Advertisement

The prognostic significance of the comprehensive complication index in patients with gastric cancer

  • Shota Shimizu
  • Hiroaki SaitoEmail author
  • Yusuke Kono
  • Yuki Murakami
  • Yuji Shishido
  • Kozo Miyatani
  • Tomoyuki Matsunaga
  • Yoji Fukumoto
  • Yoshiyuki Fujiwara
Original Article
  • 86 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

Postoperative complications worsen the prognosis of gastric cancer patients. The Clavien–Dindo classification is used to evaluate postoperative complications. The prognostic significance of the comprehensive complication index (CCI), a new tool for evaluating postoperative complications, remains unclear.

Methods

This study included 452 gastric adenocarcinoma patients who underwent curative surgery.

Results

The CCI values were significantly higher in older patients ( ≥ 70 years; P < 0.0001), male patients (P < 0.0001), those with lymphatic invasion (P = 0.039), and those with vascular invasion (P = 0.037). The five-year overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) rates were significantly higher in patients without postoperative complications and those with Clavien–Dindo grade 1 complications in comparison to those with Clavien–Dindo grade 2–4 complications (80.4% vs. 66.2%, P = 0.0011; 89.7% vs. 82.3%; P = 0.045, respectively). Among patients with Clavien–Dindo grade 2–4 complications, the 5-year OS and DSS rates in the CCIHigh group ( ≥ 32.15) were significantly lower than those in the CCILow group ( < 32.15; 47.5% vs. 74.9%, P = 0.0086; 63.1% vs. 90.0%, P = 0.0003). A multivariate analysis identified the CCI as an independent prognostic indicator in patients with Clavien–Dindo grade 2–4 complications.

Conclusions

The CCI was closely associated with the prognosis of patients with Clavien–Dindo grade 2–4 complications and may be a prognostic indicator.

Keywords

Clavien–Dindo classification Comprehensive complication index Gastric cancer Prognosis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Edanz Group (www.edanzediting.com/ac) for editing a draft of this manuscript.

Funding

The authors received no grants, equipment or funding for this study.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest in association with the present study.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were carried out in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or with comparable ethical standards.

References

  1. 1.
    Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2014. Japan: KANEHARA & Co., LTD. 2014.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sasako M, Sano T, Yamamoto S, Kurokawa Y, Nashimoto A, Kurita A, et al. D2 lymphadenectomy alone or with para-aortic nodal dissection for gastric cancer. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:453–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, Vauthey JN, Dindo D, Schulick RD, et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009;250:187–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Slankamenac K, Graf R, Barkun J, Puhan MA, Clavien PA. The comprehensive complication index: a novel continuous scale to measure surgical morbidity. Ann Surg. 2013;258:1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kim TH, Suh YS, Huh YJ, Son YG, Park JH, Yang JY, et al. The comprehensive complication index (CCI) is a more sensitive complication index than the conventional Clavien-Dindo classification in radical gastric cancer surgery. Gastric Cancer. 2018;21:171–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Murthy BL, Thomson CS, Dodwell D, Shenoy H, Mikeljevic JS, Forman D, et al. Postoperative wound complications and systemic recurrence in breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2007;97:1211–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kulu Y, Tarantio I, Warschkow R, Kny S, Schneider M, Schmied BM, et al. Anastomotic leakage is associated with impaired overall and disease-free survival after curative rectal cancer resection: a propensity score analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22:2059–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Aoyama T, Murakawa M, Katayama Y, Yamaoku K, Kanazawa A, Higuchi A, et al. Impact of postoperative complications on survival and recurrence in pancreatic cancer. Anticancer Res. 2015;35:2401–9.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Saeki H, Tsutsumi S, Tajiri H, Yukaya T, Tsutsumi R, Nishimura S, et al. Prognostic Significance of Postoperative Complications After Curative Resection for Patients With Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Annals of surgery 2016.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hayashi T, Yoshikawa T, Aoyama T, Hasegawa S, Yamada T, Tsuchida K, et al. Impact of infectious complications on gastric cancer recurrence. Gastric Cancer. 2015;18:368–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tokunaga M, Tanizawa Y, Bando E, Kawamura T, Terashima M. Poor survival rate in patients with postoperative intra-abdominal infectious complications following curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:1575–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yamashita S, Sheth RA, Niekamp AS, Aloia TA, Chun YS, Lee JE, et al. Comprehensive Complication Index Predicts Cancer-specific Survival After Resection of Colorectal Metastases Independent of RAS Mutational Status. Ann Surg. 2017;266:1045–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Japanese classification of gastric carcinoma: 3rd English edition. Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association 2011;14:101–12.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sietses C, Beelen RH, Meijer S, Cuesta MA. Immunological consequences of laparoscopic surgery, speculations on the cause and clinical implications. Langenbeck's Arch Surg. 1999;384:250–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Goldfarb Y, Sorski L, Benish M, Levi B, Melamed R, Ben-Eliyahu S. Improving postoperative immune status and resistance to cancer metastasis: a combined perioperative approach of immunostimulation and prevention of excessive surgical stress responses. Ann Surg. 2011;253:798–810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hodi FS, O'Day SJ, McDermott DF, Weber RW, Sosman JA, Haanen JB, et al. Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:711–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Brahmer J, Reckamp KL, Baas P, Crino L, Eberhardt WE, Poddubskaya E, et al. Nivolumab versus docetaxel in advanced squamous-cell non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:123–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Postow MA, Chesney J, Pavlick AC, Robert C, Grossmann K, McDermott D, et al. Nivolumab and ipilimumab versus ipilimumab in untreated melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:2006–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dunn GP, Old LJ, Schreiber RD. The immunobiology of cancer immunosurveillance and immunoediting. Immunity. 2004;21:137–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Miyatani K, Saito H, Kono Y, Murakami Y, Kuroda H, Matsunaga T, et al. Combined analysis of the pre- and postoperative neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio predicts the outcomes of patients with gastric cancer. Surg Today. 2018;48:300–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wang KX, Denhardt DT. Osteopontin: role in immune regulation and stress responses. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev. 2008;19:333–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rose-John S, Waetzig GH, Scheller J, Grotzinger J, Seegert D. The IL-6/sIL-6R complex as a novel target for therapeutic approaches. Expert Opin Ther Targets. 2007;11:613–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wu CY, Wu MS, Chiang EP, Wu CC, Chen YJ, Chen CJ, et al. Elevated plasma osteopontin associated with gastric cancer development, invasion and survival. Gut. 2007;56:782–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rittling SR, Chambers AF. Role of osteopontin in tumour progression. Br J Cancer. 2004;90:1877–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Middleton K, Jones J, Lwin Z, Coward JI. Interleukin-6: an angiogenic target in solid tumours. Crit Rev Oncol/Hematol. 2014;89:129–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rangaswami H, Bulbule A, Kundu GC. Osteopontin: role in cell signaling and cancer progression. Trends Cell Biol. 2006;16:79–877.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Denhardt DT, Noda M, O'Regan AW, Pavlin D, Berman JS. Osteopontin as a means to cope with environmental insults: regulation of inflammation, tissue remodeling, and cell survival. J Clin Investig. 2001;107:1055–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nakajima T, Kinoshita T, Nashimoto A, Sairenji M, Yamaguchi T, Sakamoto J, et al. Randomized controlled trial of adjuvant uracil-tegafur versus surgery alone for serosa-negative, locally advanced gastric cancer. Br J Surg. 2007;94:1468–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sakuramoto S, Sasako M, Yamaguchi T, Kinoshita T, Fujii M, Nashimoto A, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer with S-1, an oral fluoropyrimidine. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:1810–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bang YJ, Kim YW, Yang HK, Chung HC, Park YK, Lee KH, et al. Adjuvant capecitabine and oxaliplatin for gastric cancer after D2 gastrectomy (CLASSIC): a phase 3 open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet (London, England). 2012;379:315–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Biagi JJ, Raphael MJ, Mackillop WJ, Kong W, King WD, Booth CM. Association between time to initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy and survival in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2011;305:2335–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gagliato Dde M, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Lei X, Theriault RL, Giordano SH, Valero V, et al. Clinical impact of delaying initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:735–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Yamamoto M, Sakaguchi Y, Kinjo N, Yamaguchi S, Egashira A, Minami K, et al. S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy earlier after surgery clinically correlates with prognostic factors for advanced gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23:546–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kader A, Murakami Y, Yoshimoto M, Onishi K, Kuroda H, Matsunaga T, et al. Intra-abdominal complications after curative gastrectomies worsen prognoses of patients with stage II–III gastric cancer. Yonago Acta Medica. 2016;59:210–6.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shota Shimizu
    • 1
  • Hiroaki Saito
    • 1
    Email author
  • Yusuke Kono
    • 1
  • Yuki Murakami
    • 1
  • Yuji Shishido
    • 1
  • Kozo Miyatani
    • 1
  • Tomoyuki Matsunaga
    • 1
  • Yoji Fukumoto
    • 1
  • Yoshiyuki Fujiwara
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, School of MedicineTottori University Faculty of MedicineYonagoJapan

Personalised recommendations