4.7 Article

Inflammation-based prognostic score is a novel predictor of postoperative outcome in patients with colorectal cancer

Journal

ANNALS OF SURGERY
Volume 246, Issue 6, Pages 1047-1051

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181454171

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To investigate the significance of preoperative Glasgow prognostic score (GPS) for postoperative prognostication of patients with colorectal cancer. Background: Recent studies have revealed that the GPS, an inflammation-based prognostic score that includes only C-reactive protein (CRP) and albumin, is a useful tool for predicting postoperative outcome in cancer patients. However, few studies have investigated the GPS in the field of colorectal surgery. Methods: The GPS was calculated on the basis of admission data as follows: patients with an elevated level of both CRP (>10 mg/L) and hypoalbuminemia (Alb <35 g/L) were allocated a score of 2, and patients showing I or none of these blood chemistry abnormalities were allocated a score of I or 0, respectively. Prognostic significance was analyzed by univariate and multivariate analyses. Results: A total of 315 patients were evaluated. Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank test revealed that a higher GPS predicted a higher risk of postoperative mortality (P < 0.01). Univariate analyses revealed that postoperative TNM was the most sensitive predictor of postoperative mortality (odds ratio, 0.148; 95% confidence interval, 0.072-0.304; P < 0.0001). Multivariate analyses using factors such as age, sex, tumor site, serum carcinoembryonic antigen, CA19-9, CA72-4, CRP, albumin, and GPS revealed that GPS (odds ratio, 0.165; 95% confidence interval, 0.037-0.732; P 0.0177) was associated with postoperative mortality. Conclusions: Preoperative GPS is considered to be a useful predictor of postoperative mortality in patients with colorectal cancer.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available