Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jun 27;14(6):580-593.
doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v14.i6.580.

Prognostic significance of the preoperative hemoglobin to albumin ratio for the short-term survival of gastric cancer patients

Ce-Gui Hu  1 , Bai-E Hu  1 , Jin-Feng Zhu  1 , Zheng-Ming Zhu  1 , Chao Huang  2
Affiliations

Prognostic significance of the preoperative hemoglobin to albumin ratio for the short-term survival of gastric cancer patients

Ce-Gui Hu et al. World J Gastrointest Surg. .

Abstract

Background: Hemoglobin and albumin are associated with the prognosis of gastric cancer (GC) patients. However, the prognostic value of the hemoglobin to albumin ratio (HAR) for the short-term survival of GC patients with D2 radical resection has not been studied.

Aim: To investigate the significance of the HAR in evaluating the short-term survival of GC patients after D2 radical resection and to construct a nomogram to predict the prognosis in GC patients after surgery, thus providing a reference for the development of postoperative individualized treatment and follow-up plans.

Methods: Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier analysis was used for prognostic analysis. Logistic regression was used to analyze the relationships between HAR and the clinicopathological characteristics of the GC patients. A prognostic nomogram model for the short-term survival of GC patients was constructed by R software.

Results: HAR was an independent risk factor for the short-term survival of GC patients. GC patients with a low HAR had a poor prognosis (P < 0.001). Low HAR was markedly related to high stage [odds ratio (OR) = 0.45 for II vs I; OR = 0.48 for III vs I], T classification (OR = 0.52 for T4 vs T1) and large tumor size (OR = 0.51 for ≥ 4 cm vs < 4 cm) (all P < 0.05). The nomogram model was based on HAR, age, CA19-9, CA125 and stage, and the C-index was 0.820.

Conclusion: Preoperative low HAR was associated with short-term survival in GC patients. The prognostic nomogram model can accurately predict the short-term survival of GC patients with D2 radical resection.

Keywords: Gastric cancer; Hemoglobin to albumin ratio; Nomogram; Prognosis; Short-term survival.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Survival curve of gastric cancer patients with low hemoglobin to albumin ratio and high hemoglobin to albumin ratio. HAR: Hemoglobin to albumin ratio; HR: Hazard ratio.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Association between hemoglobin to albumin ratio and clinicopathological characteristics, including grade, stage, T classification, N classification, tumor size, vascular infiltration, nerve infiltration and age. HAR: Hemoglobin to albumin ratio.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Relationships between hemoglobin to albumin ratio and prognostic factors, including stage, T classification, and tumor size, CA125, fibrinogen to lymphocyte ratio, platelet to albumin ratio, platelet to lymphocyte ratio and hemoglobin to fibrinogen ratio. HAR: Hemoglobin to albumin ratio; FLR: Fibrinogen to lymphocyte ratio; HFR: Hemoglobin to fibrinogen ratio; PAR: Platelet to albumin ratio; PLR: Platelet to lymphocyte ratio.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Receiver operating characteristic curve of hemoglobin to albumin ratio or combined factors to predict the short-term survival of gastric cancer patients. HAR: Hemoglobin to albumin ratio; AUC: Area under the curve.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Nomogram of the logistic regression model. HAR: Hemoglobin to albumin ratio.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Van Cutsem E, Sagaert X, Topal B, Haustermans K, Prenen H. Gastric cancer. Lancet. 2016;388:2654–2664. - PubMed
    1. Songun I, Putter H, Kranenbarg EM, Sasako M, van de Velde CJ. Surgical treatment of gastric cancer: 15-year follow-up results of the randomised nationwide Dutch D1D2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:439–449. - PubMed
    1. Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2014 (ver. 4) Gastric Cancer. 2017;20:1–19. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ajani JA, D'Amico TA, Almhanna K, Bentrem DJ, Chao J, Das P, Denlinger CS, Fanta P, Farjah F, Fuchs CS, Gerdes H, Gibson M, Glasgow RE, Hayman JA, Hochwald S, Hofstetter WL, Ilson DH, Jaroszewski D, Johung KL, Keswani RN, Kleinberg LR, Korn WM, Leong S, Linn C, Lockhart AC, Ly QP, Mulcahy MF, Orringer MB, Perry KA, Poultsides GA, Scott WJ, Strong VE, Washington MK, Weksler B, Willett CG, Wright CD, Zelman D, McMillian N, Sundar H. Gastric Cancer, Version 3.2016, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2016;14:1286–1312. - PubMed
    1. Shah MA, Ajani JA. Gastric cancer--an enigmatic and heterogeneous disease. JAMA. 2010;303:1753–1754. - PubMed