4.7 Article

Sarcopenia as a Novel Preoperative Prognostic Predictor for Survival in Patients with Bladder Cancer Undergoing Radical Cystectomy

Journal

ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 23, Issue -, Pages S1048-S1054

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-016-5606-4

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose. To investigate the prognostic significance of sarcopenia on long-term outcomes in patients with bladder cancer after radical cystectomy (RC). Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 136 patients undergoing RC for urothelial carcinoma at our institution. Prognostic impact of the preoperative clinical, laboratory, and radiologic parameters were evaluated by Cox proportional hazard model analyses, and a nomogram was developed to predict cancer-specific survival (CSS) after RC. Results. Themean follow-up was 46.7 months. Patients with sarcopenia had a significantly shorter CSS than those without sarcopenia. On univariate Cox analysis, clinical T stage, histology of transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) specimen, pretreatment hemoglobin, pretreatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), pretreatment serum C-reactive protein level, pretreatment serum albumin level, presence of hydronephrosis, and presence of sarcopenia were associated with significantly worse CSS. On multivariate Cox stepwise analysis, sarcopenia (hazard rate [HR] = 2.3, p = 0.015), clinical T stage (cT4: HR = 5.3; p = 0.0096), presence of hydronephrosis (HR = 2.0; p = 0.033), histology ofTURBT specimen (HR = 2.2, p = 0.044), and NLR (HR = 1.3; p = 0.0048) were significant independent predictors of an unfavorable prognosis Based on the results of the multivariate analysis, we developed a nomogram to predict 1-, 3-, and 5-year CSS after RC. Conclusions. Sarcopenia, clinical T stage, presence of hydronephrosis, histology of TURBT specimen, and NLR are novel preoperative prognostic factors even after adjustment for other known preoperative predictors in patients undergoing RC for bladder 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