INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of the Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) score on perioperative morbidity and oncological outcomes of bladder cancer (BC) patients treated with radical cystectomy (RC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed a multi-institutional cohort of 347 patients treated with RC for clinical-localized BC between 2005 and 2019. The CONUT-score was defined as an algorithm including serum albumin, total lymphocyte count, and cholesterol. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate the ability of the CONUT-score to predict any-grade complications, major complications and 30 days readmission. Multivariable Cox' regression models were performed to evaluate the prognostic effect of the CONUT-score on recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS). RESULTS: A cut-off value to discriminate between low and high CONUT-score was determined by calculating the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. The area under the curve was 0.72 hence high CONUT-score was defined as ≥3 points. Overall, 112 (32.3%) patients had a high CONUT. At multivariable logistic regression analyses, high CONUT was associated with any-grade complications (OR 3.58, P = 0.001), major complications (OR 2.56, P = 0.003) and 30 days readmission (OR 2.39, P = 0.01). On multivariable Cox' regression analyses, high CONUT remained associated with worse RFS (HR 2.57, P < 0.001), OS (HR 2.37, P < 0.001) and CSS (HR 3.52, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Poor nutritional status measured by the CONUT-score is independently associated with a poorer postoperative course after RC and is predictive of worse RFS, OS, and CSS. This simple index could serve as a comprehensive personalized risk-stratification tool identifying patients who may benefit from an intensified regimen of supportive cares.

Department of Urology Fundacion Instituto Valenciano de Oncologia Valencia Spain

Department of Urology Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria

Department of Urology Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria; Department of Urology University of Texas Southwestern Medical center Dallas TX; Department of Urology Weill Cornell Medical College New York NY; Department of Urology 2nd Faculty of Medicine Charles University Prague Czech Republic; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health 1 M Sechenov 1st Moscow State Medical University Moscow Russia

Department of Urology Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria; Division of Urology Department of Surgical Sciences University of Torino School of Medicine Turin Italy

Department of Urology Netherlands Cancer Institute Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital Amsterdam The Netherlands

Department of Urology San Bassiano Hospital Bassano del Grappa Italy

Division of Urology Department of Surgical Sciences University of Torino School of Medicine Turin Italy

Urological Clinic Department of Medicine Surgery and Health Sciences University of Trieste Trieste Italy

Urological Clinic Department of Medicine Surgery and Health Sciences University of Trieste Trieste Italy; Department of Urology Netherlands Cancer Institute Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital Amsterdam The Netherlands; Department of Urology Fundacion Instituto Valenciano de Oncologia Valencia Spain

References provided by Crossref.org