Nutrition (Burbank, Los Angeles County, Calif.) · 2023
Modified Controlling Nutritional Status (mCONUT) serves as a promising prognostic factor in patients with cancer cachexia.
Многоцентровое исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhang Xi, Huang Jia-Xin, Tang Meng, Zhang Qi, Deng Li, Song Chun-Hua, Li Wei, Shi Han-Ping, Cong Ming-Hua
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Malnutrition and systemic inflammation are considered 2 hallmarks of cancer cachexia. Our study aimed to construct a modified Controlling Nutritional Status by introducing C-reactive protein as an inflammatory parameter and investigate its prognostic value in patients with cancer cachexia.
METHODS: This multicenter cohort study included 5221 patients with cancer, among whom 1719 were diagnosed with cachexia. Concordance index and receiver operating characteristic curves were used to compare prognostic values between the 2 systems. The primary outcome was overall survival, and comprehensive survival analyses were performed. The secondary outcomes were short-term survival, malnutrition, and quality of life.
RESULTS: During the median follow-up of 17.47 mo, 813 deaths were recorded. The modified Controlling Nutritional Status was more accurate than Controlling Nutritional Status in predicting survival in patients with cancer cachexia. Patients in the high Controlling Nutritional Status/modified Controlling Nutritional Status group had a significantly shorter overall survival. Multivariate Cox analysis confirmed high Controlling Nutritional Status (hazard ratio = 1.34, 95% CI, 1.13-1.58; P < 0.001) and modified Controlling Nutritional Status (hazard ratio = 1.46; 95% CI, 1.26-1.69; P < 0.001) were independent risk factors for survival, adjusting for confounders. In subgroup analyses, a high modified Controlling Nutritional Status score had a significantly negative effect on survival in cachexia patients with upper gastrointestinal and colorectal cancer, especially for advanced-stage (stages III and IV) patients. The risk of short-term mortality and experiencing malnutrition rose to 1.48 and 1.13 times, respectively, in the high modified Controlling Nutritional Status group, as well as that for poorer life quality.
CONCLUSION: The modified Controlling Nutritional Status group comprehensively reflects nutritional, immune, and inflammatory status and serves as a powerful prognostic scoring system in patients with cancer cachexia.
METHODS: This multicenter cohort study included 5221 patients with cancer, among whom 1719 were diagnosed with cachexia. Concordance index and receiver operating characteristic curves were used to compare prognostic values between the 2 systems. The primary outcome was overall survival, and comprehensive survival analyses were performed. The secondary outcomes were short-term survival, malnutrition, and quality of life.
RESULTS: During the median follow-up of 17.47 mo, 813 deaths were recorded. The modified Controlling Nutritional Status was more accurate than Controlling Nutritional Status in predicting survival in patients with cancer cachexia. Patients in the high Controlling Nutritional Status/modified Controlling Nutritional Status group had a significantly shorter overall survival. Multivariate Cox analysis confirmed high Controlling Nutritional Status (hazard ratio = 1.34, 95% CI, 1.13-1.58; P < 0.001) and modified Controlling Nutritional Status (hazard ratio = 1.46; 95% CI, 1.26-1.69; P < 0.001) were independent risk factors for survival, adjusting for confounders. In subgroup analyses, a high modified Controlling Nutritional Status score had a significantly negative effect on survival in cachexia patients with upper gastrointestinal and colorectal cancer, especially for advanced-stage (stages III and IV) patients. The risk of short-term mortality and experiencing malnutrition rose to 1.48 and 1.13 times, respectively, in the high modified Controlling Nutritional Status group, as well as that for poorer life quality.
CONCLUSION: The modified Controlling Nutritional Status group comprehensively reflects nutritional, immune, and inflammatory status and serves as a powerful prognostic scoring system in patients with cancer cachexia.