[Clinical implications of Naples prognostic scores in patients with resectable Siewert type II-III adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction].

Objective: To evaluate the clinical value of preoperative Naples prognostic scores (NPS) in patients with resectable Siewert type II-III esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma (AEG). Methods: In this retrospective observational study we collected and analyzed relevant data of patients with Siewert Type II-III AEG treated in the Department of Gastric Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital from January 2014 to December 2018. NPS were calculated using preoperative albumin concentration, total cholesterol concentration, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, and lymphocyte/monocyte ratio and used to allocate patients into three groups: NTS-0 (0 points), NTS-1 (1-2 points) and NTS-2 (3-4 points). Kaplan-Meier was used to calculate disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in each NPS group and the log-rank test to compare these groups. Univariate and multivariate survival analyes were performed using the Cox regression model. Time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed to compare the relationships between four commonly used tools for evaluating inflammatory responses and nutritional status:NPS, systemic inflammatory response scores, nutrient control status (CONUT), and prognostic nutrition index (PNI). Results: The study cohort comprised 221 patients with AEG of median age 63.0 (36.0-87.0) years. There were 190 men (86.0%) and 31 women (14.0%). As to pTNM stage, 47 patients (21.3%) had Stage I disease, 68 (30.8%) Stage II, and 106 (48.0%) Stage III. One hundred and forty-seven patients (66.5%) had Siewert Type II disease and 74 (33.5%) Siewert type III. There were 45 patients (20.4%) in the NPS-0, 142 (64.2%) in the NPS-1 and 34 (15.4%) in the NPS-2 groups. Higher NPS scores were significantly associated with older patients (χ²=5.056, P=0.027) and higher TNM stages (H=5.204,P<0.001). The median follow-up was 39 (6-105) months; 16 patients (7.2%) were lost to follow-up. The median OS in the NPS-0, NPS-1, and NPS-2 groups were 78.4, 63.1, and 37.0 months, respectively; these differences are statistically significant (P=0.021). Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis identified the following as independently and significantly associated with OS in patients with Siewert Type II-III: TNM stage (Stage II: HR=2.182, 95%CI: 1.227-3.878, P=0.008; Stage III: HR=3.534, 95%CI: 1.380-6.654, P<0.001), tumor differentiation (G3: HR=1.995, 95%CI: 1.141-3.488, P=0.015), vascular invasion (HR=2.172, 95%CI: 1.403-3.363, P<0.001), adjuvant chemotherapy (HR=0.326, 95%CI: 0.200-0.531, P<0.001), NPS (NPS-1: HR=2.331, 95%CI: 1.371-3.964, P=0.002; NPS-2: HR=2.494, 95%CI: 1.165-5.341, P=0.019), SIS group (NPS-1: HR=2.170, 95%CI: 1.244-3.784, P=0.006; NPS-2: HR=2.291, 95%CI: 1.052-4.986, P=0.037), and CONUT (HR=1.597, 95% CI: 1.187-2.149, P=0.038). The median DFS in the NPS-0, NPS-1, and NPS-2 groups was 68.6, 52.5, and 28.3 months, respectively; these differences are statistically significant (P=0.009). Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis identified the following as independently and significantly associated with DFS in patients with Siewert Type II-III AEG: TNM stage (StageⅡ: HR=2.789, 95%CI:1.210-6.428, P=0.016; Stage III: HR=10.721, 95%CI:4.709-24.411, P<0.001), adjuvant chemotherapy (HR=0.640, 95% CI: 0.432-0.946, P=0.025), and NPS (NPS-1: HR=1.703, 95%CI: 1.043-2.782, P=0.033; NPS-2: HR=3.124, 95%CI:1.722-5.666, P<0.001). Time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curves showed that NPS was more accurate in predicting OS and DFS in patients with Siewert Type II-III AEG than were systemic inflammatory response scores, CONUT, or PNI scores. Conclusion: NPS is associated with age and TNM stage, is an independent prognostic factor in patients who have undergone resection of Siewert type II-III AEG, and is better than SIS, CONUT, or PNI in predicting survival.