Cargando…

Combined preoperative prognostic nutritional index and D-dimer score predicts outcome in colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND: The prognostic nutritional index (PNI) and D-dimer (DD) levels represent useful prognostic indicators in colorectal cancer (CRC); however, a combination of these indicators, namely, the PNI and DD score (PDS) was less addressed. METHODS: A retrospective study with 183 patients after cura...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhu, Shibin, Yin, Jianyuan, Ye, Qianwen, Xiang, Jia, Zhang, Zihao, Yan, Bing
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9903491/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36750842
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-023-01925-8
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The prognostic nutritional index (PNI) and D-dimer (DD) levels represent useful prognostic indicators in colorectal cancer (CRC); however, a combination of these indicators, namely, the PNI and DD score (PDS) was less addressed. METHODS: A retrospective study with 183 patients after curative surgery was conducted. Patients were divided into 3 subgroups: PDS 0, decreased PNI and increased DD levels; PDS 1, decreased or increased PNI and DD levels; PDS 2, increased PNI and decreased DD levels. The differences in disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared among these subgroups, and risk factors for outcome were determined. RESULTS: A total of 56, 65 and 62 patients were assigned to the PDS 0, 1 and 2 subgroups, respectively. PDS was significant in predicting both the DFS (area under the curve (AUC) = 0.68, P < 0.001) and OS (AUC = 0.74, P < 0.001). PDS 0 patients were more likely to be associated with old age (P = 0.032), laparotomy (P < 0.001), elevated CEA (P = 0.001), T(3) + T(4) (P = 0.001) and advanced TNM stage (P = 0.031). PDS 0 patients had significantly inferior DFS (log rank = 18.35, P < 0.001) and OS (log rank = 28.34, P < 0.001) than PDS 1 or 2 patients. PDS was identified as an independent risk factor for both DFS (PDS 1: HR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.30–1.00, P = 0.049; PDS 2: HR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.20–0.79, P = 0.009) and OS (PDS 1: HR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.22–0.88, P = 0.020; PDS 2: HR = 0.17, 95% CI: 0.06–0.45, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The PDS is a useful prognostic indicator for CRC patients after curative surgery, and PDS 0 patients have inferior survival. Additional future studies are needed to validate these findings.