| Literature DB >> 35177018 |
Xianhao Xiao1, Gang Liu2, He Song2, Jianping Zhou3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia predicts poor prognosis of a variety of gastrointestinal malignancies. However, there is a lack of study on the association between skeletal muscle index (SMI) and the prognosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). The aim of this study is to develop a novel nomogram based on sarcopenia for GIST patients to predict overall survival (OS).Entities:
Keywords: Gastrointestinal stromal tumor; Sarcopenia; Skeletal muscle index; Survival
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35177018 PMCID: PMC8851766 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-022-09278-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.430
Comparison of clinicopathological parameters between sarcopenic patients and non-sarcopenic patients
| Characteristics | Non-sarcopenia | Sarcopenia | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 58.5 ± 9.5 | 58.8 ± 10.2 | 0.901 | |
| 23.4 ± 2.9 | 20.1 ± 2.1 | 0.001 | |
| 119.6 ± 15.9 | 123.0 ± 19.4 | 0.355 | |
| 41 ± 3.2 | 40 ± 2.3 | 0.007 | |
| Male | 48 | 18 | 0.823 |
| Female | 31 | 10 | |
| Complete resection | 74 | 22 | 0.034 |
| Incomplete resection | 5 | 6 | |
| Stomach | 33 | 10 | 0.423 |
| Duodenum | 27 | 13 | |
| Colon and rectum | 9 | 4 | |
| Extra GI GIST | 10 | 1 | |
| less than 5/HPF | 30 | 12 | 0.02 |
| 5–10/HPF | 45 | 10 | |
| more than 10/HPF | 4 | 6 | |
| Less than 5 cm | 18 | 5 | |
| 5-10 cm | 49 | 18 | 0.842 |
| More than 10 cm | 12 | 5 | |
| No | 75 | 21 | |
| Yes | 4 | 7 | 0.007 |
| Alive | 73 | 16 | 0.001 |
| Dead | 6 | 12 | |
| Spindle type | 52 | 15 | 0.35 |
| Epithelioid type | 15 | 9 | |
| Mixed type | 12 | 4 | |
Comparison of postoperative complications between sarcopenic patients and non-sarcopenic patients
| Charateritics | Non-sarcopenia ( | Sarcopenia ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Uroschesis | 4 | 2 | |
| Incisional infection | 3 | 3 | |
| Pulmonary atelectasis | 3 | 4 | |
| Incisional infection | 2 | 4 | |
| Adhesive intestine obstruction | 3 | 2 | |
| Abdominal infection | 4 | 1 | |
| Cardiac dysfuction | 2 | 0 | |
| Incisional hernia | 1 | 2 | |
| Anastomotic leakage | 1 | 1 | |
| Abdominal infection | 2 | 1 | |
| Heart failure | 1 | 0 | |
| NA | 0 | 0 | |
| 26(32.9%) | 20(71.4%) | 0.001 | |
Univariate and multivariate analysis for overall survival
| Variable | Univariare | analysis | Multivariate | analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OS | OS | |||
| OR(95%CI) | OR(95%CI) | |||
| Age | ||||
| < 65 | Reference | 0.387 | ||
| ≥ 65 | 0.485(0.129–1.816) | |||
| Gender | ||||
| Female | Reference | 1.000 | ||
| Male | 0.971(0.343–2.747) | |||
| BMI | 0.346 | |||
| < 18.5 | Reference | |||
| 18.5 ≤ ≤ 23.9 | 2.377(0.277–20.374) | 0.676 | ||
| > 24 | 1.000(0.092–10.865) | 1.000 | ||
| Sarcopenia | ||||
| No | Reference | 0.003 | Reference | 0.016 |
| Yes | 4.475(1.689–11.930) | 3.488(1.261–9.639) | ||
| HB(g/L) | 0.183 | |||
| < 120 | Reference | |||
| ≥ 120 | 0.535(0.216–1.318) | |||
| Albumin | ||||
| < 40 | Reference | 0.151 | ||
| > 40 | 0.567(0.231–1.380) | |||
| Resection | ||||
| Complete | Reference | 0.001 | Reference | 0.036 |
| Incomplete | 5.223(2.013–13.565) | 2.482(1.887–7.025) | ||
| Site | ||||
| Stomach | Reference | 0.061 | ||
| Duedenum + intestine | 1.721(0.448–6.611) | 0.511 | ||
| Colon and rectum | 8.357(1.866–37.428) | 0.007 | ||
| Extra GI GIST | 2.167(0.342–13.720) | 0.590 | ||
| Pathological type | ||||
| Spindle | Reference | 0.486 | ||
| Epithelioid | 1.500(0.455–4.943) | 0.530 | ||
| Mixed | 1.315(0.317–5.463) | 0.708 | ||
| Size(cm) | ||||
| < 5 | Reference | 0.012 | ||
| 5–10 | 2.437(0.662–3.213) | 0.545 | ||
| > 10 | 11.351(0.718–12.125) | 0.232 | ||
| Mitotic Index | ||||
| < 5 | Reference | 0.005 | Reference | 0.044 |
| 5–10 | 1.617(0.452–5.782) | 0.545 | 4.950(0.863–28.571) | |
| > 10 | 14.250(2.788–72.845) | 0.002 | 2.089(1.021–4.225) | |
Fig. 1Kaplan‐Meier curves of overall survival according to (A) sarcopenia status, (B) resection style and (C) mitotic index. Horizontal axis is calculated by month
Fig. 2Nomogram for predicting GIST-related survival with sarcopenia status, resection style and mitotic index. Note: The probability of each variable was added to converted into total score, and a vertical line was drawn on the total score to achieve the related probability of death
Fig. 3Calibration curves of the prognostic nomogram for 3-year overall survival (A), 5-year overall survival (B). The Y-axis indicates the observed overall survival of GIST while the X-axis indicates the estimated overall survival. The solid line demonstrates the ideal reference line that predicted GIST survival associated with the actual outcome whereas the dashed line demonstrates the prediction of nomogram. The closer alignment with the solid line represents the better performance is acquired
Fig. 4The Decision Curves Analysis curve of the predictive nomogram including three factors (sarcopenia status, resection style, mitotic index). The horizontal axis represents the threshold value, which is the where the expected benefit of treatment was equal to the expected benefit of avoiding treatment and the vertical axis represents adding up the true positive results and subtracting the false positive results. The nomogram (red line) has the high value due to the larger net benefit