Preoperative Systemic Immune–Inflammation Index (SII) as a Superior Predictor of Long-Term Survival Outcome in Patients With Stage I–II Gastric Cancer After Radical Surgery
Kang He,Lixiang Si,Xiaohua Pan,Ling Sun,Yajing Wang,Jianwei Lu,Xiaohua Wang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.829689
IF: 4.7
2022-02-28
Frontiers in Oncology
Abstract:Background Systemic immune–inflammation index (SII), calculated by immunoinflammatory cell counts of peripheral blood, is considered a predictor of survival outcome in several solid tumors, including gastric cancer (GC). However, there is no study focusing on the prognostic value of SII in the early stage of GC. This study aims to compare prognostic prediction capabilities of several inflammatory indices, nutritional indices, and tumor markers to further verify the superior prognostic value of SII in stage I–II GC patients after surgery. Methods In this study, 548 patients (358 in the training group and 190 in the validation group) with stage I–II GC after radical surgery were retrospectively analyzed. The peripheral blood indices of interest were SII, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), advanced lung cancer inflammation index (ALI), systemic inflammation score (SIS), prognostic nutritional index (PNI), body mass index (BMI), albumin, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), cancer antigen 125 (CA125), carbohydrate-associated antigen 19-9 (CA19-9), and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP). The time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (t-ROC) curves and the area under the curve (AUC) were used to determine the optimal cutoff value and prognostic ability of each parameter. Kaplan–Meier curves and multivariable Cox regression models were used to evaluate independent prognostic factors. The nomogram was constructed based on the result of bidirectional stepwise regression model. Results The optimal cutoff value of SII was 508.3. The 5-year overall survival rate of the low SII (SII-L) group was significantly higher than that of the high SII (SII-H) group (92% vs. 80%, P < 0.001), especially in the elderly and stage II patients (91% vs. 73%, P = 0.001; 86% vs. 67%, P = 0.003, respectively). The significant prognostic values of SII were consistent in most subgroups. In multivariate analysis, SII and CA19-9 were the only two independent prognostic hematology indices. The AUC value of SII (0.624) was greater than that of CA19-9 (0.528) and other prognostic parameters. Adding SII to the conventional model improved the predictive ability of 5-year overall survival as shown by the significantly increased net reclassification improvement (NRI) and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) (P = 0.033, P = 0.053, respectively) and modestly improved consistency index (C-index) (increased by 1.6%). External validation of SII-based nomogram demonstrated favorable predictive performance and discrimination. In addition, interactive web dynamic nomogram was published to facilitate clinical use. Conclusion SII is a simple but powerful index with a high predictive value to predict survival outcome in patients with stage I–II GC after radical operation. The SII-based nomogram can provide intuitive and accurate prognosis prediction of individual patients.
oncology