Literature DB >> 32611346

Hypernatremia at admission predicts poor survival in patients with terminal cancer: a retrospective cohort study.

Min-Seok Seo1,2, In Cheol Hwang3, Jaehun Jung4, Hwanhee Lee5, Jae Hee Choi5, Jae-Yong Shim2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although palliative care providers, patients, and their families rely heavily on accurate prognostication, the prognostic value of electrolyte imbalance has received little attention.
METHODS: As a retrospective review, we screened inpatients with terminal cancer admitted between January 2017 and May 2019 to a single hospice-palliative care unit. Clinical characteristics and laboratory results were obtained from medical records for multivariable Cox regression analysis of independent prognostic factors.
RESULTS: Of the 487 patients who qualified, 15 (3%) were hypernatremic upon admission. The median survival time was 26 days. Parameters associated with shortened survival included male sex, advanced age (> 70 years), lung cancer, poor performance status, elevated inflammatory markers, azotemia, impaired liver function, and hypernatremia. In a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model, male sex (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.53, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.15-2.04), poor performance status (HR = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.09-1.94), leukocytosis (HR = 1.98, 95% CI: 1.47-2.66), hypoalbuminemia (HR = 2.06, 95% CI: 1.49-2.73), and hypernatremia (HR = 1.55, 95% CI: 1.18-2.03) emerged as significant predictors of poor prognosis.
CONCLUSION: Hypernatremia may be a useful gauge of prognosis in patients with terminal cancer. Further large-scale prospective studies are needed to corroborate this finding.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Electrolyte imbalance; Hypernatremia; Prognosis; Terminal cancer

Year:  2020        PMID: 32611346      PMCID: PMC7331249          DOI: 10.1186/s12904-020-00607-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMC Palliat Care        ISSN: 1472-684X            Impact factor:   3.234


Background

Accurately predicting the prognosis of patients with terminal cancer is helpful to guide clinical decisions and develop palliative care management plans. Over the past few decades, a number of studies have been conducted in this setting to identify patient-related prognostic factors, including performance status, anorexia-cachexia, delirium, and dyspnea [1]; and various laboratory abnormalities have similarly been identified. Serum markers of systemic inflammation (i.e., leukocytosis, lymphopenia, C-reactive protein [CRP] elevation, and inflammatory cytokines) are well-known indices of poor survival [2]. Biomarkers of hepatic dysfunction (elevated lactate dehydrogenase [LDH], prolonged international normalized ratio [INR], hypoalbuminemia) and renal impairment (serum urea, creatinine, and uric acid elevations) have also been implicated [2, 3]. Electrolyte abnormalities are common among terminal cancer patients and represent yet another significant means of predicting survival [4]. In an earlier study, 79% of such patients showed at least one electrolyte abnormality upon referral for palliative care [5]. Hyponatremia is the most frequent electrolyte disorder of patients with terminal cancer, having dire consequences [6]. Its early detection and proper correction may actually prolong median survival time [7]. In cancer patients, hypernatremia caused by various etiologies such as excessive gain of sodium due to inadequate fluid replacement, excessive loss of free water, the use of osmotic agents, decreased release of antidiuretic hormone (ADH) and renal dysfunction to ADH [8]. Although hypernatremia is otherwise rare in these patients, offering little opportunity for study, there is evidence that the prognostic ramifications are negative due to a failure of feedback to compensate the imbalance [9, 10]. Potassium imbalance is also a highly prevalent electrolyte disorder. In cancer patients, hypokalemia often presents in conjunction with hyponatremia and hypomagnesemia [4]. Previous studies suggested that hyperkalemia is a prognostically unfavorable determinant, but this view remains controversial [11, 12]. Research on the prognostic utility of other electrolyte disorders including hypercalcemia and hypermagnesemia, has also been inconclusive [5, 13]. The present study was undertaken to assess the prevalence of electrolyte imbalance in terminally ill cancer patients and, investigate the potential prognostic significance.

Methods

This retrospective study reviewed medical records of 515 patients admitted to the palliative care unit of Incheon regional cancer center between January 2017 and May 2019. All participants were terminally ill with cancer and were not expected to survive beyond 6 months based on the clinical assessment of a medical oncologist and surgeon [14]. Ultimately, 10 patients who lacked serum electrolyte data and 18 patients transferred from other medical institutions were excluded, leaving 487 patients eligible for the final analysis. Patients who had no survival information available due to discharge to home or other institutions were also censored (n = 19). The institutional review board of Gachon University Gil Medical Center approved this study (GCIRB2019–149), waiving the need for informed patient consent as designed. Electronic medical records provided the following patient data: age, sex, primary cancer site, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS), evidence of active infection, survival times, and laboratory diagnostic results. The ECOG-PS is a scale (0–4) used to assess physical ability. On day of admission, an experienced member of the palliative care team (physicians and registered nurses) scored each patient’s functionality. Survival time was defined as the period from admission-day blood testing (electrolytes included) until the day of death. Laboratory testing on day of admission included total white blood cell (WBC) count with differential, hemoglobin, platelet count, serum creatinine, serum albumin, total bilirubin, INR, CRP, serum sodium, and potassium. Active infection was determined based on the use of antibiotics. Descriptive data are expressed as medians and numbers of subjects. The Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank tests were invoked to measure differences in survival times across all patient characteristics, using Cox proportional hazards models to identify independent predictors of survival in univariable and multivariable analyses. Variables showing significance (P < 0.05) in univariable analysis were used in the final multivariable analysis. A two-tailed P < 0.05 was deemed significant. All computations were performed using standard software (Stata SE v9.2; StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA).

Results

A total of 487 patients (men: 268, 55%; women: 219, 45%) with terminal cancer qualified for study participation. Baseline clinical characteristics of the study population are shown in Table 1. Median age was 70 years. The most common type of malignancy was cancer of the gastrointestinal tract (127 patients, 26.1%), followed by hepatopancreatobiliary cancer (118 patients, 24.2%). ECOG-PS scores of 3 and 4 were recorded in 38.8 and 37.6% of patients, respectively. The median values of abnormal laboratory parameters were as follows: hemoglobin 10.1 g/dL, CRP 5.2 mg/dL, and sodium 134 mEq/L. The median survival time overall was 26 days.
Table 1

Characteristics of study participants (N = 487)

Median (IQR) or n (%)Reference range
Age, yrs70 (59–79)
Female sex219 (45.0)
Cancer site
 Gastrointestinal tract127 (26.1)
 Hepatobiliary/pancreatic118 (24.2)
 Lung108 (22.2)
 Urogenital tract57 (11.7)
 Others77 (15.8)
ECOG-PS
  ≤ 2115 (23.6)
 3189 (38.8)
 4183 (37.6)
Active infectiona164 (33.7)
Laboratory parameter
 White blood cells, 103/mm39.1 (6.3–12.7)3.8–10
 Neutrophils, %78.9 (72.0–85.7)50–75
 Lymphocytes, %11.2 (6.8–17.4)20–44
 Hemoglobin, g/dL10.1 (8.8–11.7)13–17
 Platelets, 103/mm3227 (154–323)150–400
 Creatinine, mg/dL0.8 (0.5–1.2)0.5–1.2
 Albumin, g/dL3.2 (2.8–3.7)3.5–5.2
 Total bilirubin, mg/dL0.7 (0.5–1.4)0.2–1.2
 PT/INR1.2 (1.1–1.3)0.8–1.2
 C-reactive protein, mg/dL5.2 (2.3–12.9)0–0.5
 Sodium, mEq/L134 (130–137)135–145
 Potassium, mEq/L4.2 (3.8–4.6)3.5–5.5
Censoredb19 (3.9)
Survival time, days26 (14–45)

ECOG-PS Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, IQR interquartile range, PT/INR prothrombin time/international normalized ratio

aDetermined by the use of antibiotics

bNo available information for survival by discharge or transfer

Characteristics of study participants (N = 487) ECOG-PS Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, IQR interquartile range, PT/INR prothrombin time/international normalized ratio aDetermined by the use of antibiotics bNo available information for survival by discharge or transfer Table 2 shows the survival time according to participant characteristics. Advanced age (> 70 years), male sex, lung cancer, poor performance status, leukocytosis, neutrophilia, lymphopenia, thrombocytopenia, azotemia, hypoalbuminemia, hyperbilirubinemia, prolonged prothrombin time (PT)-INR, elevated CRP, and hypernatremia were associated with significantly shorter median survival time.
Table 2

Survival time in relation to patient characteristics

nMedian survival, days (95% CI)Pb
Age, years
  < 7023229 (13–52)0.003
  ≥ 7025524 (14–40)
Sex
 Female21929 (13–48)0.035
 Male26824 (14–40)
Cancer site
 Gastrointestinal tract12729 (14–47)0.012
 Hepatobiliary/pancreatic11824 (13–33)
 Lung10822 (12–41)
 Urogenital tract5727 (13–55)
 Others7735 (19–47)
ECOG-PS
  ≤ 211530 (18–50)0.012
 318927 (14–48)
 418323 (11–40)
Active infection
 No32227 (12–46)0.558
 Yes16425 (14–38)
Leukocytosis
 No27931 (15–52)< 0.001
 Yes20822 (11–34)
Neutrophilia
 No17331 (18–55)< 0.001
 Yes31424 (12–39)
Lymphopenia
 No9036 (19–60)< 0.001
 Yes39725 (13–41)
Anemia
 No5625 (13–45)0.707
 Yes43126 (14–45)
Thrombocytopenia
 No37128 (14–47)0.020
 Yes11620 (11–36)
Azotemia
 No36728 (14–46)0.011
 Yes12020 (12–38)
Hypoalbuminemia
 No17635 (20–60)< 0.001
 Yes31120 (11–37)
Hyperbilirubinemia
 No34129 (15–48)< 0.001
 Yes14519 (10–32)
PT/INR prolongation
 No25929 (16–51)< 0.001
 Yes20020 (10–34)
C-reactive proteina
 Low23929 (14–52)0.007
 High23322 (12–38)
Sodium level
 Within normal range21928 (14–49)< 0.001
 Hyponatremia25325 (13–43)
 Hypernatremia156 (3–28)
Potassium level
 Within normal range39427 (14–46)0.118
 Hypokalemia6526 (13–43)
 Hyperkalemia2819 (10–27)

CI confidence interval, ECOG-PS Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, PT/INR prothrombin time/international normalized ratio

aMedian value applied

bLog-rank test

Survival time in relation to patient characteristics CI confidence interval, ECOG-PS Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, PT/INR prothrombin time/international normalized ratio aMedian value applied bLog-rank test Kaplan-Meier survival curves plotted by serum sodium level are depicted in Fig. 1. Hypernatremia patients survived shorter than those with eunatremia or hyponatremia (P < 0.001), whereas the difference in survival time between eunatremic and hyponatremic patients was not significant.
Fig. 1

Kaplan-Meier survival curves of terminal cancer patients plotted by sodium level (note significantly shorter survival in patients with hypernatremia)

Kaplan-Meier survival curves of terminal cancer patients plotted by sodium level (note significantly shorter survival in patients with hypernatremia) Table 3 presents independent prognostic factors identified from the Cox proportional hazards models. Multivariable analysis revealed that various parameters including male sex (HR = 1.53; P = 0.004), poor ECOG-PS (HR = 1.45, P = 0.011), leukocytosis (HR = 1.98, P < 0.001), hypoalbuminemia (HR = 2.06, P < 0.001), and hypernatremia (HR = 1.55, P = 0.002), were significantly associated with poor survival.
Table 3

Independent prognostic indices of survival (Cox proportional hazards model)

Univariable analysisMultivariable analysisa
HR (95% CI)P-valueHR (95% CI)P-value
Advanced age (> 70 years)1.31 (1.09–1.58)0.004
Male sex1.21 (1.01–1.46)0.0381.53 (1.15–2.04)0.004
Poor functional score (ECOG = 4)1.30 (1.08–1.57)0.0051.45 (1.09–1.94)0.011
Lung cancer1.20 (0.96–1.50)0.108
Active infection1.06 (0.87–1.28)0.564
Leukocytosis1.56 (1.29–1.87)< 0.0011.98 (1.47–2.66)< 0.001
Neutrophilia1.45 (1.19–1.75)< 0.001
Lymphopenia1.53 (1.20–1.94)0.001
Anemia0.95 (0.71–1.26)0.711
Thrombocytopenia1.28 (1.04–1.59)0.022
Azotemia1.30 (1.06–1.61)0.013
Hypoalbuminemia1.88 (1.54–2.28)< 0.0012.06 (1.49–2.73)< 0.001
Hyperbilirubinemia1.47 (1.21–1.80)< 0.001
PT/INR prolongation1.46 (1.21–1.77)< 0.001
CRP elevation1.28 (1.07–1.54)0.008
Hypokalemia1.01 (0.77–1.32)0.958
Hyperkalemia1.22 (1.01–1.48)0.044
Hyponatremia1.24 (1.03–1.49)0.025
Hypernatremia1.59 (1.22–2.07)0.0011.55 (1.18–2.03)0.002

CI confidence interval, CRP C-reactive protein, HR hazard ratio, PT/INR prothrombin time/international normalized ratio

aBased on significant variables (P < 0.05) in univariable analysis

Independent prognostic indices of survival (Cox proportional hazards model) CI confidence interval, CRP C-reactive protein, HR hazard ratio, PT/INR prothrombin time/international normalized ratio aBased on significant variables (P < 0.05) in univariable analysis

Discussion

The findings of the present study indicate that the prognosis is demonstrably poor for terminally ill cancer patients with hypernatremia (vs. eunatremia or hyponatremia). These results are in accordance with outcomes of previous studies, offering added support. Based on a group of 259 cancer patients referred for palliative care, Alsirafy et al. reported shorter median survival (8 days) and higher mortality (68%) in those with hypernatremia than in hyponatremic or eunatremic patients [10]. However, multivariable analysis of well-known prognostic factors in terminal cancer patients had not been carried out. Our data demonstrate that the association between hypernatremia and poor survival remains robust after controlling for other predictors of survival. Salahudeen et al. reported poor clinical outcomes involving higher mortality, longer hospitalization, and greater hospital expense in patients with hypernatremia [9]. There were some differences from our cohort of terminal patients whose life expectancies were approximately 6 months. They examined subjects admitted to a comprehensive cancer center with any stage of disease; and their focus was on iatrogenic hypernatremia since baseline hypernatremia contributed so few patients. In our investigation, laboratory testing took place on the day of admission, aimed at existing rather than acquired hypernatremia. Hence, this may be the first effort to explore the prognostic utility of spontaneous hypernatremia in terminally ill cancer patients. The prevalence of hypernatremia in patients with terminal cancer is unclear. Salahudeen and colleagues found that hypernatremia in cancer patients increased from 0.2% on admission to 2.6% during the course of hospitalization [9]. Another study reported that 8.5% of adult cancer patients referred for palliative care are hypernatremic [10]. Similar to prior studies, we recorded a 3% prevalence of hypernatremia. Little is known about the specific mechanism by which hypernatremia worsens survival, but there is at least one plausible explanation. Hypernatremia is generally induced by the loss of electrolyte-free water. Physiologic feedback mechanisms, such as thirst and ADH release, are then promptly activated to increase water intake and minimize additional free water loss. In a healthy population, elevated serum sodium levels return to the normal range [12]. However, feedback dysfunction in patients with terminal cancer may impede or prevent normalization of serum sodium concentrations, and many are faced with non-replenishment of water lost through excessive sweating, vomiting, diarrhea, and nasogastric drainage [15]. Impaired response to thirst due to diminished mental faculties or poor oral intake and subsequent dehydration may induce hypernatremia in such patients outside hospital environments. Still, there is virtually no research on hypernatremia in cancer patients. Retrospective studies of older adult patients and critically ill patients admitted to intensive care units would be helpful to understand this problem in the context of terminal cancer [16, 17]. Mental debilitation and poor oral intake create rapid declines in their general conditions [18]. Although causality between hypernatremia and deteriorating general conditions remain in question, hypernatremic patients are extremely ill and less inclined to survive. Certain prognostic factors—namely poor functional status, leukocytosis, and hypoalbuminemia—are well documented in past reports, but the data on effects of hyponatremia have been inconsistent. Several earlier endeavors have shown the negative prognostic aspect of hyponatremia in a variety of cancers [19, 20]. Yoon et al. also demonstrated a relationship between hyponatremia and shorter survival time in terminally ill cancer patients [21]. However, the results of another study failed to support this relationship in Korean patients with terminal cancer entering a hospice unit, although hampered by a relatively short median survival time (9.5 days) [22]. To our knowledge, the present analysis offers the most fully controlled results in a comparable setting, adjusted for potential confounders. Also, our subjects survived longer than those in previous studies. Even so, hyponatremia was not predictive of poor survival under these conditions. Further prospective studies to explore the prognostic significance of hyponatremia are nevertheless warranted. At present, evidence of the prognostic value of potassium disorders is sparse. Cui et al. observed an association between serum potassium level and survival time, but significance was not reached in multivariable analysis [23]. In our study, hyperkalemia similarly did not emerge from multivariable analysis as a significant predictor of poor prognosis. One retrospective study conducted in Taiwan cited a serum potassium level > 5 mg/dL as an objective index of short-term survival (7 days) in patients with advanced cancer [11]. However, other researchers found no prognostic significance attached to potassium imbalance [2, 22]. There are acknowledged limitations to interpreting our results. First, the cohort is only representative of a single center, and the number of hypernatremic patients was small. Considering the low prevalence of hypernatremia in terminal cancer patients, large-scale multicenter investigations would be helpful to determine the actual prognostic import of hypernatremia under such circumstances. Another drawback is the lack of sequential or interventional data on serum sodium levels. A previous study indicated that hyponatremia normalization is prognostically beneficial in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancers [24]. One may thus infer that without normalization, patients with persistent hypernatremia will fare worse. Finally, we did not consider potential confounders related with symptoms such as anorexia-cachexia, delirium, dyspnea, and edema.

Conclusion

Hypernatremia on admission for palliative care of terminal cancer is predictive of shorter patient survival. Despite its low prevalence (3%), greater clinical attention should be paid to the prognostic utility of hypernatremia.
  23 in total

1.  [Is hyponatremia a prognostic marker of survival for lung cancer?].

Authors:  C Petereit; O Zaba; I Teber; C Grohé
Journal:  Pneumologie       Date:  2011-08-11

2.  Reduced osmotic thirst in healthy elderly men.

Authors:  P A Phillips; M Bretherton; C I Johnston; L Gray
Journal:  Am J Physiol       Date:  1991-07

3.  Impact of awareness of terminal illness and use of palliative care or intensive care unit on the survival of terminally ill patients with cancer: prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Young Ho Yun; Myung Kyung Lee; Seon Young Kim; Woo Jin Lee; Kyung Hae Jung; Young Rok Do; Samyong Kim; Dae Seog Heo; Jong Soo Choi; Sang Yoon Park; Hyun Sik Jeong; Jung Hun Kang; Si-Young Kim; Jungsil Ro; Jung Lim Lee; Sook Ryun Park; Sohee Park
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-05-16       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Symptom patterns of advanced cancer patients in a palliative care unit.

Authors:  Jaw-Shiun Tsai; Chih-Hsun Wu; Tai-Yuan Chiu; Wen-Yu Hu; Ching-Yu Chen
Journal:  Palliat Med       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 4.762

Review 5.  Diagnosis and treatment of hypernatremia.

Authors:  Saif A Muhsin; David B Mount
Journal:  Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2016-03-04       Impact factor: 4.690

6.  Hyponatremia as an independent prognostic factor in patients with terminal cancer.

Authors:  Johi Yoon; Seo Hee Ahn; Yong Joo Lee; Chul-Min Kim
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2014-11-30       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 7.  Hyponatremia in cancer patients: Time for a new approach.

Authors:  Rossana Berardi; Silvia Rinaldi; Miriam Caramanti; Christian Grohè; Matteo Santoni; Francesca Morgese; Mariangela Torniai; Agnese Savini; Ilaria Fiordoliva; Stefano Cascinu
Journal:  Crit Rev Oncol Hematol       Date:  2016-03-10       Impact factor: 6.312

Review 8.  Prognostication of Survival in Patients With Advanced Cancer: Predicting the Unpredictable?

Authors:  David Hui
Journal:  Cancer Control       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 3.302

9.  Hyponatremia associates with poor outcome in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients treated with everolimus: prognostic impact.

Authors:  P Penttilä; P Bono; K Peltola; F Donskov
Journal:  Acta Oncol       Date:  2018-06-04       Impact factor: 4.089

10.  A systematically structured review of biomarkers of dying in cancer patients in the last months of life; An exploration of the biology of dying.

Authors:  Victoria Louise Reid; Rachael McDonald; Amara Callistus Nwosu; Stephen R Mason; Chris Probert; John E Ellershaw; Séamus Coyle
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-04-06       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Molecular and physical technologies for monitoring fluid and electrolyte imbalance: A focus on cancer population.

Authors:  Devasier Bennet; Yasaman Khorsandian; Jody Pelusi; Amy Mirabella; Patrick Pirrotte; Frederic Zenhausern
Journal:  Clin Transl Med       Date:  2021-06
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.