Glasgow prognostic score is a better predictor of the long-term survival in patients with gastric cancer, compared to the modified Glasgow prognostic score or high-sensitivity modified Glasgow prognostic score

BACKGROUND Inflammation influences cancer progression by increasing catabolism and impairing nutrient absorption. We compared the prognostic ability of three inflammation-based prognostic scoring systems-the Glasgow prognostic score (GPS), modified GPS (mGPS), and high-sensitivity mGPS (HS-mGPS)-in gastric cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS We retrospectively examined 434 curatively resected gastric cancer patients to evaluate the prognostic ability of scoring systems for overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). RESULTS OS analysis identified the following independent prognostic factors: GPS model: pathological stage (pStage, p < 0.001), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA, p = 0.004), and GPS 1 (hazard ratio [HR], 1.929; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.152-3.228; p = 0.013); mGPS model: body mass index (BMI, p = 0.027), pStage (p < 0.001), and CEA (p < 0.001); HS-mGPS model: BMI (p = 0.029), pStage (p < 0.001), and CEA (p = 0.003). mGPS and HS-mGPS were not independent prognostic factors for OS. CSS analysis of the GPS model identified pStage (p < 0.001), CEA (p = 0.015), and GPS 1 (HR; 2.095, 95% CI; 1.025-4.283; p = 0.043) and 2 (HR, 2.812; 95% CI, 1.111-7.116; p = 0.029) as independent prognostic factors; however, mGPS and HS-mGPS were not independent prognostic factors for CSS. Log-rank tests demonstrated significant differences in OS among patients with GPS 0 vs. 1 (p < 0.001) and 0 vs. 2 (p < 0.001) and in CSS among the three GPS (0 vs. 1; p = 0.005, 0 vs. 2; p < 0.001, 1 vs. 2; p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS GPS most reliably predicts long-term survival of gastric cancer patients.