A simple risk stratification model that predicts 1-year postoperative mortality rate in patients with solid-organ cancer

This study aimed to construct a scoring system developed exclusively from the preoperative data that predicts 1-year postoperative mortality in patients with solid cancers. A total of 20,632 patients who had a curative resection for solid-organ cancers between 2007 and 2012 at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital Linkou Medical Center were included in the derivation cohort. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to develop a risk model that predicts 1-year postoperative mortality. Patients were then stratified into four risk groups (low-, intermediate-, high-, and very high-risk) according to the total score (0–43) form mortality risk analysis. An independent cohort of 16,656 patients who underwent curative cancer surgeries at three other hospitals during the same study period (validation cohort) was enrolled to verify the risk model. Age, gender, cancer site, history of previous cancer, tumor stage, Charlson comorbidity index, American Society of Anesthesiologist score, admission type, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status were independently predictive of 1-year postoperative mortality. The 1-year postoperative mortality rates were 0.5%, 3.8%, 14.6%, and 33.8%, respectively, among the four risk groups in the derivation cohort (c-statistic, 0.80), compared with 0.9%, 4.2%, 14.6%, and 32.6%, respectively, in the validation cohort (c-statistic, 0.78). The risk stratification model also demonstrated good discrimination of long-term survival outcome of the four-tier risk groups (P < 0.01 for both cohorts). The risk stratification model not only predicts 1-year postoperative mortality but also differentiates long-term survival outcome between the risk groups

Additional file 2 of Clinical features and treatment outcome of lymphoepithelioma-like carcinoma from multiple primary sites: a population-based, multicentre, real-world study

Additional file 2. Figure S2: Kaplan–Meier survival analysis for OS in patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy at stage II (A). DFS(B) and OS(C) in patients receiving adjuvant radiotherapy at stage I

Additional file 6 of Clinical features and treatment outcome of lymphoepithelioma-like carcinoma from multiple primary sites: a population-based, multicentre, real-world study

Additional file 6. Figure S6: Kaplan–Meier survival analysis for OS according to ECOG PS≥2 (A), stage III-IV (B) , high level of EBV-DNA (C), liver metastasis (D) and bone metastasis (E

Additional file 3 of Clinical features and treatment outcome of lymphoepithelioma-like carcinoma from multiple primary sites: a population-based, multicentre, real-world study

Additional file 3 Supplement Figure 3 Kaplan–Meier survival analysis for OS in patients receiving adjuvant radiotherapy at stage III (A). DFS(B) and OS(C) in patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy at stage II

Additional file 4 of Clinical features and treatment outcome of lymphoepithelioma-like carcinoma from multiple primary sites: a population-based, multicentre, real-world study

Additional file 4. Figure S4: Kaplan–Meier survival analysis for PFS (A) and OS (B) in patients receiving paclitaxel-based chemotherapy as first-line regimen at stage IV or after relapsed. PFS (C) and OS (D) in patients receiving gemcitabine-based chemotherapy as first-line regimen at stage IV or after relapsed. OS in patients at stage IV or after relapsed receiving radiotherapy (E

Additional file 1 of Clinical features and treatment outcome of lymphoepithelioma-like carcinoma from multiple primary sites: a population-based, multicentre, real-world study

Additional file 1. Figure S1: Kaplan–Meier survival analysis for OS in patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy at stage I (A). DFS(B) and OS(C) in patients receiving adjuvant radiotherapy at stage

Additional file 5 of Clinical features and treatment outcome of lymphoepithelioma-like carcinoma from multiple primary sites: a population-based, multicentre, real-world study

Additional file 5. Figure S5: Kaplan–Meier survival analysis for OS in patients receiving anti- angiogenesis (A) and anti- EGFR (B) therapy at stage IV or after relapsed. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis for PFS in patients receiving anti-angiogenesis (C) and anti-EGFR (D) therapy at stage IV or after relapse