ArticleThe American surgeon2017
Optimal Modified Frailty Index Cutoff in Older Gastrointestinal Cancer Patients.
Article in The American surgeon, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing frailty to predict surgical risk: a comparative study of three tools in older non-cardiac surgery patients.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Impact of Frailty and Sarcopenia on Short- and Long-Term Outcomes in Elderly Patients Undergoing Radical Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer.World journal of surgery · 2023Article
- Is Frailty a Good Predictor of Postoperative Complications in Elective Abdominal Surgery?-A Single-Center, Prospective, Observational Study.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Impact of Frailty Upon Surgical Decision-Making for Left-Sided Colon Cancer.Ochsner journal · 2023Article
- Modified Frailty Index Independently Predicts Postoperative Pulmonary Infection in Elderly Patients Undergoing Radical Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer.Cancer management and research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The newly characterized modified frailty index (mFI) is a robust predictor of postoperative outcomes for surgical patients. The present study investigates the optimal cutoff for mFI specifically in older gastrointestinal (GI) cancer patients undergoing surgery. All patients more than 60 years old who underwent surgery for a GI malignancy (esophagus, stomach, colon, rectum, pancreas, liver, and bile duct) were identified in the 2005 to 2012 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, Participant Use Data File (NSQIP PUF). Patients undergoing emergency procedures, of American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) five status, or diagnosed with preoperative sepsis were excluded. Logistic regression modeling and 10-fold cross validation were used to identify an optimal mFI cutoff. A total of 41,455 patients (mean age 72, 47.4% female) met the eligibility criteria. Among them, 19.0 per cent (n = 7891) developed a major postoperative complication and 2.8 per cent (n = 1150) died within 30 days. A random sampling by a cancer site was performed to create 90 per cent training and 10 per cent test sample datasets. Using 10-fold cross validation, logistical regression models evaluated the association between mFI and endpoints of 30-day mortality and major morbidity at various cutoffs. Optimal cutoffs for 30-day mortality and major morbidity were mFI ≥ 0.1 and ≥0.2, respectively. After adjusting for age, sex, ASA, albumin ≥3g/dl, and body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2, mFI ≥ 0.1 was associated with increased mortality (odds ratio (OR) 1.49, 1.30-1.71 95% confidence interval (CI), P < 0.001) and mFI ≥ 0.2 was associated with increased morbidity (OR 1.52, 1.39-1.65 95% CI, P < 0.001). For older GI cancer patients, a very low mFI was a predictor of poor postoperative outcomes with an optimal cutoff of two or more mFI characteristics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28822392PMC7064810W3025462524What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.