J Cancer 2017; 8(4):606-616. doi:10.7150/jca.17356
Immunization-based scores as independent prognostic predictors in soft tissue sarcoma patients
1. Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center; State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, China.
2. Department of Medical oncology, the First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Qingchun Road 79#, Hangzhou, 310003, China.
3. Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 310003, China.
*Shan-Shan Jiang and Long Jiang contributed equally to this work.
Jiang SS, Jiang L, Weng DS, Li Yf, Pan QZ, Zhao JJ, Tang Y, Zhou ZW, Xia JC. Immunization-based scores as independent prognostic predictors in soft tissue sarcoma patients. J Cancer 2017; 8(4):606-616. doi:10.7150/jca.17356. Available from http://www.jcancer.org/v08p0606.htm
Background: The purpose of this study was to examine and compare the prognostic value of different immunization-based scoring systems in patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS).
Methods: We conducted a retrospective study evaluating a cohort of 165 patients diagnosed with STS between July 2007 and July 2014. The relative Glasgow prognostic score (GPS) of these patients was calculated using 3 different systems: the traditional GPS system (tGPS), the modified GPS system 1 (m1GPS), and the modified GPS system 2 (m2GPS). Then, we evaluated the relationships between each GPS system and clinicopathological characteristics. The mean follow-up for survivors in the cohort was 73.7 months as of March 2015.
Results: The most favorable overall survival (OS) rate was associated with the score 0 groups, and the poorest progression-free survival (PFS) rate was associated with the score 2 groups, regardless of which system was used to calculate the score. Specifically, the m1GPS provided the greatest accuracy in predicting OS and PFS. Moreover, the same effect was observed in a separate analysis restricted to patients with metastases. Remarkably, in patients with a score of 2 as measured by all 3 systems, local treatment resulted in a poorer prognosis compared to patients with a score of 2 who did not receive local treatment.
Conclusion: The GPS is a valuable prognostic marker and has the capability to predict the appropriate treatment strategy for STS patients with metastases. The modified GPS systems demonstrated superior prognostic and predictive value compared with the traditional GPS system.
Keywords: Immunization, Prognosis, Predictor, Soft tissue sarcoma, Retrospective cohort study.