Prognostic impact of preoperative Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index in oral squamous cell carcinoma

Abstract

Objectives To investigate the prognostic impact of preoperative Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) values in older adults undergoing radical surgery for oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). Subjects and methods This retrospective study included 61 patients ≥65 years old with OSCC (43 men, 18 women; age: 72.1 ± 5.4 years) who underwent radical surgery between 2013 and 2020. Factors influencing overall survival (OS) and disease‐free survival (DFS) were examined. Results Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis indicated that the optimal GNRI value for classifying patients into low‐GNRI (<93.7; OS: n = 19 [31.1%], DFS: n = 42 [68.9%]) and high‐GNRI groups (≥93.7; OS, n = 19 [31.1%]; DFS, n = 42 [68.9%]) was 93.7. OS and DFS rates were significantly lower in the low‐GNRI group than in the high‐GNRI group. Univariate analysis indicated that alcohol use, preoperative serum C‐reactive protein level, lymphatic invasion, postoperative treatment, and GNRI were significantly correlated with OS, while lymphatic invasion, postoperative treatment, and GNRI were significantly correlated with DFS. In multivariate analysis, only GNRI was significantly correlated with OS. DFS and postoperative treatment were independent predictors of DFS. Conclusions Preoperative GNRI may be a significant prognostic factor in older adults with OSCC. GNRI assessment and nutritional intervention may improve prognosis in patients at high nutritional risk.

Prognostic and clinicopathological role of geriatric nutritional risk index in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: A meta-analysis

“…It is calculated by the formula: GNRI = 1.487 × serum albumin (g/L) + 41.7 × present/optimal BW (kg) ( 11 ). In clinical settings, the GNRI is used as a simple nutrition evaluation approach, and a low GNRI indicates poor nutritional status of patients ( 12 , 13 ). In recent years, numerous studies have analyzed the role of GNRI in predicting the prognosis of DLBCL cases ( 14 – 20 ), but their findings remain controversial.…”

Efficacy of the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index for Predicting Overall Survival in Patients with Head and Neck Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

“…Of these, seven were subsequently eliminated, mainly because they either did not report pertinent outcomes (only addressing perioperative complications without survival analysis) or were published as conference abstracts. Finally, ten retrospective studies [20][21][22][25][26][27][28][29][30][31] fulfilled the eligibility requirements and were incorporated into the final qualitative and quantitative analyses.…”

“…Overall, the NOS scores varied from 5 to 8. Four of the studies were categorized as low quality, with scores ranging from 5 to 6, indicating a higher risk of bias [21,27,28,30]. The characteristics of the studies included in the analysis are summarized in Table 2.…”

“…All studies were published between 2021 and 2023, reflecting recent interest in this research area. Eight studies provided information on mean or median age, with a range of 45 to 72.1 years [20][21][22][25][26][27]30,31]. Two studies reported that the proportions of patients aged over 70 and 65 years were 61.3% and 87.2%, respectively [28,29].…”

Prognostic impact of geriatric nutritional risk index on patients with urological cancers: A meta-analysis

“…Nutritional status in patients with cancer may be evaluated using the GNRI because it is a straightforward method. Previous research has revealed the predictive usefulness of the GNRI in many different forms of cancer, including gastric cancer (11), hepatocellular carcinoma (9), pancreatic cancer (12), and oral squamous cell carcinoma (13). The prognostic factor of GNRI in patients with UC has been the subject of several studies with varying results (14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21).…”