Optimal Body Mass Index Cut-off Point for Predicting Colorectal Cancer Survival in an Asian Population: A National Health Information Database Analysis

Mendelian randomization unraveled: gender-specific insights into obesity-related phenotypes and colorectal cancer susceptibility

Objective

Evidence has been increasingly pointing towards a potential link between phenotypes related to obesity and the incidence of colorectal cancer. However, confirming this as a direct causal connection remains elusive. This investigation aims to elucidate the causative links between obesity-associated phenotypes and the incidence of colorectal cancer.

Methods

Employing the Two Sample Mendelian Randomization (TwoSampleMR) R package, analyses were conducted using Mendelian randomization (MR) to discern potential causative links between obesity categories sourced from both the Institute for Education and University (IEU) Open GWAS Project and Zenodo, and colorectal tumors (data obtained from IEU Open GWAS and FinnGen). For primary evaluations, the study utilized the Wald ratio and the Inverse Variance Weighting (IVW) methods, while the MR-Egger approach was integrated for sensitivity assessment. Bidirectional Mendelian Randomization (Bidirectional MR), as well as Linkage Disequilibrium (LD) Score Regression with well-imputed HapMap3 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), were additionally executed. Sensitivity assessments entailed IVW, MR-Egger methodologies to assess heterogeneity and pleiotropy, along with a leave-one-out strategy. Instrumental variables were chosen judiciously based on predetermined P-value thresholds and F-statistics.

Results

Results from MR evaluations did not identify a clear causative link between BMI and colorectal malignancy. Conversely, both measures of obesity, the Waist-Hip Ratio (WHR) and its adjusted form for BMI (WHRadjBMI), displayed a connection to increased risk of colorectal cancer, especially prominent among female subjects. Reverse MR analyses dismissed potential reverse causality between colorectal malignancies and obesity. A significant genetic interplay was observed between WHR, WHRadjBMI, and colorectal cancer instances. Ensuing MR probes spotlighted inflammatory bowel ailment as a protective factor, while salad intake was indicated as a potential risk concerning colorectal malignancies. Sensitivity reviews, which included tests for both pleiotropy and heterogeneity, validated the robustness of the MR findings.

Conclusion

Findings from this research indicate that specific obesity-related parameters, notably WHR and WHRadjBMI, carry a causal relationship with an elevated colorectal cancer risk. The impact is distinctly more evident among females. Such insights might be pivotal for public health deliberations, hinting that individuals boasting a high WHR might necessitate intensified colorectal cancer screenings.

Operational Definitions of Colorectal Cancer in the Korean National Health Insurance Database

OBJECTIVES

We reviewed the operational definitions of colorectal cancer (CRC) from studies using the Korean National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) and compared CRC incidence derived from the commonly used operational definitions in the literature with the statistics reported by the Korea Central Cancer Registry (KCCR).

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE and KoreaMed databases to identify studies containing operational definitions of CRC, published until January 15, 2021. All pertinent data concerning the study period, the utilized database, and the outcome variable were extracted. Within the NHIS-National Sample Cohort, age-standardized incidence rates (ASRs) of CRC were calculated for each operational definition found in the literature between 2005 and 2019. These rates were then compared with ASRs from the KCCR.

RESULTS

From the 62 eligible studies, 9 operational definitions for CRC were identified. The most commonly used operational definition was "C18-C20" (n=20), followed by "C18-C20 with claim code for treatment" (n=3) and "C18-C20 with V193 (code for registered cancer patients' payment deduction)" (n=3). The ASRs reported using these operational definitions were lower than the ASRs from KCCR, except for "C18-C20 used as the main diagnosis." The smallest difference in ASRs was observed for "C18-C20," followed by "C18- C20 with V193," and "C18-C20 with claim code for hospitalization or code for treatment."

CONCLUSIONS

In defining CRC patients utilizing the NHIS database, the ASR derived through the operational definition of "C18-C20 as the main diagnosis" was comparable to the ASR from the KCCR. Depending on the study hypothesis, operational definitions using treatment codes may be utilized.

Nomogram for predicting the overall survival of underweight patients with colorectal cancer: a clinical study

BACKGROUND

An underweight individual is defined as one whose Body Mass Index (BMI) is < 18.5 kg/m². Currently, the prognosis in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) who are also underweight is unclear.

METHODS

Information on South Korean patients who underwent curative resection for CRC without distant metastasis was collected from health insurance registry data between January 2014 and December 2016. We compared the overall survival (OS) of underweight and non-underweight (BMI ≥ 18.5 kg/m²) patients after adjusting for confounders using propensity score matching. A nomogram to predict OS in the underweight group was constructed using the significant risk factors identified in multivariate analysis. The predictive and discriminative capabilities of the nomogram for predicting 3- and 5-year OS in the underweight group were validated and compared with those of the tumor, node, and metastasis (TNM) staging system in the training and validation sets.

RESULTS

A total of 23,803 (93.6%) and 1,644 (6.4%) patients were assigned to the non-underweight and underweight groups, respectively. OS was significantly worse in the underweight group than in the non-underweight group for each pathological stage (non-underweight vs. underweight: stage I, 90.1% vs. 77.1%; stage IIA, 85.3% vs. 67.3%; stage IIB/C, 74.9% vs. 52.1%; and stage III, 73.2% vs. 59.4%, P < 0.001). The calibration plots demonstrated that the nomogram exhibited satisfactory consistency with the actual results. The concordance index (C-index) and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of the nomogram exhibited better discriminatory capability than those of the TNM staging system (C-index, nomogram versus TNM staging system: training set, 0.713 versus 0.564, P < 0.001; validation set, 0.691 versus 0.548, P < 0.001; AUC for 3- and 5- year OS, nomogram versus TNM staging system: training set, 0.748 and 0.741 versus 0.610 and 0.601; validation set, 0.715 and 0.753 versus 0.586 and 0.579, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Underweight patients had worse OS than non-underweight patients for all stages of CRC. Our nomogram can guide prognostic predictions and the treatment plan for underweight patients with CRC.

Preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen to body mass index ratio contributes to prognosis prediction in colorectal cancer

Both carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level and body mass index (BMI) are traditional prognostic markers in colorectal cancer (CRC); however, to the best of our knowledge, the value of the CEA to BMI ratio (CBR) has never been addressed. In the present study, 191 patients with CRC treated using radical resection were retrospectively included, and the significance of the CBR in predicting disease-free survival (DFS) or overall survival (OS) rates was calculated. The prognostic efficacy of the CBR in predicting OS was compared with individual CEA and BMI values. The survival differences of the subgroups were calculated by Kaplan-Meier analysis, and corresponding risk factors were then estimated by a Cox proportional hazards model. As a result, 29.84% (57/191) of the patients were assigned to the high CBR group (cut-off, ≥0.28); the CBR had a sensitivity of 56.50 and 68.90%, and a specificity of 80.60 and 80.10% for DFS and OS, respectively. Patients with a high CBR more commonly underwent laparotomy and exhibited advanced T stages, the presence of tumor deposits and advanced Tumor-Node-Metastasis stages (stage II or III). The CBR was more efficient than the CEA or BMI alone in predicting OS. In addition, patients with a high CBR presented with a significantly worse outcome than patients with a low CBR. Finally, the CBR was an independent risk factor for both DFS and OS. In conclusion, the CBR was a more robust prognostic factor in CRC, and patients with a relatively high CBR exhibited poorer survival.

Association of Body Mass Index with Survival in Asian Patients with Colorectal Cancer

Purpose

The clinical significance of body mass index (BMI) on long-term outcomes has not been extensively investigated in Asian patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). This study aims to describe the association between BMI and survival, plus providing BMI cutoff value for predicting prognosis in CRC patients.

Materials and Methods

A total of 1,182 patients who had undergone surgery for stage I–III CRC from June 2004 to February 2014 were included. BMI was categorized into four groups based on the recommendation for Asian ethnicity. The optimal BMI cutoff value was determined to maximize overall survival (OS) difference.

Results

In multivariable analysis, underweight BMI was significantly associated with poor OS (hazard ratio [HR], 2.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.55 to 3.71; p < 0.001) and obese BMI was associated with better OS (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.97; p=0.036) compared with the normal BMI. Overweight and obese BMI were associated with better recurrence-free survival (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.99; p=0.046 and HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.89; p=0.014, respectively) compared with the normal BMI group. BMI cutoff value was 20.44 kg/m². Adding the BMI cutoff value to cancer staging could increase discriminatory performance in terms of integrated area under the curve and Harrell’s concordance index.

Conclusion

Compared to normal BMI, underweight BMI was associated with poor survival whereas obese BMI was associated with better survival. BMI cutoff value of 20.44 kg/m² is a useful discriminator in Asian patients with CRC.

Comorbidity Risk Score in Association with Cancer Incidence: Results from a Cancer Screenee Cohort

The combined effects of comorbidities can cause cancer incidence, while the effects of individual conditions, alone, might not. This study was conducted to investigate the joint impact of comorbidities on cancer incidence. The dietary score for energy-adjusted intake was calculated by applying a Gaussian graphical model and was then categorized into tertiles representing light, normal, and heavy eating behaviors. The risk point for cancer, according to the statuses of blood pressure, total cholesterol, fasting glucose, and glomerular filtration rate was computed from a Cox proportional hazard model adjusted for demographics and eating behavior. The comorbidity risk score was defined as the sum of the risk points for four comorbidity markers. We finally quantified the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between the strata of the comorbidity risk score and cancer incidence. A total of 13,644 subjects were recruited from the Cancer Screenee Cohort from 2007–2014. The comorbidity risk score was associated with cancer incidence in a dose-dependent manner (HR = 2.15, 95% CI = 1.39, 3.31 for those scoring 16–30 vs. those scoring 0–8, P-trend < 0.001). Subgroup analysis still showed significant dose-dependent relationships (HR = 2.39, 95% CI = 1.18, 4.84 for males and HR = 1.99, 95% CI = 1.11, 3.59 for females, P-trend < 0.05). In summary, there was a dose-dependent impact of comorbidities on cancer incidence; Highlights: Previous studies have generally reported that hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, diabetes, and chronic kidney disease might predispose patients to cancer. Combining these chronic diseases into a single score, this study found a dose-dependent association between the data-driven comorbidity risk score and cancer incidence.