A Diagnostic Nomogram Incorporating Prognostic Nutritional Index for Predicting Vaginal Invasion in Stage IB – IIA Cervical Cancer
Authors:
Open Access
- 1 January 2024
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Cancer Control
- Vol. 31
Abstract
Introduction: With the advancements in cancer prevention and diagnosis, the proportion of newly diagnosed early-stage cervical cancers has increased. Adjuvant therapies based on high-risk postoperative histopathological factors significantly increase the morbidity of treatment complications and seriously affect patients’ quality of life. Objectives: Our study aimed to establish a diagnostic nomogram for vaginal invasion (VI) among early-stage cervical cancer (CC) that can be used to reduce the occurrence of positive or close vaginal surgical margins. Methods: We assembled the medical data of early-stage CC patients between January 2013 and December 2021 from the Fujian Cancer Hospital. Data on demographics, laboratory tests, MRI features, physical examination (PE), and pathological outcomes were collected. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were employed to estimate the diagnostic variables for VI in the training set. Finally, the statistically significant factors were used to construct an integrated nomogram. Results: In this retrospective study, 540 CC patients were randomly divided into training and validation cohorts according to a 7:3 ratio. Multivariate logistic analyses showed that age [odds ratio (OR) = 2.41, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.29-4.50, P = 0.006], prognostic nutritional index (OR = 0.18, 95% CI, 0.04-0.77, P = 0.021), histological type (OR = 0.28, 95% CI, 0.08-0.94, P = 0.039), and VI based on PE (OR = 3.12, 95% CI, 1.52-6.45, P = 0.002) were independent diagnostic factors of VI. The diagnostic nomogram had a robust ability to predict VI in the training [area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.70-0.82] and validation (AUC = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.58-0.83) cohorts, and the calibration curves, decision curve analysis, and confusion matrix showed good prediction power. Conclusion: Our diagnostic nomograms could help gynaecologists quantify individual preoperative VI risk, thereby optimizing treatment options, and minimizing the incidence of multimodality treatment-related complications and the economic burden.Keywords
Funding Information
- the Major Scientific Research Program for Young and Middle-aged Health Professionals of Fujian Province, China (2022ZQNZD008)
- the High-level Talents Training Project of Fujian Cancer Hospital (2022YNG04)
This publication has 32 references indexed in Scilit:
- Assessment of treatment factors and clinical outcomes in cervical cancer in older women compared to women under 65 years oldJournal of Geriatric Oncology, 2018
- Oncologic effectiveness of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy in cervical cancerJournal of Gynecologic Oncology, 2018
- Neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio, platelet–lymphocyte ratio, neutrophil–platelet score and prognostic nutritional index: do they have prognostic significance in metastatic pancreas cancer?Current Medical Research and Opinion, 2017
- Comparison of survival outcomes between radical hysterectomy and definitive radiochemotherapy in stage IB1 and IIA1 cervical cancerCancer Management and Research, 2017
- Does the Robotic Platform Reduce Morbidity Associated With Combined Radical Surgery and Adjuvant Radiation for Early Cervical Cancers?International Journal of Gynecological Cancer, 2016
- Impact of cervical screening on cervical cancer mortality: estimation using stage-specific results from a nested case–control studyBritish Journal of Cancer, 2016
- STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studiesBMJ, 2015
- Imaging techniques for the evaluation of cervical cancerBest Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 2014
- The impact of close surgical margins after radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancerGynecologic Oncology, 2013
- Uterine Cervical Carcinoma: Preoperative Staging with 3.0-T MR Imaging—Comparison with 1.5-T MR ImagingRadiology, 2009