| Literature DB >> 34970226 |
Yike Chen1, Feng Cai1, Jing Cao2, Feng Gao3, Yao Lv4, Yajuan Tang1, Anke Zhang1, Wei Yan1, Yongjie Wang1, Xinben Hu1, Sheng Chen1, Xiao Dong1, Jianmin Zhang1, Qun Wu1.
Abstract
Background: Pituitary adenoma (PA) is a benign neuroendocrine tumor caused by adenohypophysial cells, and accounts for 10%-20% of all primary intracranial tumors. The surgical outcomes and prognosis of giant pituitary adenomas measuring ≥3 cm in diameter differ significantly due to the influence of multiple factors such as tumor morphology, invasion site, pathological characteristics and so on. The aim of this study was to explore the risk factors related to the recurrence or progression of giant and large PAs after transnasal sphenoidal surgery, and develop a predictive model for tumor prognosis.Entities:
Keywords: Cox regression model; nomogram; pituitary adenoma; transnasal sphenoidal surgery; tumor recurrence
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34970226 PMCID: PMC8713699 DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2021.793337
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) ISSN: 1664-2392 Impact factor: 5.555
General characteristics.
| Clinical Features | Groups | N of Patients (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Age | <60 | 109(63.4%) |
| ≥60 | 63(36.6%) | |
| Clinical status | Non-functional PA | 150(87.2%) |
| Functional PA | 22(12.8%) | |
| BMI | <25 kg/m2 | 101(58.7%) |
| ≥25 kg/m2 | 71(41.3%) | |
| Dietary Habit | Smoking | 53(30.8%) |
| Drinking | 60(34.9%) | |
| Past Medical History | Diabetes | 17(9.9%) |
| Hypertension | 51(29.7%) | |
| Hardy Classification | Grade 1~2 | 61(35.4%) |
| Grade 3 | 77(44.8%) | |
| Grade 4~5 | 34(19.8%) | |
| Knosp Classification | Grade 0~1 | 15(8.7%) |
| Grade 2-3 | 92(53.5%) | |
| Grade 4 | 65(37.8%) | |
| Structure of Tumor Invasion | Cavernous Sinus | 150(87.2%) |
| Sphenoid Sinus | 65(37.7%) | |
| Sella | 152(88.3%) | |
| Operation Methods | Microscope | 60(34.9%) |
| Endoscope | 112(65.1%) | |
| Extent of resection | GTR | 28(16.3%) |
| NTR | 62(36.0%) | |
| STR | 54(41.4%) | |
| PR | 28(16.3%) | |
| Pathologic Results | P53+ | 47(27.3%) |
| Ki-67≥3% | 44(25.6%) |
Figure 1The overall progress free survival (PFS) rates of 1, 3 and 5 years after transnasal sphenoidal surgery was 90.70%, 79.65% and 59.30% respectively.
Univariate analysis results and mean PFS for each group.
| Clinical Features | Groups | N | PFS | 95%CI | X2 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | ||||||
| <60 | 109 | 49.32 | (46.04,52.61) | 0.016 | 0.899 | |
| ≥60 | 63 | 51.30 | (47.14,55.46) | |||
| Gender | ||||||
| Female | 78 | 56.73 | (52.20,61.26) | 3.413 | 0.065 | |
| Male | 94 | 50.59 | (46.82,54.35) | |||
| Hypertension | ||||||
| N | 121 | 48.98 | (45.67,52.30) | 0.170 | 0.68 | |
| Y | 51 | 52.57 | (48.90,56.24) | |||
| Diabetes | ||||||
| N | 155 | 49.57 | (46.75,52.39) | 0.414 | 0.52 | |
| Y | 17 | 54.41 | (50.13,58.69) | |||
| Smoking | ||||||
| N | 119 | 54.35 | (52.30,56.40) | 5.588 | 0.018 | |
| Y | 53 | 40.38 | (34.11,46.65) | |||
| Drinking | ||||||
| N | 112 | 49.30 | (46.09,52.5) | 2.889 | 0.089 | |
| Y | 60 | 51.45 | (47.1,55.81) | |||
| BMI | ||||||
| <25 kg/m2 | 101 | 53.60 | (50.88,56.33) | 13.708 | <0.001 | |
| ≧25 kg/m2 | 71 | 44.99 | (40.31,49.66) | |||
| Clinical status | ||||||
| N | 150 | 55.35 | 47.64,53.06 | 0.282 | 0.596 | |
| Y | 22 | 57.96 | 39.85,56.06 | |||
| Operation Methods | ||||||
| Endoscope | 112 | 50.50 | (47.43,53.57) | 0.072 | 0.788 | |
| Microscope | 60 | 49.20 | (44.53,53.88) | |||
| Cavernous Sinus Invasion | ||||||
| N | 22 | 47.32 | (39.58,55.06) | 0.924 | 0.336 | |
| Y | 150 | 50.45 | (47.72,53.18) | |||
| Sphenoid Sinus Invasion | ||||||
| N | 107 | 52.95 | (50.22,55.69) | 10.816 | 0.001 | |
| Y | 65 | 45.26 | (40.34,50.19) | |||
| Sella Invasion | ||||||
| N | 51 | 48.02 | (43.39,52.65) | 3.229 | 0.072 | |
| Y | 152 | 50.90 | (47.80,54.00) | |||
| Hardy Classification | ||||||
| Grade 1~2 | 61 | 53.26 | (49.98,56.54) | 11.579 | 0.003 | |
| Grade 3 | 77 | 51.49 | (47.72,55.27) | |||
| Grade 4~5 | 34 | 41.00 | (33.83,48.17) | |||
| Knosp Classification | ||||||
| Grade 0~1 | 15 | 59.07 | (57.56,60.57) | 24.018 | <0.001 | |
| Grade 2~3 | 92 | 52.71 | (49.52,55.90) | |||
| Grade 4 | 65 | 44.20 | (39.46,48.94) | |||
| Extent of resection | ||||||
| GTR | 28 | 57.82 | (55.02,60.62) | 37.748 | <0.001 | |
| NTR | 62 | 52.73 | (49.02,56.44) | |||
| STR | 54 | 50.26 | (45.50,55.02) | |||
| PR | 28 | 35.93 | (28.55,43.31) | |||
| P53 | ||||||
| Negative | 125 | 51.41 | (48.56,54.25) | 1.561 | 0.211 | |
| Positive | 47 | 46.43 | (40.89,51.96) | |||
| Ki-67 | ||||||
| <3% | 128 | 53.97 | (51.58,56.36) | 39.916 | <0.001 | |
| ≥3% | 44 | 38.64 | (32.44,44.83) | |||
Figure 2Survival curves of patients stratified on the basis of Knosp classification, Hardy classification, sphenoid sinus invasion, Ki-67, extent of resection, BMI and smoking history.
Multivariate analysis results.
| Variables | B | SE | Wald |
| HR | 95.0% CI for HR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Smoking History | 1.132 | 0.274 | 17.017 | <0.001 | 3.103 | 1.812-5.314 |
| BMI(≧25 kg/m2) | 0.691 | 0.257 | 7.222 | 0.007 | 1.997 | 1.206-3.306 |
| Sphenoid Sinus Invasion | 0.403 | 0.262 | 2.354 | 0.125 | 1.496 | 0.894-2.501 |
| Hardy Classification | ||||||
| Grade 1-2 | 1.000 | |||||
| Grade 3 | 0.064 | 0.299 | 0.045 | 0.831 | 1.066 | 0.593-1.914 |
| Grade 4-5 | 0.599 | 0.362 | 2.739 | 0.098 | 1.821 | 0.895-3.703 |
| Knosp Classification | ||||||
| Grade 0-1 | 1.000 | |||||
| Grade 2-3 | 0.678 | 0.629 | 1.160 | 0.282 | 1.970 | 0.574-6.763 |
| Grade 4 | 1.409 | 0.651 | 4.692 | 0.030 | 4.093 | 1.144-14.649 |
| Extent of resection | ||||||
| GTR | 1.000 | |||||
| NTR | 0.503 | 0.520 | 0.936 | 0.333 | 1.653 | 0.597-4.579 |
| STR | 0.692 | 0.519 | 1.779 | 0.182 | 1.997 | 0.723-5.519 |
| PT | 1.315 | 0.598 | 4.825 | 0.028 | 3.723 | 1.152-12.033 |
| P53 (-) | -0.259 | 0.298 | 0.754 | 0.385 | 0.772 | 0.430-1.385 |
| Ki-67 (≥3%) | 1.535 | 0.279 | 30.290 | <0.001 | 4.639 | 2.686-8.013 |
Figure 3The predictive nomogram based on resection degree, BMI, Ki-67, Knosp classification and smoking history.
Figure 4Performance of the nomogram for predicting tumor recurrence or progression. (A) calibration curve of the nomogram. (B) The predictive performance of the nomogram was assessed by receiver operator characteristics (ROC) analysis and area under the curve (AUC).