomy, RT radiotherapy, n.a. not available, SLN sentinel lymph node
Fig. 1Kaplan–Meier overall survival curves in patients with vulvar cancer distributed by pre-therapeutic serum albumin levels