Development and application of the Cancer Cachexia Staging Index for the diagnosis and staging of cancer cachexia
Junjie Wang,Shanjun Tan,Jiahao Xu,Shuhao Li,Mingyue Yan,Fan Yang,Qiuye Huang,Zhige Zhang,Yanni Zhang,Jun Han,Hao Liu,Qiulin Zhuang,Qiulei Xi,Qinyang Meng,Guohao Wu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nut.2023.112114
IF: 4.893
2023-06-05
Nutrition
Abstract:SUMMARY Background & aims The current tools for evaluating cancer cachexia are either too simple to reflect the far-reaching effects of cachexia or too complicated to be used in daily practice. We aim to develop a Cancer Cachexia Staging Index (CCSI) that is both practical and comprehensive. Methods Patients with gastrointestinal cancers were prospectively included in our study. Clinical data including weight change, body composition, systematic inflammation, nutrition, and function status were entered into regression models to determine the best variable combination as well as their respective cutoff values and score distribution in the CCSI. CCSI's ability in predicting outcomes and evaluating the impact of cachexia on patients were then evaluated. Results Clinical information and test results from 10568 patients were used to develop CCSI. CCSI is composed of subjective measures and objective measures. Subjective measures include body mass index-adjusted weight loss grade (WLGS), rate of weight loss, inflammation (neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio [NLR] and C-reactive protein [CRP]), and prealbumin. Objective measures include appetite status and physical status. Patients were diagnosed and stratified by the total CCSI score into 3 subgroups: no cachexia, mild/moderate cachexia, and severe cachexia. CCSI grades showed good survival discrimination and were independently predictive of survival in multivariate analysis. Compared to the the traditional Fearon criteria for diagnosing cancer cachexia, CCSI was more accurate in predicting postoperative complications (Net Reclassification Index [NRI]: 2.8%, 95%CI: 0.0104 to 0.0456), death (NRI: 10.68%, 95%CI: 0.0429 to 0.1708), recurrence (NRI: 3.71%, 95%CI: 0.0082 to 0.0685) and overall survival (NRI: 8.5%, 95%CI: 0.0219 to 0.1533). CCSI also had better discriminative ability than Fearon criteria in discriminating nutritional status, body composition, and systematic inflammation in patients with or without cachexia. A more detailed evaluation of a randomly selected subgroup (N= 1566) showed that CCSI grades had good discrimination of appetite and food intake status, physical function and muscle strength, symptom burden, and quality of life. Conclusions CCSI is a comprehensive and practical evaluation tool for cancer cachexia. It can predict postoperative outcomes and survival. CCSI stages showed good discrimination when evaluating cancer patients in terms of nutritional status, physical function, systematic inflammation, body composition, symptom burden, and quality of life.
nutrition & dietetics