Back to Journals » Cancer Management and Research » Volume 11

Determining the optimal cutoff point for lymph node density and its impact on overall survival in children with Wilms’ tumor

Authors Pan Z, Bu Q, You H, Yang J, Liu Q, Lyu J

Received 8 October 2018

Accepted for publication 31 December 2018

Published 15 January 2019 Volume 2019:11 Pages 759—766

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/CMAR.S190138

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewers approved by Dr Colin Mak

Peer reviewer comments 3

Editor who approved publication: Dr Rituraj Purohit


Zhenyu Pan,1–3,* Qingting Bu,4,* Haisheng You,5 Jin Yang,1,2 Qingqing Liu,1,2 Jun Lyu1,2

1Clinical Research Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, Shaanxi, People’s Republic of China; 2School of Public Health, Xi’an Jiaotong University Health Science Center, Xi’an, Shaanxi, People’s Republic of China; 3Department of Pharmacy, The Affiliated Children Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, Shaanxi, People’s Republic of China; 4Department of Genetics, Northwest Women’s and Children’s Hospital, Xi’an, Shaanxi, People’s Republic of China; 5Department of Pharmacy, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, Shaanxi, People’s Republic of China

*These authors contributed equally to this work

Objective: Previous studies showed that the lymph node density (LND) was a predictor of survival in Wilms’ tumor (WT). However, the optimal LND cutoff point is controversial due to methodological shortcomings of previous studies, and no studies have shown the effect of LND on survival in children with WT. The purpose of this study was to remedy this situation.
Methods: We identified 376 children with WT. LND cutoff point was determined using the median value, the X-tile program, the survival-tree algorithm, and the time-dependent ROC curve analysis. Survival functions were estimated by the Kaplan–Meier method. We used Cox regression analysis to determine the impact of LND on survival. Smooth curve fitting between relative mortality risk and LND was performed.
Results: The LND cutoff point was 0.44, 0.65, 0.65, and 0.64 according to the median value, the X-tile program, the survival-tree algorithm, and the time-dependent ROC curve analysis, respectively. The 5-, 10-, and 20-year overall survival rates were 86.9%, 86.9%, and 84.7%, respectively, in the <0.44 group and 81.3%, 80.3%, and 80.3%, respectively, in the ≥0.44 group. Survival did not differ significantly between the two groups (P=0.185). The 5-, 10-, and 20-year overall survival rates were 87.8%, 87.8%, and 86.0%, respectively, in the < 0.65 or < 0.64 group and 76.5%, 75.1%, and 75.1%, respectively, in the ≥ 0.65 or ≥ 0.64 group. Children with the high LND had a significantly worse survival (P=0.011) if 0.64 or 0.65 was used for the stratification. LND was a significant predictor for overall survival in the multivariate Cox regression analysis (HR =1.797; 95% CI, 1.043–3.097; P=0.035). Smooth curve fitting suggested that the risk of mortality tended to be ascending with the increase in LND in general.
Conclusion: The three methods including the X-tile program, the survival-tree algorithm, and the time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis are equivalent in their ability to stratify patients and clearly better than the median method. The results showed that the optimal LND cutoff point was around 0.65 and the LND was a reliable predictor of overall survival in children with WT.

Keywords:
Wilms’ tumor, lymph node density, cutoff point, survival
 

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]