{"title":"虚弱和子宫内膜癌患者的生存:一项荟萃分析。","authors":"Shanshan Jia, Min Zhang","doi":"10.1002/nur.22456","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim of this study is to investigate the association between frailty and overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in women with endometrial cancer (EC). Frailty is increasingly recognized as a significant predictor of outcomes in cancer patients, yet its impact on survival among EC patients remains unclear. This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science from database inception to September 28, 2024 were searched for cohort studies evaluating frailty in relation to survival in EC patients. Inclusion criteria focused on studies reporting hazard ratios (HRs) for OS or PFS, comparing frail versus nonfrail patients. A random-effects model was applied. Eight cohort studies involving 486,138 women reported the outcome of OS, and 4 of them involving 378 women also reported the outcome of PFS. Frailty was associated with poor OS (HR: 1.78, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.56-2.03, p < 0.001) without significant heterogeneity (I<sup>2</sup> = 0%). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the stability of this association. Subgroup analyses according to the mean age of the patients, tools for evaluating frailty, follow-up duration, and study quality score showed consistent results (p for subgroup difference: 0.35-0.98). Four studies indicated a significant association between frailty and worse PFS (HR: 1.91, 95% CI: 1.24-2.95, p = 0.003), also with no heterogeneity (I<sup>2</sup> = 0%). The results of the study conclude that frailty is associated with poor survival in EC. Although these findings should be validated in large prospective cohort studies, this meta-analysis highlights the possible role of frailty assessment in risk stratification and prognostic prediction of patients with EC. No patient or public contribution.</p>","PeriodicalId":54492,"journal":{"name":"Research in Nursing & Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Frailty and the Survival of Patients With Endometrial Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Shanshan Jia, Min Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/nur.22456\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The aim of this study is to investigate the association between frailty and overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in women with endometrial cancer (EC). Frailty is increasingly recognized as a significant predictor of outcomes in cancer patients, yet its impact on survival among EC patients remains unclear. This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science from database inception to September 28, 2024 were searched for cohort studies evaluating frailty in relation to survival in EC patients. Inclusion criteria focused on studies reporting hazard ratios (HRs) for OS or PFS, comparing frail versus nonfrail patients. A random-effects model was applied. Eight cohort studies involving 486,138 women reported the outcome of OS, and 4 of them involving 378 women also reported the outcome of PFS. Frailty was associated with poor OS (HR: 1.78, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.56-2.03, p < 0.001) without significant heterogeneity (I<sup>2</sup> = 0%). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the stability of this association. Subgroup analyses according to the mean age of the patients, tools for evaluating frailty, follow-up duration, and study quality score showed consistent results (p for subgroup difference: 0.35-0.98). Four studies indicated a significant association between frailty and worse PFS (HR: 1.91, 95% CI: 1.24-2.95, p = 0.003), also with no heterogeneity (I<sup>2</sup> = 0%). The results of the study conclude that frailty is associated with poor survival in EC. Although these findings should be validated in large prospective cohort studies, this meta-analysis highlights the possible role of frailty assessment in risk stratification and prognostic prediction of patients with EC. No patient or public contribution.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54492,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research in Nursing & Health\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research in Nursing & Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.22456\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Nursing & Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.22456","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本研究的目的是探讨子宫内膜癌(EC)女性虚弱与总生存期(OS)和无进展生存期(PFS)之间的关系。虚弱越来越被认为是癌症患者预后的重要预测因素,但其对EC患者生存的影响尚不清楚。本研究采用系统综述和荟萃分析。检索PubMed、Embase和Web of Science从数据库建立到2024年9月28日的队列研究,评估虚弱与EC患者生存的关系。纳入标准侧重于报告OS或PFS的风险比(hr)的研究,比较体弱与非体弱患者。采用随机效应模型。8项队列研究涉及486138名妇女报告了OS的结果,其中4项涉及378名妇女也报告了PFS的结果。虚弱与不良OS相关(HR: 1.78, 95%可信区间[CI]: 1.56-2.03, p 2 = 0%)。敏感性分析证实了这种关联的稳定性。根据患者的平均年龄、虚弱评估工具、随访时间和研究质量评分进行亚组分析,结果一致(亚组差异p: 0.35-0.98)。四项研究表明,虚弱和更差的PFS之间存在显著关联(HR: 1.91, 95% CI: 1.24-2.95, p = 0.003),也没有异质性(I2 = 0%)。研究结果表明,虚弱与EC患者的低生存率有关。虽然这些发现需要在大型前瞻性队列研究中得到验证,但该荟萃分析强调了虚弱评估在EC患者的风险分层和预后预测中的可能作用。没有病人或公众捐款。
Frailty and the Survival of Patients With Endometrial Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.
The aim of this study is to investigate the association between frailty and overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in women with endometrial cancer (EC). Frailty is increasingly recognized as a significant predictor of outcomes in cancer patients, yet its impact on survival among EC patients remains unclear. This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science from database inception to September 28, 2024 were searched for cohort studies evaluating frailty in relation to survival in EC patients. Inclusion criteria focused on studies reporting hazard ratios (HRs) for OS or PFS, comparing frail versus nonfrail patients. A random-effects model was applied. Eight cohort studies involving 486,138 women reported the outcome of OS, and 4 of them involving 378 women also reported the outcome of PFS. Frailty was associated with poor OS (HR: 1.78, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.56-2.03, p < 0.001) without significant heterogeneity (I2 = 0%). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the stability of this association. Subgroup analyses according to the mean age of the patients, tools for evaluating frailty, follow-up duration, and study quality score showed consistent results (p for subgroup difference: 0.35-0.98). Four studies indicated a significant association between frailty and worse PFS (HR: 1.91, 95% CI: 1.24-2.95, p = 0.003), also with no heterogeneity (I2 = 0%). The results of the study conclude that frailty is associated with poor survival in EC. Although these findings should be validated in large prospective cohort studies, this meta-analysis highlights the possible role of frailty assessment in risk stratification and prognostic prediction of patients with EC. No patient or public contribution.
期刊介绍:
Research in Nursing & Health ( RINAH ) is a peer-reviewed general research journal devoted to publication of a wide range of research that will inform the practice of nursing and other health disciplines. The editors invite reports of research describing problems and testing interventions related to health phenomena, health care and self-care, clinical organization and administration; and the testing of research findings in practice. Research protocols are considered if funded in a peer-reviewed process by an agency external to the authors’ home institution and if the work is in progress. Papers on research methods and techniques are appropriate if they go beyond what is already generally available in the literature and include description of successful use of the method. Theory papers are accepted if each proposition is supported by research evidence. Systematic reviews of the literature are reviewed if PRISMA guidelines are followed. Letters to the editor commenting on published articles are welcome.