John Bliton1, Michael Parides2, Peter Muscarella1, John C McAuliffe1, Katia Papalezova1, Haejin In3. 1. Department of Surgery, Montefiore Medical Center/Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York. 2. Department of Surgery, Montefiore Medical Center/Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York; Department of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, Montefiore Medical Center/Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York. 3. Department of Surgery, Montefiore Medical Center/Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York; Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Montefiore Medical Center/Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York. Electronic address: hin@montefiore.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The impact of the stage of cancer on perioperative mortality remains obscure. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether cancer stage influences 30-d mortality for gastric, pancreatic, and colorectal cancers. METHODS: Data were collected from the National Cancer Database for patients undergoing resections for cancers of the stomach, pancreas, colon, or rectum between 2004 and 2015. The main analysis was conducted among patients with cancer stages 1-3. A sensitivity analysis also included cancer stage 4. Descriptive statistics were used to compare the patients' baseline characteristics. Generalized linear mixed models were used to evaluate the relationship between stage and 30-d mortality, controlling for other disease-, patient- and hospital-level factors. Pseudo R2 statistics (%Δ pseudo R2) were used to quantify the relative explanatory capacity of the variables to the model for 30-d mortality. All analyses were performed using SAS 9.4. RESULTS: The cohort included 24,468, 28,078, 176,285, and 64,947 patients with stomach, pancreas, colon, and rectal cancers, respectively. After adjusting for other variables, 30-d mortality was different by stage for all cancer types examined. The factor most strongly associated with 30-d mortality was age (%Δ pseudo R2 range 14%-39%). The prognostic impact of cancer stage (Stages 1, 2, or 3) on 30-d mortality was comparable to that of the Charlson comorbidity index. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer stage contributes to explaining differences observed in short-term mortality for gastrointestinal cancers. Short-term mortality models would benefit by including more granular cancer stage, beyond disseminated status alone.
BACKGROUND: The impact of the stage of cancer on perioperative mortality remains obscure. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether cancer stage influences 30-d mortality for gastric, pancreatic, and colorectal cancers. METHODS: Data were collected from the National Cancer Database for patients undergoing resections for cancers of the stomach, pancreas, colon, or rectum between 2004 and 2015. The main analysis was conducted among patients with cancer stages 1-3. A sensitivity analysis also included cancer stage 4. Descriptive statistics were used to compare the patients' baseline characteristics. Generalized linear mixed models were used to evaluate the relationship between stage and 30-d mortality, controlling for other disease-, patient- and hospital-level factors. Pseudo R2 statistics (%Δ pseudo R2) were used to quantify the relative explanatory capacity of the variables to the model for 30-d mortality. All analyses were performed using SAS 9.4. RESULTS: The cohort included 24,468, 28,078, 176,285, and 64,947 patients with stomach, pancreas, colon, and rectal cancers, respectively. After adjusting for other variables, 30-d mortality was different by stage for all cancer types examined. The factor most strongly associated with 30-d mortality was age (%Δ pseudo R2 range 14%-39%). The prognostic impact of cancer stage (Stages 1, 2, or 3) on 30-d mortality was comparable to that of the Charlson comorbidity index. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer stage contributes to explaining differences observed in short-term mortality for gastrointestinal cancers. Short-term mortality models would benefit by including more granular cancer stage, beyond disseminated status alone.
Authors: Bas W G van Rhijn; Theo H van der Kwast; Sultan S Alkhateeb; Neil E Fleshner; Geert J L H van Leenders; Peter J Bostrom; Madelon N M van der Aa; David M Kakiashvili; Chris H Bangma; Michael A S Jewett; Alexandre R Zlotta Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2011-10-25 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: J R Headrick; D L Miller; D M Nagorney; M S Allen; C Deschamps; V F Trastek; P C Pairolero Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2001-03 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: John N Melvan; Manu S Sancheti; Theresa Gillespie; Dana C Nickleach; Yuan Liu; Kristin Higgins; Suresh Ramalingam; Joseph Lipscomb; Felix G Fernandez Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2015-04-16 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Laura Nemer; Somashekar G Krishna; Zarine K Shah; Darwin L Conwell; Zobeida Cruz-Monserrate; Mary Dillhoff; Denis C Guttridge; Alice Hinton; Andrei Manilchuk; Timothy M Pawlik; Carl R Schmidt; Erin E Talbert; Tanios Bekaii-Saab; Phil A Hart Journal: Pancreas Date: 2017-10 Impact factor: 3.327
Authors: Richard S Swanson; Christopher M Pezzi; Katherine Mallin; Ashley M Loomis; David P Winchester Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2014-09-05 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Pooya Mobadersany; Safoora Yousefi; Mohamed Amgad; David A Gutman; Jill S Barnholtz-Sloan; José E Velázquez Vega; Daniel J Brat; Lee A D Cooper Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2018-03-12 Impact factor: 11.205