Development and validation of a diagnostic nomogram for frailty in cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: The presence of frailty decreases the overall survival of cancer patients. An accurate and operational diagnostic method is needed to help clinicians choose the most appropriate treatment to improve patient outcomes. METHODS: Data were collected from 10 649 cancer patients who were prospectively enrolled in the Investigation on Nutritional Status and its Clinical Outcomes of Common Cancers (INSCOC) project in China from July 2013 to August 2022. The training cohort and validation cohort were randomly divided at a ratio of 7:3. The multivariable logistic regression analysis, multivariate Cox regression analyses, and the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) method were used to develop the nomogram. The concordance index and calibration curve were used to assess the diagnostic utility of the nomogram model. RESULTS: The 10 risk factors associated with frailty in cancer patients were age, AJCC stage, liver cancer, hemoglobin, radiotherapy, surgery, hand grip strength (HGS), calf circumference (CC), PG-SGA score and QOL from the QLQ-C30. The diagnostic nomogram model achieved a good C index of 0.847 (95% CI, 0.832-0.862, P < 0.001) in the training cohort and 0.853 (95% CI, 0.83-0.876, P < 0.001) in the validation cohort. The prediction nomogram showed 1-, 3-, and 5-year mortality C indices in the training cohort of 0.708 (95% CI, 0.686-0.731), 0.655 (95% CI, 0.627-0.683), and 0.623 (95% CI, 0.568-0.678). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year C indices in the validation cohort were similarly 0.743 (95% CI, 0.711-0.777), 0.680 (95% CI, 0.639-0.722), and 0.629 (95% CI, 0.558-0.700). In addition, the calibration curves and decision curve analysis (DCA) were well-fitted for both the diagnostic model and prediction model. CONCLUSIONS: The nomogram model provides an accurate method to diagnose frailty in cancer patients. Using this model could lead to the selection of more appropriate therapy and a better prognosis for cancer patients.

Association of possible sarcopenia with all-cause mortality in patients with solid cancer: A nationwide multicenter cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: The concept of possible sarcopenia (PS) was recently introduced to enable timely intervention in settings without the technologies required to make a full diagnosis of sarcopenia. This study aimed to investigate the association between PS and all-cause mortality in patients with solid cancer. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 13,736 patients with 16 types of solid cancer who were ≥18 years old. MEASUREMENTS: The presence of both a low calf circumference (men <34 cm or women <33 cm) and low handgrip strength (men <28 kg or women <18 kg) was considered to indicate PS. Harrell's C-index was used to assess prognostic value and the association of PS with mortality was estimated by calculating multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs). RESULTS: The study enrolled 7207 men and 6529 women (median age = 57.8 years). During a median follow-up of 43 months, 3150 deaths occurred. PS showed higher Harrell's C-index (0.549, 95%CI = [0.541, 0.557]) than the low calf circumference (0.541, 95%CI = [0.531, 0.551], P = 0.037) or low handgrip strength (0.542, 95%CI = [0.532, 0.552], P = 0.026). PS was associated with increased mortality risk in both univariate (HR = 1.587, 95%CI = [1.476, 1.708]) and multivariable-adjusted models (HR = 1.190, 95%CI = [1.094, 1.293]). Sensitivity analyses showed that the association of PS with mortality was robust in different covariate subgroups, which also held after excluding those patients who died within the first 3 months (HR = 1.162, 95%CI = [1.060, 1.273]), 6 months (HR = 1.150, 95%CI = [1.039, 1.274]) and 12 months (HR = 1.139, 95%CI = [1.002, 1.296]) after enrollment. CONCLUSION: PS could independently and robustly predict all-cause mortality in patients with solid cancer. These findings imply the importance of including PS assessment in routine cancer care to provide significant prognostic information to help mitigate sarcopenia-related premature deaths.

Value of the modified Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment in indicating the need for nutrition intervention and predicting overall survival in patients with malignant tumors in at least two organs.

BACKGROUND: Although the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) is a reference standard used to assess a patient's nutrition status, it is cumbersome to administer. The aim of the present study was to estimate the value of a simpler and easier-to-use modified PG-SGA (mPG-SGA) to evaluate the nutrition status and need for intervention in patients with malignant tumors present in at least two organs. METHODS: A total of 591 patients (343 male and 248 female) were included from the INSCOC study. A Pearson correlation analysis was conducted to assess the correlation between the mPG-SGA and nutrition-related factors, with the optimal cut-off defined by a receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC). The consistency between the mPG-SGA and PG-SGA was compared in a concordance analysis. A survival analysis was used to determine the effects of nutritional intervention among different nutrition status groups. Univariable and multivariable Cox analyses were applied to evaluate the association of the mPG-SGA with the all-cause mortality. RESULTS: The mPG-SGA showed a negative association with nutrition-related factors. Individuals with an mPG-SGA ≥ 5 (rounded from 4.5) were considered to need nutritional intervention. Among the malnourished patients (mPG-SGA ≥ 5), the overall survival (OS) of those who received nutrition intervention was significantly higher than that of patients who did not. However, the OS was not significantly different in the better-nourished patients (mPG-SGA < 5). CONCLUSION: Our findings support that the mPG-SGA is a feasible tool that can be used to guide nutritional interventions and predict the survival of patients with malignant tumors affecting at least two organs.

Exploring the optimal indicator of short-term peridiagnosis weight dynamics to predict cancer survival: A multicentre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Body weight and its changes have been associated with cancer outcomes. However, the associations of short-term peridiagnosis weight dynamics in standardized, clinically operational time frames with cancer survival remain largely unknown. This study aimed to screen for and evaluate the optimal indicator of short-term peridiagnosis weight dynamics to predict overall survival (OS) in patients with cancer. METHODS: This multicentre cohort study prospectively collected data from 7460 patients pathologically diagnosed with cancer between 2013 and 2019. Body weight data were recorded 1 month before, at the time of and 1 month following diagnosis. By permuting different types (point value in kg, point height-adjusted value in kg/m2, absolute change in kg or relative change in percentage) and time frames (prediagnosis, postdiagnosis or peridiagnosis), we generated 12 different weight-related indicators and compared their prognostic performance using Harrell's C-index, integrated discrimination improvement, continuous net reclassification improvement and time-dependent C-index. We analysed associations of peridiagnosis relative weight change (RWC) with OS using restricted cubic spine (RCS), Kaplan-Meier analysis and multivariable-adjusted Cox regression models. RESULTS: The study enrolled 5012 males and 2448 females, with a median age of 59 years. During a median follow-up of 37 months, 1026 deaths occurred. Peridiagnosis (1 month before diagnosis to 1 month following diagnosis) RWC showed higher prognostic performance (Harrell's C-index = 0.601, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.583, 0.619]) than other types of indicators including body mass index (BMI), absolute weight change, absolute BMI change, prediagnosis RWC and postdiagnosis RWC in the study population (all P < 0.05). Time-dependent C-index analysis also indicated that peridiagnosis RWC was optimal for predicting OS. The multivariable-adjusted RCS analysis revealed an N-shaped non-linear association between peridiagnosis RWC and OS (PRWC < 0.001, Pnon-linear < 0.001). Univariate survival analysis showed that the peridiagnosis RWC groups could represent distinct mortality risk stratifications (P < 0.001). Multivariable survival analysis showed that, compared with the maintenance group (weight change < 5%), the significant (gain >10%, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.530, 95% CI = [0.413, 0.680]) and moderate (gain 5-10%, HR = 0.588, 95% CI = [0.422, 0.819]) weight gain groups were both associated with improved OS. In contrast, the moderate (loss 5-10%, HR = 1.219, 95% CI = [1.029, 1.443]) and significant (loss >10%, HR = 1.280, 95% CI = [1.095, 1.497]) weight loss groups were both associated with poorer OS. CONCLUSIONS: The prognostic performance of peridiagnosis RWC is superior to other weight-related indicators in patients with cancer. The findings underscore the importance of expanding the surveillance of body weight from at diagnosis to both past and future, and conducting it within clinically operational time frames, in order to identify and intervene with patients who are at risk of weight change-related premature deaths.