Prognostic Value of Preoperative Body Mass Index for Diabetic Patients with Non-metastasis Gastric Cancer: A Single Center Experience

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-330099/v1

Download PDF

Research article

Prognostic Value of Preoperative Body Mass Index for Diabetic Patients with Non-metastasis Gastric Cancer: A Single Center Experience

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-330099/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Journal Publication

published 09 Aug, 2021

Read the published version in BMC Surgery →

You are reading this latest preprint version

AIM: This study was designed to investigate the prognostic effect of preoperative body mass index (BMI) for Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients with non-metastasis gastric cancer (GC) who underwent D₂ gastrectomy.

METHODS：T2DM patients with pT_1-4bN_0-3bM₀ GC were retrospectively collected in our cancer center from January, 2000 to December, 2010.

Chi-square test was used to analyze unordered categorical variables and ranked data, followed by Kaplan-Meier analysis as well as Cox regression models to detect risk factors for survival outcomes.

In addition, the cut-off point was determined by the X-tile program. All analyses were carried out using survival package of R and SPSS Software.

RESULTS： A total of 302 T2DM patients with pT_1-4bN_0-3bM₀ GC were collected and analyzed. The cut-off point of BMI, identified by the X-tile program, was 19 kg/m2. Patients with low BMI (< 19 kg/m2) had a higher percentage of advanced T stage (T_4aand T_4b), more advanced TNM stage(stage IIIA, IIIB and IIIC), and more elevated level of serum carcinoembryonic antigen(CEA), compared to those with high BMI(>19 kg/m2)(all P < 0.05). In the low BMI subgroup, the 5-year overall survival rate was 39.02%, which was as high as 58.11% in the high BMI subgroup (P < 0.05). In the multivariate Cox regression model revealed that III_C stage (OR= 3.101), N_3bstage (OR= 3.113) were the most important prognostic indicators, followed by pretreatment BMI (OR= 2.136).

CONCLUSION: Low preoperative BMI (<19 kg/m2) was a poor prognostic marker for T2DM patients with pT_1-4bN_0-3bM₀ GC.

Surgery

General Surgery

BMI

Type 2 diabetes mellitus

Gastric Cancer

X-tile

survival rate

Patients with low BMI (< 19 kg/m2) had a higher percentage of advanced T stage (T_4aand T_4b), more advanced TNM stage(stage IIIA, IIIB and IIIC), and more elevated level of serum CEA, lower 5-year overall survival rate compared to those with high BMI(>19 kg/m2). In the multivariate Cox regression model revealed that III_C stage, N_3bstage were the most important prognostic indicators, followed by pretreatment BMI. So low preoperative BMI (<19 kg/m2) was a poor prognostic marker for T2DM patients with pT_1-4bN_0-3bM₀ GC.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus(T₂DM) has gradually become a growing global public health burden. The relationship between obesity and cancers has been well investigated and BMI is the most commonly used indicator. However, the current classification of BMI hardly matches the true circumstance. We enrolled 302 patients who had gastric cancers in this research and the cut-off point was set at 19 kg/m². The low BMI(< 19 kg/m²) group showed a worse biological behavior and a lower 5-year overall survival rate. Moreover, our data showed that diabetic GC patients with low preoperative BMI(<19 kg/m²) were associated with a doubled mortality risk.

Gastric cancer (GC) ranks the second in all cases of cancer-related mortality, accounting for approximately one million GC-related deaths per year^[1]. D₂ radical resection of the stomach combined with regional lymphadenectomy has been verified to be the single radical option^[2-6]. Although there has been great advance in diagnosis as well as treatment of GC, little progress has been achieved in long-term prognosis. Hence, it is particularly necessary to find a novel prognostic marker, which is noninvasive and accessible before treatment.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T₂DM) has gradually become a growing global public health burden [7]. the prevalence of T₂DM is up to 8.3% worldwide [8] according to the International Diabetes Federation, which varies in different regions and countries. It is estimated that 552 million people will develop diabetes by 2030 globally [8]. T₂DM may predispose patients to premature illness and death due to the relevant risks of cardiovascular diseases [9]. The prevalence of T₂DM has enhanced substantially in recent years, and the presence of T₂DM has been confirmed to be related with increased risks of multiple malignancies [10]. Moreover, and the relationship between diabetes mellitus (DM) and risks of developing cancers has been examined in numerous meta-analyses.

Obesity is an emerging risk factor for several cancers worldwide, and the relationship between obesity and cancers has been well investigated in various types of malignancies [11-14]. T₂DM is a multifactorial and chronic group of metabolic disorders characterized by hyperglycemia[7, 15], which is a result of obesity to some extent. In consideration of the relationship between obesity and long-term post-operative outcome in GC patients, several studies have revealed that obesity/overweight may correlate with the long-term outcome.

Body mass index (BMI) is the most commonly used index of body mass^[16]. Some authors have suggested a relationship between increased BMI and esophageal and gastric cardia adenocarcinoma^[17-19]. Conversely, some studies have demonstrated that high BMI was associated with a good prognosis of GC patients^{[20, 21]}. According to the World Health Organization (WHO) classification system, BMI is generally categorized into the following four grades^[22]: underweight (< 18.5kg/m²), normal weight (18.5kg/m²–24.9kg/m²), overweight (25.0kg/m²–29.9kg/m²), and obese (≥ 30.0kg/m²). However, it hardly matches the true circumstance for the GC patients with T₂DM. The role of preoperative BMI on the survival of T₂DM patients with GC survival remains unclear. Hence, the retrospective study was designed to investigate the effect of preoperative BMI on the survival outcome in T₂DM patients with non-metastatic GC after D₂ gastrectomy.

Patients

From January 2000 to December 2012, a retrospective analysis was conducted of 302 non-metastasis consecutive diabetic patients with GC who underwent D₂ lymphadenectomy, at the department of gastrointestinal surgery, Fujian Cancer Hospital & Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospital. All of the patients were diagnosed with stage pT_1-4bN_0-3bM₀ GC according to the 7th edition of the TNM classifcation[23]. Data from these patients were entered into a prospectively maintained database.

The inclusion criteria were as follows: 1. non-metastasis GC; 2. adenocarcinoma conformed by histopathology; 3. physical fitness suitable for surgery; 4. D₂ lymphadenectomy; and 5. no prior history of any type of adjunctive therapy; 6. preprandial glucose> 7.1 mmo/L.

The exclusion criteria were as follows: 1. older than 80 years of age; 2. previous or concomitant other cancer; 3. previous or concomitant gastrectomy for benign disease; 4. previous chemotherapy or radiotherapy; 5. esophageal involvement; or 6. distant metastatic disease; 7.non-curative resection; 8. multiple primary malignancies; 9. remnant GC; 10. 15 retrieved lymph nodes, and 11. mortality within 30 days after surgery.

This data set included patient demographics (age and sex), pathologic characteristics (depth of invasion, number of metastatic lymph nodes, and number of examined lymph nodes), and follow-up data (follow-up duration and survival). The depth of invasion was categorized as mucosa, submucosa, proper muscle, subserosa, serosa, or adjacent organ invasion. The number of metastatic lymph nodes was categorized according to the node grouping of the seventh TNM classiﬁcation[23]. Adjuvant chemotherapy was categorized as received or not received. Follow-up data were collected from hospital records for patients who were lost to follow-up. The follow-up duration was measured from the time of surgery to the last follow-up date, and information regarding the survival status at the last follow-up was collected.

All of the above patients were followed up by telephone interviews. The last follow-up was 1 January 2017. The logical and follow-up findings were collected and recorded in the database. All subjects gave written informed consent to the study protocol, which was approved by the Ethical Committees of Fujian Cancer Hospital & Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospital.

Surgery

According to the 7th edition NCCN guidelines[24], surgery with lymph node (LN) dissection is the primary treatment option for medically fit patients with resectable T_1-4b, any N tumors. All patients in the study underwent standard total or distal gastrectomy, depending on the location and macroscopic appearance of the primary tumor (Table 1). The strategy for LN dissections was determined using a standardized technique according to the guidelines of the 2010 Japanese Classification of Gastric Cancer and Gastric Cancer Treatment Guidelines edited by the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association[25].

Clinicopathological characteristics

The clinicopathological findings, including depth of tumor invasion and LN metastases, were utilized to stage tumors according to the 7th edition NCCN guidelines[24]. LNs were dissected and described according to the Japanese Classification of Gastric Carcinoma[25], which was also used to classify the location, histological type, and lymphatic invasion of tumors.

Statistical analysis

The associations between N category and clinic-pathological features were analyzed using Chi-square test. Risk factors for survival outcomes were identified by Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression models. Only variables that were significance in univariate analysis were included in the multivariate model. The X-tile program(http://www.tissuearray.org/rimmlab/) which identified the cut-off with the minimum P values from log-rank χ2 statistics was used to divide patients into high and low risk subsets, as previously described[26]. The primary endpoints of this study was cause specific survival (CSS). Deaths attributed to gastric cancer were treated as events, while other reasons caused deaths or survivors were defined as censored events. All analyses were performed with survival package of R(Version 3.2.1) and SPSS(Version 22.0). Prism 5 for Windows(Version 5.01, GraphPad Software) was used to draft the figure of Kaplan-Meier curve. Difference with P-value <0.05 was regarded as statistically significant.

Identification of BMI cut-off points

X-tail plots, constructed in, illustrated that the optimal cut-off point of BMI was 19 kg/m2 using minimum P value from log-rank ÷2 test, with the strongest discriminatory capacity (Fig.1).

Clinicopathologic characteristics of patients

A total of 302 T₂DM patients with pT_1-4bN_0-3bM₀ GC, underwent D₂ radical resection, were collected for analysis. with 132 deaths in a median follow-up of 87.6 months (range 63 to 114 months). A detailed description of the associations between BMI level and clinic-pathological characteristics were presented in Table 1. As anticipated, patients with low BMI (<19 kg/m2) have high percentage of female, advanced T₄ category (T_4aand T_4b), advanced TNM category (stage III_A, III_B and III_C), and level of serum CEA (all P<0.05). In the low BMI subgroup, the percentage of T₄category (79.3% vs 56.6%, P=0.002) and stage_III (79.3% vs 56.1%, P=0.002) was significantly higher in the low BMI subgroup than in the high BMI subgroup.

Survival analysis

The 5-year OS of T₂DM GC patients whose BMI less than 19 kg/m2 and more than 19 kg/m2 subgroups were 39.02% and 58.11%, respectively (Fig.2). At the same time, the risk level of BMI was built using the linear combination of BMI with the estimated regression coefficients derived from the above Cox regression analysis as the weight to calculate the death risk score for each patient. Distribution of death and the survival status of stage I_A-III_C GC were shown in Fig.3. The plot of HRs for BMI sharply decreased as the level of BMI increased.

Independent prognostic factors in the training cohort

Variables considered significant in the multivariate analysis were entered in the Cox multivariate analysis. A total of 6 variables, including H.pylori infection (OR=1.439), Gender (OR=0.943) have no statistical power (all P>0.05). However, pretreatment BMI (OR=2.136), III_B category (OR=1.845), III_C category (OR=3.101), T_4acategory (OR=1.617), T_4bcategory (OR=1. 8), N_1c category (OR=1.701), N₂ category (OR=1.812), N_3a category (OR=2.145), and N_3b category (OR=3.113), respectively (all P< 0.05) were proved independent in the multivariate Cox regression model (Table 2, Fig.4).

To the best of our knowledge, our work is the first one to systematically assess the clinical significance of BMI level in T₂DM patients with non-metastatic GC. In spite of unclear underlying mechanisms, our study reveals that the pretreatment BMI is a significant indicator in predicting cancer-specific survival (CSS) in GC patients with T₂DM. In the Cox multivariate analysis, pretreatment BMI under 19 kg/m² was found to be an independent prognostic factor (OR = 2.136).

The important aspect in the intricate relation between the eﬀect of BMI and GC is still unknown. Many investigation have been made on this relation, which harbor diverse results in terms of survival, pathological findings and surgical procedures[21, 27, 28]. Recent studies have reported a significantly decreased overall survival (OS) in underweight patients, defined as BMI under 18.5 kg/m2, who previously underwent gastrectomy due to GC [29], indicating a close correlation between low BMI and poor prognosis in GC patients. Consistently, our study found that the pretreatment BMI is a significant predictor of CSS in GC patients with T₂DM. It was further confirmed that a preoperative BMI < 19 kg/m2 was a predictor of poor prognosis.

Lymph node involvement has been verified as the most independently essential factor for survival of GC[30-34], whose accurate evaluation largely depends on the sufficiency of lymphadenectomy[35]. In our data, N_3b category (OR = 3.113) was the most vital indicator, followed by N_3a category (OR = 2.145), N₂ category (OR = 1.812), and N₁ category (OR = 1.701). Curative surgery of GC is rather tough in case of T₄ category , which includes tumor extension into serosa (T_4a) as well as surrounding organs and tissues (T_4b), which bears an unsatisfactory prognosis[36-38]. The 5-year survival rate of patients with T_4a GC has been reported to be rather low, 20% of whom pass away due to recurrence despite radical surgery of primary lesions. In the cohort, the percentage of T₄was up to 79.3% in patients with BMI < 19 kg/m2, and the corresponding data was 56.6% in the subgroup of BMI ≥ 19 kg/m2 (P = 0.002). In the cox multivariate analysis, T_4a category (OR = 1.617), T_4bcategory (OR = 1.908) were found to be independent risk factors. Pathologic TNM category is a helpful tool to predict prognosis in GC patients, nonetheless, a combination of preoperative BMI level can enhance predictive accuracy[39, 40]. In line with studies in other types of cancers, our findings demonstrated that low preoperative BMI (< 19 kg/m2) was a hazard factor for poor survival in patients with GC.

Our work was a retrospective single-institute study, which was the major limitation. Anyhow, our work demonstrated for the first time that pretreatment BMI was associated with the prognosis of GC patients with T₂DM. Specifically, a low pretreatment BMI predicted poor survival outcomes in GC patients with T₂DM. The application of BMI is efficient, cost-effective and easy-calculated compared to other invasive procedures.

Collectively, our data showed that low preoperative BMI(<19 kg/m2) was a prognostic factor for poor survival in patients with GC, and was useful in clinical practice and research design.

Acknowledgments

We appreciate the help from Ms. Xiaoling Chen in collecting the follow-up data for this study.

Authors’ contributions

Zaisheng Ye and Shenghong Wei : Acquisition of data and drafting of the article; Zaisheng Ye,Qinying Liu and Qiuhong Zheng:participated in the data analysis; Yi Zeng, Yi Wang ,Shu Chen and Zhitao Lin: Analysis and interpretation of the data and statistical expertise; Zaisheng Ye,Shenghong Wei and Luchuan Chen: Conception and design of the study.All of authors reviewed and approved the manuscript.

Funding

This research was sponsored by the National Clinical Key Specialty Construction Program of China and grants from the National Science Foundation Project of Fujian Science and Technology Department (No. 2017J01264 and No. 2018Y0015)，Foundation for Fujian Provincial Health Technology Project (No.2019-ZQN-16，2019-CXB-9，2019006) and Startup Fund for scientific research, Fujian Medical University (No. 2017Q1219， 2017Q1220).

Institutional review board statement:

This study was approved by Institutional Ethnic Committee of Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospita.

Informed consent statement:

Patients were not required to give informed consent to the study because the analysis used anonymous clinical data that were obtained after each patient agreed to treatment by verbal consent. Individuals can’t be identified according to the data presented.

Conflict-of-interest statement:

The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding this manuscript.

Data sharing statement:

No additional data are available.

Kamangar F, Dores GM, Anderson WF. Patterns of cancer incidence, mortality, and prevalence across five continents: defining priorities to reduce cancer disparities in different geographic regions of the world. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(14):2137–50. DOI:10.1200/JCO.2005.05.2308]. [PMID: 16682732.
Han DS, Suh YS, Kong SH, Lee HJ, Choi Y, Aikou S, Sano T, Park BJ, Kim WH, Yang HK. Nomogram predicting long-term survival after d2 gastrectomy for gastric cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(31):3834–40. DOI:10.1200/JCO.2012.41.8343]. [PMID: 23008291.
Chang JS, Kim KH, Yoon HI, Hyung WJ, Rha SY, Kim HS, Lee YC, Lim JS, Noh SH, Koom WS. Locoregional relapse after gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer. Br J Surg. 2017;104(7):877–84. DOI:10.1002/bjs.10502]. [PMID: 28245053.
Mizuno A, Shinohara H, Haruta S, Tsunoda S, Kurahashi Y, Ohkura Y, Udagawa H, Sakai Y. Lymphadenectomy along the infrapyloric artery may be dispensable when performing pylorus-preserving gastrectomy for early middle-third gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer. 2017;20(3):543–7. [PMID: 27516348 DOI: 10.1007/s10120-016-0632–2].
Son SY, Shin DJ, Park YS, Oo AM, Jung DH, Lee CM, Ahn SH, Park DJ, Kim HH. Spleen-preserving lymphadenectomy versus splenectomy in laparoscopic total gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer. Surg Oncol. 2017;26(2):207–11. DOI:10.1016/j.suronc.2017.04.002]. [PMID: 28577727.
Woo Y, Goldner B, Ituarte P, Lee B, Melstrom L, Son T, Noh SH, Fong Y, Hyung WJ. Lymphadenectomy with Optimum of 29 Lymph Nodes Retrieved Associated with Improved Survival in Advanced Gastric Cancer: A 25,000-Patient International Database Study. J Am Coll Surg. 2017;224(4):546–55. DOI:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.12.015]. [PMID: 28017807.
Xu CX, Zhu HH, Zhu YM. Diabetes and cancer: Associations, mechanisms, and implications for medical practice. World J Diabetes. 2014;5(3):372–80. DOI:10.4239/wjd.v5.i3.372]. [PMID: 24936258 PMCID: 4058741.
L'Heveder R, Nolan T. International Diabetes Federation. Diabetes research and clinical practice 2013; 101(3): 349–351 [PMID: 24119591 DOI: 10.1016/j.diabres.2013.08.003].
Mazzone T. Intensive glucose lowering and cardiovascular disease prevention in diabetes: reconciling the recent clinical trial data. Circulation. 2010;122(21):2201–11. DOI:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.913350]. [PMID: 21098460 PMCID: 3005220.
Shi Y, Hu FB. The global implications of diabetes and cancer. Lancet 2014; 383(9933): 1947–1948 [PMID: 24910221 DOI: 10.1016/S0140–6736(14)60886–2].
Calle EE, Rodriguez C, Walker-Thurmond K, Thun MJ. Overweight, obesity, and mortality from cancer in a prospectively studied cohort of U.S. adults. N Engl J Med. 2003;348(17):1625–38. [PMID: 12711737 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa021423].
Oh SW, Yoon YS, Shin SA. Effects of excess weight on cancer incidences depending on cancer sites and histologic findings among men: Korea National Health Insurance Corporation Study. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(21):4742–54. DOI:10.1200/JCO.2005.11.726]. [PMID: 16034050.
Renehan AG, Tyson M, Egger M, Heller RF, Zwahlen M. Body-mass index and incidence of cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective observational studies. Lancet. 2008;371(9612):569–78. [PMID: 18280327 DOI: 10.1016/S0140–6736(08)60269-X].
Wang J, Yang DL, Chen ZZ, Gou BF. Associations of body mass index with cancer incidence among populations, genders, and menopausal status: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer epidemiology. 2016;42:1–8. DOI:10.1016/j.canep.2016.02.010]. [PMID: 26946037.
Takeuchi D, Koide N, Komatsu D, Okumura M, Suzuki A, Miyagawa S. Relationships of obesity and diabetes mellitus to other primary cancers in surgically treated gastric cancer patients. Int J Surg. 2014;12(6):587–93. DOI:10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.04.012]. [PMID: 24802517.
Criqui MH, Klauber MR, Barrett-Connor E, Holdbrook MJ, Suarez L, Wingard DL. Adjustment for obesity in studies of cardiovascular disease. Am J Epidemiol. 1982;116(4):685–91. [PMID: 7137155].
Abnet CC, Freedman ND, Hollenbeck AR, Fraumeni JF Jr, Leitzmann M, Schatzkin A. A prospective study of BMI and risk of oesophageal and gastric adenocarcinoma. Eur J Cancer. 2008;44(3):465–71. DOI:10.1016/j.ejca.2007.12.009]. [PMID: 18221867 PMCID: 2350215.
Cho Y, Lee DH, Oh HS, Seo JY, Lee DH, Kim N, Jeong SH, Kim JW, Hwang JH, Park YS, Lee SH, Shin CM, Jo HJ, Jung HC, Yoon YB, Song IS. Higher prevalence of obesity in gastric cardia adenocarcinoma compared to gastric non-cardia adenocarcinoma. Dig Dis Sci. 2012;57(10):2687–92. DOI:10.1007/s10620-012-2095–6]. [PMID: 22484493.
O'Doherty MG, Freedman ND, Hollenbeck AR, Schatzkin A, Abnet CC. A prospective cohort study of obesity and risk of oesophageal and gastric adenocarcinoma in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study. Gut. 2012;61(9):1261–8. [PMID: 22174193 PMCID: 3504700 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl–2011–300551].
Tokunaga M, Hiki N, Fukunaga T, Ohyama S, Yamaguchi T, Nakajima T. Better 5-year survival rate following curative gastrectomy in overweight patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16(12):3245–51. [PMID: 19636624 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-009-0645–8].
Kulig J, Sierzega M, Kolodziejczyk P, Dadan J, Drews M, Fraczek M, Jeziorski A, Krawczyk M, Starzynska T, Wallner G. Polish Gastric Cancer Study G. Implications of overweight in gastric cancer: A multicenter study in a Western patient population. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2010;36(10):969–76. DOI:10.1016/j.ejso.2010.07.007]. [PMID: 20727706.
Luczynski W, Szypowska A, Bossowski A, Ramotowska A, Recko P, Rembinska M, Tercjak M, Blecharczyk B, Lachowska U, Suchon P, Wisniewska K, Bernatowicz P, Glowinska-Olszewska B. [Overweight, obesity and metabolic syndrome in children with type 1 diabetes melllitus]. Pediatric endocrinology, diabetes, and metabolism 2010; 16(2): 83–88 [PMID: 20813084].
Santiago JM, Sasako M, Osorio J. [TNM–7th edition 2009 (UICC/AJCC) and Japanese Classification 2010 in Gastric Cancer. Towards simplicity and standardisation in the management of gastric cancer]. Cirugia espanola. 2011;89(5):275–81. DOI:10.1016/j.ciresp.2010.10.011]. [PMID: 21256476.
Tsai YC, Hsiao WH, Lin SH, Yang HB, Cheng HC, Chang WL, Lu CC, Sheu BS. Genomic single nucleotide polymorphisms in the offspring of gastric cancer patients predispose to spasmolytic polypeptide-expressing metaplasia after H. pylori infection. Journal of biomedical science. 2015;22:16. DOI:10.1186/s12929-015-0121–7]. [PMID: 25884934 PMCID: 4340867.
Sano T. [Evaluation of the gastric cancer treatment guidelines of the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association]. Gan to kagaku ryoho. Cancer chemotherapy. 2010;37(4):582–6. [PMID: 20414011].
Camp RL, Dolled-Filhart M, Rimm DL. X-tile: a new bio-informatics tool for biomarker assessment and outcome-based cut-point optimization. Clin Cancer Res. 2004;10(21):7252–9. [PMID: 15534099 DOI: 10.1158/1078–0432.CCR–04–0713].
Bickenbach KA, Denton B, Gonen M, Brennan MF, Coit DG, Strong VE. Impact of obesity on perioperative complications and long-term survival of patients with gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(3):780–7. [PMID: 22976377 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-012-2653–3].
Park SM, Lim MK, Shin SA, Yun YH. Impact of prediagnosis smoking, alcohol, obesity, and insulin resistance on survival in male cancer patients: National Health Insurance Corporation Study. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(31):5017–24. DOI:10.1200/JCO.2006.07.0243]. [PMID: 17075121.
Ejaz A, Spolverato G, Kim Y, Poultsides GA, Fields RC, Bloomston M, Cho CS, Votanopoulos K, Maithel SK, Pawlik TM. Impact of body mass index on perioperative outcomes and survival after resection for gastric cancer. J Surg Res. 2015;195(1):74–82. DOI:10.1016/j.jss.2014.12.048]. [PMID: 25619462.
Deng J, Liang H, Sun D, Wang D, Pan Y. Suitability of 7th UICC N category for predicting the overall survival of gastric cancer patients after curative resection in China. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17(5):1259–66. DOI:10.1245/s10434-010-0939-x]. [PMID: 20217252.
Chae S, Lee A, Lee JH. The effectiveness of the new (7th) UICC N classification in the prognosis evaluation of gastric cancer patients: a comparative study between the 5th/6th and 7th UICC N classification. Gastric Cancer. 2011;14(2):166–71. [PMID: 21360132 DOI: 10.1007/s10120-011-0024–6].
Mita K, Ito H, Fukumoto M, Murabayashi R, Koizumi K, Hayashi T, Kikuchi H. Surgical outcomes and survival after extended multiorgan resection for T4 gastric cancer. Am J Surg. 2012;203(1):107–11. DOI:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2010.12.007]. [PMID: 21474116.
Siewert JR, Bottcher K, Stein HJ, Roder JD. Relevant prognostic factors in gastric cancer: ten-year results of the German Gastric Cancer Study. Ann Surg. 1998;228(4):449–61. [PMID: 9790335 PMCID: 1191515].
Kim JP, Kim YW, Yang HK, Noh DY. Significant prognostic factors by multivariate analysis of 3926 gastric cancer patients. World J Surg. 1994;18(6):872–7. discussion 877–878 [PMID: 7846911].
Chen XL, Zhao LY, Xue L, Xu YH, Zhang WH, Liu K, Chen XZ, Yang K, Zhang B, Chen ZX, Chen JP, Zhou ZG, Hu JK. Prognostic significance and the role in TNM category of extranodal metastasis within regional lymph nodes station in gastric carcinoma. Oncotarget. 2016;7(41):67047–60. DOI:10.18632/oncotarget.11478]. [PMID: 27563811 PMCID: 5341856.
Ozer I, Bostanci EB, Orug T, Ozogul YB, Ulas M, Ercan M, Kece C, Atalay F, Akoglu M. Surgical outcomes and survival after multiorgan resection for locally advanced gastric cancer. Am J Surg. 2009;198(1):25–30. DOI:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2008.06.031]. [PMID: 18823618.
Cheng CT, Tsai CY, Hsu JT, Vinayak R, Liu KH, Yeh CN, Yeh TS, Hwang TL, Jan YY. Aggressive surgical approach for patients with T4 gastric carcinoma: promise or myth? Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18(6):1606–14. DOI:10.1245/s10434-010-1534-x]. [PMID: 21222167.
Dhar DK, Kubota H, Tachibana M, Kinugasa S, Masunaga R, Shibakita M, Kohno H, Nagasue N. Prognosis of T4 gastric carcinoma patients: an appraisal of aggressive surgical treatment. J Surg Oncol. 2001;76(4):278–82. [PMID: 11320520].
Chiu CF, Yang HR, Yang MD, Jeng LB, Yang TY, Sargeant AM, Bai LY. Palliative Gastrectomy Prolongs Survival of Metastatic Gastric Cancer Patients with Normal Preoperative CEA or CA19–9 Values: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2016; 2016: 6846027 [PMID: 27990157 PMCID: 5136406 DOI: 10.1155/2016/6846027].
Deng K, Yang L, Hu B, Wu H, Zhu H, Tang C. The prognostic significance of pretreatment serum CEA levels in gastric cancer: a meta-analysis including 14651 patients. PLoS One 2015; 10(4): e0124151 [PMID: 25879931 PMCID: 4400039 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0124151].

Table 1. Demographics and clinicopathologic characteristics of patients with gastric cancer

	BMI < 19 kg/m2 (n=29)		BMI ≥ 19 kg/m2 (n=273)		P-value
H. Pylori infection
Y	2	6.9%	17	7.2%	0.975
N	27	93.1%	220	92.8%
Age	56.69±13.1 57(30-79)		58.81±11.27 59(23-82)
Gender
M	16	55.2%	180	75.9%	0.016
F	13	44.8%	57	24.1%
CEA level	14.32±4.53		11.58±3.38		0.004
T category
1a	-	-	22	9.3%	0.003
1b	-	-	22	9.3%	0.002#
2	3	10.3%	34	14.3%
3	3	10.3%	25	10.5%
4a	18	62.1%	127	53.6%*
4b	5	17.2%	7	3%*
N category
0	4	13.8%	79	33.3%	0.301
1	7	24.1%	41	17.3%	0.082$
2	7	24.1%	41	17.3%
3a	6	20.7%	45	19%*
3b	5	17.2%	31	13.1%*
TNM category
IA	0		34	14.3%	0.213
IB	1	3.4%	23	9.7%	0.002&
IIA	3	10.3%	20	8.4%
IIB	2	6.9%	27	11.4%
IIIA	6	20.7%	31	13.1%*
IIIB	6	20.7%	37	15.6%*
IIIC	11	37.9%	65	27.4%*

Table 2 Cox Proportional Hazards Multivariate Regression Analysis Results

	B	SE	Wald	Sig.	Exp(B)	95.0% CI used for Exp(B)
	B	SE	Wald	Sig.	Exp(B)	Low		upper
H.pylori infection	.364	.368	.977	.323	1.439	.699	2.959
Gender	-.059	.254	.053	.818	.943	.573	1.552
BMI	.036	.005	43.388	.000	2.136	1.525	3.147
TNM category
IA					1(reference)
IB	-7.243	36.242	.040	.842	1.153	.514	2.584
IIA	-7.871	36.272	.047	.828	1.211	.704	2.130
IIB	-9.443	36.313	.068	.795	1.331	.654	2.411
IIIA	-10.091	36.359	.077	.781	1.411	.704	2.830
IIIB	-10.396	36.399	.082	.000	1.845	1.410	2.312
IIIC	-10.747	36.446	.087	.000	3.101	2.33	4.312
T category
1a					1(reference)
1b	5.579	17.095	.107	.744	1.153	.514	2.584
2	12.454	40.017	.097	.756	1.411	.704	2.830
3	14.452	40.041	.130	.718	1.230	.654	2.311
4a	14.850	40.063	.137	.012	1.617	1.308	3.130
4b	15.474	40.076	.149	.008	1.908	1.318	4.000
N category
0					1(reference)
1	2.678	1.090	6.036	.002	1.701	1.216	2.406
2	3.187	1.502	4.503	.000	1.812	1.322	2.517
3a	3.918	1.919	4.167	.000	2.145	1.510	3.034
3b	3.994	1.882	4.502	.000	3.113	2.133	4.539

Download PDF

Journal Publication

published 09 Aug, 2021

Read the published version in BMC Surgery →

Editorial decision: Major revision
21 Apr, 2021
Review #2 received at journal
27 Mar, 2021
Review #1 received at journal
27 Mar, 2021
Reviewer #2 agreed at journal
21 Feb, 2021
Reviewer #1 agreed at journal
20 Feb, 2021
Editor assigned by journal
17 Feb, 2021
Reviewers invited by journal
17 Feb, 2021
Submission checks completed at journal
17 Feb, 2021
Editor invited by journal
17 Feb, 2021
First submitted to journal
20 Dec, 2020

You are reading this latest preprint version

Prognostic Value of Preoperative Body Mass Index for Diabetic Patients with Non-metastasis Gastric Cancer: A Single Center Experience

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Synopsis

Core Tip

Introduction

Materials And Methods

Results

Discussion

Declarations

References

Tables

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1