Critical prognostic value of the log odds of negative lymph nodes/tumor size in rectal cancer patients.

Negative lymph nodes Negative lymph nodes/tumor size Prognosis Rectal cancer Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program Survival analysis

Journal

World journal of clinical cases
ISSN: 2307-8960
Titre abrégé: World J Clin Cases
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101618806

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
26 May 2021
Historique:
received: 12 11 2020
revised: 02 01 2021
accepted: 10 03 2021
entrez: 28 5 2021
pubmed: 29 5 2021
medline: 29 5 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The number of negative lymph nodes (NLNs) and tumor size are associated with prognosis in rectal cancer patients undergoing surgical resection. However, little is known about the prognostic significance of the NLN count after adjusting for tumor size. To assess the prognostic impact of the log odds of NLN/tumor size (LONS) in rectal cancer patients. Data of patients with stage I-III rectal cancer were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program database. These patients were randomly divided into a training cohort and a validation cohort. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were used to determine the prognostic value of the LONS. The optimal cutoff values of LONS were calculated using the "X-tile" program. Stratified analysis of the effect of LONS on cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) were performed. The Kaplan-Meier method with the log-rank test was used to plot the survival curve and compare the survival data among the different groups. In all, 41080 patients who met the inclusion criteria were randomly divided into a training cohort ( LONS is associated with improved survival of rectal cancer patients independent of other clinicopathological factors.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
The number of negative lymph nodes (NLNs) and tumor size are associated with prognosis in rectal cancer patients undergoing surgical resection. However, little is known about the prognostic significance of the NLN count after adjusting for tumor size.
AIM OBJECTIVE
To assess the prognostic impact of the log odds of NLN/tumor size (LONS) in rectal cancer patients.
METHODS METHODS
Data of patients with stage I-III rectal cancer were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program database. These patients were randomly divided into a training cohort and a validation cohort. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were used to determine the prognostic value of the LONS. The optimal cutoff values of LONS were calculated using the "X-tile" program. Stratified analysis of the effect of LONS on cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) were performed. The Kaplan-Meier method with the log-rank test was used to plot the survival curve and compare the survival data among the different groups.
RESULTS RESULTS
In all, 41080 patients who met the inclusion criteria were randomly divided into a training cohort (
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
LONS is associated with improved survival of rectal cancer patients independent of other clinicopathological factors.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34046453
doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v9.i15.3531
pmc: PMC8130081
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

3531-3545

Informations de copyright

©The Author(s) 2021. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Références

J Gastrointest Surg. 2014 Jul;18(7):1284-91
pubmed: 24841438
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Jun 1;33(16):1787-96
pubmed: 25918287
Lancet. 2019 Oct 19;394(10207):1467-1480
pubmed: 31631858
J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2016 Jul;23(7):414-21
pubmed: 27161394
J Gastrointest Surg. 2012 Mar;16(3):595-602
pubmed: 22143420
Gastric Cancer. 2019 Jul;22(4):853-863
pubmed: 30483985
Mod Pathol. 2005 Jul;18(7):886-90
pubmed: 15803186
Front Oncol. 2019 Oct 02;9:1008
pubmed: 31632922
Gut. 2017 Apr;66(4):683-691
pubmed: 26818619
Am J Gastroenterol. 2010 Feb;105(2):420-33
pubmed: 19809407
J Cancer. 2019 Jan 1;10(2):313-322
pubmed: 30719125
Clin Cancer Res. 2004 Nov 1;10(21):7252-9
pubmed: 15534099
Surgery. 2017 May;161(5):1299-1306
pubmed: 28088321
Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2018 Feb;15(2):77-78
pubmed: 29182161
Eur Urol. 2018 Oct;74(4):489-497
pubmed: 30017400
World J Gastroenterol. 2019 Sep 7;25(33):4945-4958
pubmed: 31543685
Surg Today. 2015 Jul;45(7):826-33
pubmed: 25377268
J Clin Oncol. 2017 Apr 10;35(11):1162-1170
pubmed: 28029318
United European Gastroenterol J. 2019 Aug;7(7):933-941
pubmed: 31428418
Eur J Cancer. 2005 Jan;41(2):272-9
pubmed: 15661553
Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2020 Jun 24;2020:8065972
pubmed: 32676106
Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020 Feb;17(2):111-130
pubmed: 31900466

Auteurs

Jie-Bin Xie (JB)

Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan Province, China.

Yue-Shan Pang (YS)

Department of Geriatrics, The Second Clinical Medical College of North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong Central Hospital, Nanchong 637200, Sichuan Province, China.

Xun Li (X)

Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College China, Nanchong 637200, Sichuan Province, China.

Xiao-Ting Wu (XT)

Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan Province, China. wxt1@medmail.com.cn.

Classifications MeSH