Dataset Information

Prognostic role of the prognostic nutritional index (PNI) in patients with head and neck neoplasms undergoing radiotherapy: A meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

This novel meta-analysis was conducted to systematically and comprehensively evaluate the prognostic role of the pretreatment PNI in patients with head and neck neoplasms (HNNs) undergoing radiotherapy.

Methods

Three databases, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science, were used to retrieve desired literature. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted and pooled by fixed-effects or random-effects models to analyze the relationship between the PNI and survival outcomes: overall survival (OS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and progression-free survival (PFS).

Results

Ten eligible studies involving 3,458 HNN patients were included in our analysis. The robustness of the pooled results was ensured by heterogeneity tests (I2 = 22.6%, 0.0%, and 0.0% for OS, DMFS, and PFS, respectively). The fixed-effects model revealed a lower pretreatment PNI was significantly related to a worse OS (HR = 1.974; 95% CI: 1.642-2.373; P<0.001), DMFS (HR = 1.959; 95% CI: 1.599-2.401; P<0.001), and PFS (HR = 1.498; 95% CI: 1.219-1.842; P<0.001). The trim-and-fill method (HR = 1.877; 95% CI: 1.361-2.589) was also used to prove that the existing publication bias did not deteriorate the reliability of the relationship.

Conclusion

The pretreatment PNI is a promising indicator to evaluate and predict the long-term prognostic survival outcomes in HNN patients undergoing radiotherapy.

SUBMITTER: Shi Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8439446 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThere is limited evidence regarding the economic effects of nutrition support in cancer patients. This study aims at investigating the cost-effectiveness profile of systematic oral nutritional supplementation (ONS) in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients undergoing radiotherapy (RT) and receiving nutritional counseling.MethodsA cost-effectiveness analysis based on a RCT was performed to estimate direct medical costs, life years gained (LYG) and Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALY) for nutritional counseling with or without ONS at 5-month and 6-year follow up time. Value of information analysis was performed to value the expected gain from reducing uncertainty through further data collection.ResultsONS with nutritional counseling produced higher QALY than nutritional counseling alone (0.291 ± 0.087 vs 0.288 ± 0.087), however the difference was not significant (0.0027, P = 0.84). Mean costs were €987.60 vs €996.09, respectively in the treatment and control group (-€8.96, P = 0.98). The Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) was -€3,277/QALY, with 55.4% probabilities of being cost-effective at a cost-effectiveness threshold of €30,000/QALY. The Expected Incremental Benefit was €95.16 and the Population Expected Value of Perfect Information was €8.6 million, implying that additional research is likely to be worthwhile. At a median 6-year follow up, the treatment group had a significantly better survival rate when adjusting for late effect (P = 0.039).ConclusionOur findings provide the first evidence to inform decisions about funding and reimbursement of ONS in combination with nutritional counseling in HNC patients undergoing RT. ONS may improve quality of cancer care at no additional costs, however further research on the cost-effectiveness of nutritional supplementation is recommended.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02055833. Registered 5th February 2014 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02055833.

Project description:Background: Locally advanced head and neck cancer is managed either by combined surgery and (chemo) radiotherapy or definitive (chemo) radiotherapy, which may deteriorate nutritional status. Previous data have shown that intensive nutritional intervention by a dietician reduces radiation-induced adverse events including weight loss. Objective: To determine if on-demand nutritional counseling (ODC, control group) would be as efficacious as intensive nutritional counseling (INC, experimental group) in patients undergoing (chemo) radiotherapy. Methods: Fifty-eight patients were randomly assigned to receive INC (n = 26) or ODC (n = 32). Outcome measures were nutritional status (PG-SGA), weight loss, handgrip strength (HGS), body composition, and survival. Results: Weight loss and impaired nutritional parameters during oncological treatment were seen equally in both groups (NS). Leaner patients at baseline maintained their weight, while overweight patients lost both weight and handgrip strength during treatment. Disease-free survival (DFS) (median = 43 months) was not affected by weight loss during treatment. Lower baseline HGS and malnutrition were associated with worse DFS (low vs. normal HGS: 15 vs. 42 months; p = 0.05 and malnutrition vs. good nutrition status: 17 vs. 42 months; p = 0.014, respectively). Survival according to low vs. normal HGS in the INC group was 4 vs. 44 months (p = 0.007) and in the ODC group 28 vs. 40 months (p = 0.944). According to malnutrition vs. good nutritional status in the INC group, DFS was 21 vs. 43 months (p = 0.025) and in the ODC group 15 vs. 41 months (p = 0.03). Conclusions: As for our primary endpoint, individualized on-demand nutritional counseling was as efficacious as intensive counseling in preventing deterioration of nutritional status and incidence of malnutrition during (chemo) radiotherapy. This should be verified with larger number of patients. Additional findings were that overweight patients had more severe weight loss, but not poorer survival. Low HGS and malnutrition at baseline were associated with poor survival. Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT02159508.

Project description:ObjectivePrognostic nutritional index (PNI), calculated as serum albumin (ALB) (g/L) + 5 × total lymphocyte count (109/L), is initially used to evaluate nutritional status in patients undergoing surgery and may evaluate the therapeutic effects and predict the survival of various solid tumors. The present study aimed to evaluate the potential prognostic significance of PNI in breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT).MethodsA total of 785 breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy were enrolled in this retrospective study. The optimal cutoff value of PNI by receiver operating characteristic curve stratified patients into a low-PNI group (<51) and a high PNI group (≥51). The associations between breast cancer and clinicopathological variables by PNI were determined by chi-square test or Fisher's exact test. Kaplan-Meier plots and log-rank test were used to evaluate the clinical outcomes of disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). The prognostic value of PNI was analyzed by univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression models. The toxicity of NACT was accessed by the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC).ResultsThe results indicated that PNI had prognostic significance by an optimal cutoff value of 51 on DFS and OS in univariate and multivariate Cox regression survival analyses. Breast cancer patients with a high PNI value had longer DFS and OS than those with a low PNI value [47.64 vs. 36.60 months, P < 0.0001, hazard ratio (HR) = 0.264, 95%CI = 0.160-0.435; 73.61 vs. 64.97 months, P < 0.0001, HR = 0.319, 95%CI = 0.207-0.491, respectively]. Furthermore, the results indicated that patients with high PNI had longer DFS and OS than those with low PNI in early stage and advanced breast cancer, especially in advanced breast cancer. The mean DFS and OS times for breast cancer patients with high PNI by the log-rank test were longer than in those with low PNI in different molecular subtypes. Moreover, the mean DFS and OS times in patients with high PNI by the log-rank test were longer than in those patients with low PNI without or with lymph vessel invasion. The common toxicities after neoadjuvant chemotherapy were hematologic and gastrointestinal reaction, and the PNI had no significance on the toxicities of all enrolled patients, except in anemia, leukopenia, and myelosuppression.ConclusionPretreatment PNI with the advantages of being convenient, noninvasive, and reproducible was a useful prognostic indicator for breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy and is a promising biomarker for breast cancer on treatment strategy decisions.

Project description:BackgroundPoor nutritional status is associated with progression and advanced disease in patients with cancer. The prognostic nutritional index (PNI) may represent a simple method of assessing host immunonutritional status. This study was designed to investigate the prognostic value of the PNI for distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC).MethodsA training cohort of 1,168 patients with non-metastatic NPC from two institutions was retrospectively analyzed. The optimal PNI cutoff value for DMFS was identified using the online tool "Cutoff Finder". DMFS was analyzed using stratified and adjusted analysis. Propensity score-matched analysis was performed to balance baseline characteristics between the high and low PNI groups. Subsequently, the prognostic value of the PNI for DMFS was validated in an external validation cohort of 756 patients with NPC. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) was calculated to compare the discriminatory ability of different prognostic scores.ResultsThe optimal PNI cutoff value was determined to be 51. Low PNI was significantly associated with poorer DMFS than high PNI in univariate analysis (P<0.001) as well as multivariate analysis (P<0.001) before propensity score matching. In subgroup analyses, PNI could also stratify different risks of distant metastases. Propensity score-matched analyses confirmed the prognostic value of PNI, excluding other interpretations and selection bias. In the external validation cohort, patients with high PNI also had significantly lower risk of distant metastases than those with low PNI (Hazards Ratios, 0.487; P<0.001). The PNI consistently showed a higher AUC value at 1-year (0.780), 3-year (0.793) and 5-year (0.812) in comparison with other prognostic scores.ConclusionPNI, an inexpensive and easily assessable inflammatory index, could aid clinicians in developing individualized treatment and follow-up strategies for patients with non-metastatic NPC.

Project description:BackgroundThe prognostic nutritional index (PNI) is a nutritional indicator and predictor of various diseases. However it is unclear whether PNI can be a predictor of perioperative ischemic stroke. This study aims to evaluate the association of the preoperative PNI and ischemic stroke in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery.MethodsThe retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent noncardiac surgery between January 2008 and August 2019. The patients were divided into PNI ≥ 38.8 and PNI < 38.8 groups according to the cut-off value of PNI. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to explore the association between PNI and perioperative ischemic stroke. Subsequently, propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to eliminate the confounding factors of covariates and further validate the results. Subgroup analyses were completed to assess the predictive utility of PNI for perioperative ischemic stroke in different groups.ResultsAmongst 221,542 hospitalized patients enrolled, 485 (0.22%) experienced an ischemic stroke within 30 days of the surgery, 22.1% of patients were malnourished according to PNI < 38.8, and the occurrence of perioperative ischemic stroke was 0.34% (169/49055) in the PNI < 38.8 group. PNI < 38.8 was significantly associated with an increased incidence of perioperative ischemic stroke whether in univariate logistic regression analysis (OR = 1.884, 95% CI: 1.559-2.267, P < 0.001) or multivariate logistic regression analysis (OR = 1.306, 95% CI: 1.061-1.602, P = 0.011). After PSM analysis, the ORs of PNI < 38.8 group were 1.250 (95% CI: 1.000-1.556, P = 0.050) and 1.357 (95% CI: 1.077-1.704, P = 0.009) in univariate logistic regression analysis and multivariate logistic regression analysis respectively. The subgroup analysis indicated that reduced PNI was significantly associated to an increased risk of perioperative ischemic stroke in patients over 65 years old, ASA II, not taking aspirin before surgery, without a history of stroke, who had neurosurgery, non-emergency surgery, and were admitted to ICU after surgery.ConclusionsOur study indicates that low preoperative PNI is significantly associated with a higher incidence of ischemic stroke in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery. Preoperative PNI, as a preoperative nutritional status evaluation index, is an independent risk factor useful to predict perioperative ischemic stroke risk, which could be used as an intervenable preoperative clinical biochemical index to reduce the incidence of perioperative ischemic stroke.

Project description:Background and aims This study compared the prognostic significance of various nutritional and inflammatory indicators such as neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, prognostic nutritional index, and controlling nutritional status score. In addition, we aimed to establish a more accurate prognostic indicator. Methods We retrospectively evaluated 1112 patients with stage I–III colorectal cancer between January 2004 and April 2014. The controlling nutritional status scores were classified as low (0–1), intermediate (2–4), and high (5–12) scores. The cut-off values for prognostic nutritional index and inflammatory markers were calculated using the X-tile program. P-CONUT, a combination of prognostic nutritional index and the controlling nutritional status score, was suggested. The integrated areas under the curve were then compared. Results The multivariable analysis showed that prognostic nutritional index was an independent prognostic factor for overall survival, whereas the controlling nutritional status score, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio, and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio were not. The patients were divided into three P-CONUT groups as follows: G1, controlling nutritional status (0–4) and high prognostic nutritional index; G2, controlling nutritional status (0–4) and low prognostic nutritional index; and G3, controlling nutritional status (5–12) and low prognostic nutritional index. There were significant survival differences between the P-CONUT groups (5-year overall survival of G1, G2, and G3 were 91.7%, 81.2%, and 64.1%, respectively; p < 0.0001). The integrated areas under the curve of P-CONUT (0.610, CI: 0.578–0.642) was superior to those of the controlling nutritional status score alone (bootstrap integrated areas under the curve mean difference=0.050; 95% CI=0.022–0.079) and prognostic nutritional index alone (bootstrap integrated areas under the curve mean difference=0.012; 95% CI=0.001–0.025). Conclusion Prognostic effect of P-CONUT may be better than inflammatory markers such as neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio. Thus, it could be used as a reliable nutritional risk stratification tool in patients with colorectal cancer.