Skip to main content
Download PDF

The five-item modified frailty index predicts long-term outcomes in elderly patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery

World Journal of Surgical Oncology volume 21, Article number: 268 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Frailty has been globally recognized as a predictor of adverse postoperative outcomes. Frailty assessment using the five-factor modified frailty index (5-mFI) has recently gained traction; however, long-term outcomes are unknown in colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery. This study aimed to investigate whether the 5-mFI predicted long-term survival and cause of death on the basis of frailty severity in elderly patients who underwent CRC surgery and to determine the risk factors for mortality.

Methods

A total of 299 patients underwent CRC surgery with curative intent between January 2013 and December 2017. Patients were divided into three groups by the 5-mFI score: group 1 (5-mFI: 0 or 1; n = 164): no frailty; group 2 (5-mFI: 2; n = 91): moderate frailty; and group 3 (5-mFI: ≥ 3; n = 44): severe frailty. Clinicopathological variables, namely comorbidities, 5-mFI, prognostic nutrition index, operative/postoperative data, and outcome, including cause of death, were compared between the three groups. To identify factors associated with death from CRC- and non-CRC-related causes, univariate and multivariate analyses using a Cox regression model were performed.

Results

The immediate postoperative morbidity of patients with Clavien–Dindo grade ≥ III complications (9.1%) in group 3 was not significantly different from that in group 1 (9.1%) or group 2 (14.3%); however, the 30-day mortality rate (4.5%) in group 3 was significantly higher. Long-term disease-free survival was similar between frailty groups, suggesting that CRC surgery provides oncological benefit to patients irrespective of frailty. The 5-year survival rates in groups 1, 2, and 3 were 83.5%, 71.2%, and 47.9%, respectively, showing a significantly lower survival rate as frailty advanced. Sixty percent of the deaths in frail patients were due to respiratory failure and cardiovascular diseases. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that advanced age, higher 5-mFI score, and longer postoperative hospital stay were risk factors for mortality unrelated to CRC. Multivariate analysis also revealed that advanced tumor stage, carcinoembryonic antigen ≥ 5 ng/ml, undifferentiated tumor, and R1 resection were risk factors for CRC-related mortality.

Conclusions

The 5-mFI score can predict postoperative short- and long-term outcomes and risk factors for mortality unrelated to CRC. Additionally, long-term survival was negatively associated with the 5-mFI score.

Background

Frailty is a geriatric syndrome characterized by physiological decline of multiple organ systems and increased vulnerability to stressor events [1]. With growing aging populations worldwide, frailty has recently been recognized as an important risk factor for adverse outcomes in elderly patients after surgery [1, 2]. Frailty is associated with postoperative complications, higher mortality, longer hospital stays, higher readmission rates, loss of independence, and increased healthcare costs [2,3,4,5]. Although frailty has become a tool for risk stratification in older adults undergoing surgery [6], a global standard for simple and reliable assessment of frailty has not yet been established.

In 2001, a physical phenotype model by Fried et al. [7] and an accumulating deficits model by Mitnitski et al. [8] were developed. However, both models are cumbersome, complex, and time-consuming because they comprise 5–92 preoperative variables that can impact decision making immediately before surgery [7,8,9]. Subsequently, the Canadian Study of Health and Aging (CSHA) introduced a less complex frailty index (CSHA-FI) that is composed of 70 clinically practicable items [10]. In 2013, the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program provided a modified frailty index by extracting 11 variables from the original CSHA-FI [9, 11]. Similar to the CSHA-FI, the 11-item modified frailty index (11-mFI) was proven to be a valid predictor of postoperative morbidity and mortality [9, 12,13,14]. Recently, the five-item modified frailty index (5-mFI) using a subset of five variables extracted from the 11-mFI was introduced [15,16,17]. The 5-mFI comprises four comorbid conditions (pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure, diabetes mellitus, and hypertension) and one functional status [16,17,18]. Similar to the original 11-mFI, the 5-mFI has been proven to be an acceptable predictor of outcome in various surgeries, namely paraesophageal hernia repair, multiorgan resections, trauma, nephrectomy, breast reconstruction, spine surgery, and complex head and neck surgery [15, 16, 18,19,20,21,22,23].

Increased population aging has resulted in the need for elderly patients to undergo colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery. Although these patients have higher morbidity and reduced survival [24] compared with younger patients, the influence of frailty on long-term outcome has not been well described in the literature. We previously reported that while the long-term disease-free survival of patients over 80 years was similar to that of younger age groups, more than half of the older patients died of reasons unrelated to cancer [25]. In the present study, we aimed to investigate whether frailty severity classified by the 5-mFI score predicts the short- and long-term outcomes of elderly patients undergoing curative CRC surgery, including determining the cause of mortality and risk factors.

Methods

We recruited 377 patients over 60 years of age who underwent elective colorectal resection with curative intent between January 2013 and December 2017 at Saint Mary’s Hospital. Seventy-eight patients were excluded because of stage IV CRC (n = 57) and emergency surgery (n = 21). In total, 299 patients over 60 years of age were retrospectively selected for our analysis: 248 patients with primary colon cancer and 51 patients with rectal cancer. All data were collected retrospectively. This study was approved by the Hospital Ethics Committee (approval number: 22–0612). Informed consent was obtained from all patients.

Patients were divided into three groups by the 5-mFI score. Group 1 (5-mFI = 0 or 1) had no frailty; group 2 (5-mFI = 2) was moderately frail; and group 3 (5-mFI ≥ 3) was severely frail. The 5-mFI score was determined by four comorbid conditions and one functional variable [16, 18], as follows: history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure within 30 days postoperation, diabetes mellitus requiring oral agents or insulin, and hypertension requiring medication, as well as preoperative functional health status (independent, partially, or totally dependent). Each variable represents 1 point, for a total possible score of 5 points. A score of 2 or greater indicates frailty [16, 17]. The following data were collected from all patients:

  1. a

    Patient characteristics: age, sex, preoperative body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status score, comorbidities (cardiovascular disease, hypertension, cerebral disease, renal disease, respiratory disease, diabetes mellitus, liver disease, cancer in other organs), and blood test results (hemoglobin, albumin, carcinoembryonic antigen [CEA], and prognostic nutrition index [PNI] calculated as 10 × serum albumin [g/dl] + 0.005 × total lymphocyte count [/mm3] [26])

  2. b

    Operation data: method (open or laparoscopic), amount of blood loss, duration of operation

  3. c

    Tumor-related data: tumor location (right-sided/cecum to splenic flexure, left-sided/splenic flexure to sigmoid colon, or rectum), tumor size, tumor margin status (R0/R1), tumor differentiation (well, moderate/poor, mucinous), and tumor stage according to the 7th edition of the Union of International Cancer Control (UICC) [27]

  4. d

    Postoperative outcomes:

    1. I.

      Short-term: postoperative hospital stay, morbidity defined as Clavien–Dindo classification ≥ III [28], mortality within 30 days, mortality within 1 year, and use of adjuvant chemotherapy

    2. II.

      Long-term: mortality at 5 years in addition to cause of death, from which overall survival and disease-free survival rates were determined. Cause of death was categorized as CRC-related or non-CRC-related, which comprised respiratory disease, cardiovascular disease, other primary cancer, and sepsis.

Statistics

Values are expressed as frequencies and percentages. Differences in the categorical variables among the three frailty groups were analyzed using the chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test as appropriate. The duration of hospital stay was expressed as mean ± standard deviation and was analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis test. Overall and disease-free survival rates were analyzed with the Kaplan–Meier method using the log-rank test. Overall survival was defined as the period from the date of surgery to the date of last follow-up or death. Disease-free survival was defined as the duration from surgery to the date of CRC recurrence. Univariate analysis was performed using the Cox proportional hazards model with survival time analysis as the dependent variable. Statistically significant variables were subsequently tested by multivariate analysis to determine the association between the individual determinants and death from CRC- and non-CRC-related causes, and the effect of each variable was assessed by the hazard ratio and 95% confidence interval. A significant p-value was set at α < 0.05. In the log-rank test, when comparing the three groups, all paired comparisons were adjusted for the p-value in multiple testing using the Holm method [29]. All statistical analyses were performed using the JMP software package (version 13.0; SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA).

Results

Preoperative characteristics of the colorectal cancer patients

Differences in preoperative features between the three frailty groups by the 5-mFI score are shown in Table 1. Of the 299 patients, 164 patients (54.9%) comprised group 1, 91 patients (30.4%) comprised group 2, and 44 patients (14.7%) comprised group 3. Regarding the 5-mFI variables, the frequency of a history of chronic heart failure, hypertension, diabetes, and dependence in activities of daily living increased in direct proportion to the 5-mFI score, while there was no significant difference for a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease between the three groups. High 5-mFI score was significantly associated with older age, high frequency of comorbidities, and high American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status score. There was no significant difference in sex, BMI, or dysphagia before surgery, and laboratory studies revealed no significant difference in PNI, hemoglobin, albumin, or CEA.

Table 1 Preoperative characteristics of CRC patients classified by 5-mFI score
Full size table

Table 2 shows the CRC surgical data and tumor characteristics by the 5-mFI category. There were no significant differences in the amount of blood loss or the duration of operation; however, laparoscopic surgery was performed less often in patients as the 5-mFI score increased. Investigation of tumor-related factors revealed that while UICC tumor stage was higher in patients with a higher 5-mFI score compared with those with a lower score, there was no significant difference in tumor location, tumor size, tumor differentiation, or tumor margin status between the groups. Although all patients underwent surgery with curative intent, 24 specimens revealed residual tumor cells on the tumor margin (R1) across all groups: 10 (6.1%), 10 (11.0%), and 4 (9.1%) for groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively; R0 resection rates were 93.9%, 89.0%, and 90.9%, respectively. There was no significant difference in R0 resection rates between the three groups.

Table 2 Surgical data and tumor characteristics of patients with CRC classified by 5-mFI score
Full size table

Short-term outcomes

The duration of hospital stay after surgery (mean ± standard deviation) was 19.3 ± 14.5 days in group 1, 22.6 ± 18.1 days in group 2, and 24.9 ± 24.9 days in group 3, revealing that patients in group 3 required significantly longer hospital stays compared with patients in group 1 (p = 0.047). Table 3 shows the differences in the immediate postoperative course by 5-mFI score. Immediate postoperative morbidity rates for Clavien–Dindo classification ≥ III in groups 1, 2, and 3 were 9.1%, 14.3%, and 9.1%, respectively. There was no significant difference in immediate postoperative morbidity between the three groups; however, 30-day mortality (4.5%) in group 3 was significantly higher. Two patients in group 3 died within 30 days after surgery from heart failure and aspiration pneumonia, respectively. Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered postoperatively to all patients who were eligible for treatment: 68 (41.5%), 22 (24.2%), and 8 (18.2%); groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively.

Table 3 Short- and long-term outcome and cause of death in CRC patients classified by 5-mFI score
Full size table

Long-term outcomes

The median follow-up period for all groups was 57.3 months with a range of 0.2–114.8 months; 61.0 months in group 1, 54.8 months in group 2, and 47.4 months in group 3. During the follow-up, 62 patients (20.7%) developed local or distant metastases: 20.7% in group 1, 20.9% in group 2, and 20.5% in group 3, indicating no significant difference in disease-free survival between the three groups (Fig. 1). Of the 299 patients, 89 patients died: 37/164 (22.6%) in group 1, 29/91 (31.9%) in group 2, and 23/44 (52.3%) in group 3. A significantly higher mortality rate was observed in group 3 compared with groups 1 and 2. When classifying causes of death, 49/89 (55.1%) were from CRC and 40/89 (44.9%) were from other causes; 75.7% vs 24.3% in group 1, 44.8% vs 55.2% in group 2, and 36.4% vs 63.6% in group 3, respectively. A notable finding was that while 75.7% of non-frail patients (28/37; group 1) died from CRC, the majority of frail patients (n = 31/52 in group 2/3; approximately 60%) died from causes unrelated to CRC. The two primary noncancer causes of death were respiratory failure (29.0%) and cardiovascular disease (29.0%); other causes comprised primary cancer (12.9%), sepsis (7.1%), and others (7.1%). Although there was no significant difference between the three groups for disease-free survival, overall survival was significantly lower in group 3 (p < 0.001) (Table 3, Figs. 1 and 2). The survival rate in group 3 was lower than those in group 2 (p = 0.021) and group 1 (p < 0.001) by multiple pairwise comparison; there was no significant difference in survival between groups 1 and 2 (p = 0.070). The 5-year survival rates in groups 1, 2, and 3 were 83.5%, 71.2%, and 47.9%, respectively, revealing that the 5-year survival rate in patients with frailty (groups 2 and 3: 63.4%) was significantly lower than that in patients without frailty (group 1: 83.5%). The overall survival rates in groups 1, 2, and 3 were 61.3%, 32.3%, and 31.4%, respectively. There was one outlier in group 2 (survival: 3236 days, died of CRC). Then, we analyzed overall survival except the outlier, resulting in overall survival rates in groups 1, 2, and 3 of 61.3%, 64.1%, and 31.4%, respectively.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Disease-free survival in patients who underwent colorectal cancer surgery classified by the 5-mFI. 5-mFI, five-item modified frailty index

Full size image
Fig. 2
figure 2

Overall survival in patients who underwent colorectal cancer surgery classified by the 5-mFI. 5-mFI, five-item modified frailty index

Full size image

Factors influencing cause of death

A univariate analysis of CRC-related deaths revealed that age, PNI, hemoglobin, CEA, tumor margin status, UICC stage, tumor differentiation, postoperative hospital stay, morbidity, and operative blood loss were significant factors influencing the cause of death. Multivariate analysis showed that UICC stage, CEA, tumor differentiation, and margin status were important risk factors for death (Table 4). A univariate analysis of non-CRC-related death revealed that age, 5-mFI score, PNI, surgical procedure, tumor location, postoperative hospital stay, morbidity, and operation time were significant risk factors. Age, 5-mFI score, and postoperative hospital stay were significant risk factors for non-CRC-related death in the multivariate analysis.

Table 4 Univariate and multivariate analyses of survival after colorectal cancer surgery
Full size table

Discussion

In the present study, we aimed to determine the effect of frailty on the short- and long-term survival of elderly patients after CRC surgery. The 5-mFI score was significantly associated with 30-day mortality, 1-year mortality, and longer hospital stay, although there was no significant difference in 30-day morbidity between the three groups. Regarding long-term outcomes, higher 5-mFI score was associated with lower 5-year survival compared with a lower 5-mFI score. While most non-frail patients died of CRC, more than half of the deaths in frail patients were unrelated to CRC (primarily respiratory failure and cardiovascular disease). Advanced tumor stage, elevated CEA, undifferentiated tumor, and R1 resection were identified as risk factors for CRC-related death, while advanced age, high 5-mFI score, and long postoperative hospital stay were important risk factors for non-CRC-related deaths.

Frailty is considered a state of increased vulnerability resulting from a decline in physiological function across multiple organs [1]. Frailty has increasingly been recognized as a high-risk state predictive of adverse outcomes. However, frailty is considered to be separate from aging and comorbidity [30], and much research on frailty has been performed worldwide in the effort to improve comprehensive geriatric assessments in older adults with cancer [15, 31, 32]. Various frailty predictive models have been developed since 2001; however, early models are cumbersome and difficult to use [9, 17]. In 2013, the simpler 11-mFI, which can be used easily during history-taking and physical examination, was proven to be correlated with mortality and morbidity [9] and is currently widely used clinically [12,13,14]. The even simpler and less time-consuming 5-mFI was developed recently, and there is robust research comparing the 5-mFI and 11-mFI for predicting postoperative outcomes [15,16,17]. A weighted Kappa statistic showed strong agreement between the 5-mFI and 11-mFI in these studies [16, 17]. Dauch et al. reported that the 5-mFI was 88% comparable in predicting frailty compared with the 11-mFI [33]. Therefore, research has proven that the 5-mFI and 11-mF have similar predictive abilities. Furthermore, gathering data for the 5-mFI and using the index in practice is relatively easy, lending itself to clinical use in the geriatric population [15]. With these considerations, we chose the 5-mFI as the assessment tool for this study.

The trend in current studies on frailty and postoperative outcomes is to compare data between two groups: patients with and without frailty [3, 34, 35] or three groups: nonfrail, prefrail, and frail [17, 18, 31]. Dasgupta et al. used the Edmonton Frail Scale, with scores ranging from 0 (not frail) to 17 (very frail), in patients ≥ 70 years of age who underwent noncardiac surgery [36]. The study showed that patients with scores > 7 had increased complications compared with those with scores < 4 [36]. Mosquera et al. classified the 11-mFI into four groups, as follows: no frailty (0 points), mild frailty (1 point), moderate frailty (2 points), and severe frailty (≥ 3 points) in thoracoabdominal operations, and found that increased frailty was strongly associated with increased mortality and major complications [14]. We classified patients into three groups on the basis of the 5-mFI score, as follows: group 1, nonfrail (5-mFI = 0 or 1), group 2: moderately frail (5-mFI = 2), and group 3: severely frail (5-mFI ≥ 3) to investigate postoperative outcomes. This three-group categorization was expected to help refine our judgment when choosing to proceed with curative CRC surgery in patients with severe frailty.

Our study showed that patients with severe frailty had significantly poorer short-term postoperative outcomes, such as 30-day/1-year mortality and longer hospital stays compared with nonfrail patients and those with moderate frailty. These findings were similar to those in previous studies [4, 17, 37], although our study showed no significant difference in 30-day morbidity. Other research has demonstrated that frailty predicts poor postoperative outcomes, including a higher risk of postoperative morbidity [4, 13, 17, 18, 37], higher 30-day mortality [4, 13, 17, 37, 38], longer hospital stay [4, 13, 17, 37], and higher rates for readmission [4, 13, 17, 37], discharge to a facility other than home [17], and reoperation [13, 17]. Numerous studies using the 5-mFI also indicated that the 5-mFI score was associated with poor short-term postoperative outcomes, such as 30-day mortality and 30-day morbidity [17, 39]. Notably, these studies reported short-term outcomes but lacked long-term data and cause of death. In comparison, our study showed that the 5-mFI score was significantly associated with not only poor short-term outcomes, but also poor long-term outcomes and risk factors for mortality unrelated to CRC. Additionally, we found that long-term survival was negatively associated with the 5-mFI score.

Curative resection and adjuvant treatment are the standard treatments for CRC; however, there has been debate regarding whether surgery with curative intent should be performed for elderly patients. Historically, elderly patients with CRC have been hesitant to undergo curative surgery owing to the associated high morbidity and mortality and have received less aggressive treatment or even undertreatment [40,41,42]. Recently, owing to improved perioperative management and the use of laparoscopy, the 30-day survival rate for CRC surgery patients aged ≥ 65 years has decreased from 6 times as high to 3 times as high as that of younger age groups [25]. However, long-term survival in older patients has not been well described or analyzed. In the present study, contrary to the decrease in overall survival, the 5-year disease-free survival rate was similar between the three groups, indicating oncological benefit to patients irrespective of the degree of frailty. Our study showed that risk factors for CRC-related death were R1 resection, advanced tumor stage, CEA ≥ 5 ng/mL, undifferentiated tumor status, and longer postoperative hospital stay, which were findings similar to those in previous reports [43,44,45].

Studies on the effect of frailty on long-term survival in elderly patients after CRC surgery are limited and controversial. Artiles–Armas et al. reported that frailty did not affect 5-year survival [34], while Ommundsen et al. found that 5-year survival in frail patients (24%) was significantly lower than that in nonfrail patients (66%) [35]. Our study indicated that 5-year survival in frail patients (groups 2 and 3: 63.4%) was significantly lower than that in nonfrail patients (group 1: 83.5%). Artiles–Armas et al. and Ommundsen et al. studied patients aged ≥ 70 years with tumors ranging from stage I–IV [34, 35]; stage IV tumors accounted for 4.7% and 11.8% of the patients, respectively [34, 35]. In our study, we included patients aged ≥ 60 years with stage I–III tumors and excluded emergency patients and those with stage IV tumors. The frequency of the laparoscopic approach was 79.3% in our study and 29.2–38.9% in the mentioned previous studies [34, 35]. Compared with the survival in our study, the lower survival in the previous studies might have resulted from the lower rate of laparoscopy as well as the inclusion of stage IV tumors. Neither previous study reported the cause of death in detail. Moreover, the high frequency of the laparoscopic approach in our study may be related to the lack of a significant difference in short-term morbidity between the frailty groups [43].

In the present study, we found that despite similar disease-free survival between the frailty groups, long-term survival was markedly lower in more severely frail patients compared with those with moderate frailty. Additionally, more than half of the deaths in more severely frail patients were unrelated to CRC; deaths were from other causes, such as respiratory failure and cardiovascular disease. This was the reason why long-term survival was lower in more severe frail patients compared with less severe frail patients, despite the lack of a significant difference in DFS between the groups. KRAS and BRAF mutations are significantly associated with both DFS and overall survival [46]. We will investigate survival including KRAS and BRAF status in elderly patients with CRC surgery in future studies. Advanced age, 5-mFI score, and postoperative hospital stay were independent risk factors for non-CRC-related mortality from respiratory failure and cardiovascular disease in a previous study [25].

The 5-mFI score has been reported to be a preoperative predictor of postoperative outcomes after surgery for liver resection, trauma, nephrectomy, breast reconstruction, spinal disorders, bladder cancer, and complex head and neck disorders [19,20,21,22,23, 33, 47]. In the present study, high 5-mFI score was identified as an important risk factor for non-cancer-related deaths after CRC surgery. Preoperative assessment using the 5-mFI score may help reliably predict both non-CRC-related death as well as postoperative complications, and preoperative identification of frailty may allow for improved decision-making when selecting elderly patients for CRC surgery. The 5-mFI score is easy to calculate and use as a standard assessment for frailty in patients who may undergo surgery. Multimodal prehabilitation comprising exercise, nutrition, and counseling may improve frailty and help patients avoid postoperative complications and mortality [48, 49].

The present study has several limitations. First, this was a retrospective study that lacked assessment of postoperative quality of life. Second, patients with stage IV CRC and those who underwent emergency surgery were excluded, which further reduced the relatively small sample size. Third, advanced tumor stage was disproportionately represented in patients in group 3, which was the severe frailty group. The strengths of this study are the availability of detailed perioperative information on the population that underwent CRC surgery, as well as the promising long-term outcomes that were identified. Additionally, this study highlighted the potential for preoperative frailty evaluation using the 5-mFI to become a powerful tool in determining which elderly patients might receive the most benefit from surgery.

Conclusions

The 5-mFI score can be a useful predictor of certain short-term outcomes (30-day and 1-year mortality), long-term outcomes (5-year survival), and mortality unrelated to CRC. Additionally, long-term survival was shown to be negatively associated with the 5-mFI score. Appropriate preoperative assessment using the 5-mFI can be a potential tool not only for the selection of elderly patients for CRC surgery but also for the identification of patients who may benefit from a prehabilitation program before surgery.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets generated or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available because of the data protection of the database but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

5-mFI:

Five-item modified frailty index

CRC:

Colorectal cancer

UICC:

Union of International Cancer Control

BMI:

Body mass index

CEA:

Carcinoembryonic antigen

PNI:

Prognostic nutrition index

References

  1. Clegg A, Young J, Iliffe S, Rikkert MO, Rockwood K. Frailty in elderly people. Lancet. 2013;381:752–62.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Richards SJG, Frizelle FA, Geddes JA, Eglinton TW, Hampton MB. Frailty in surgical patients. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2018;33(12):1657–66.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hampton JP, Owodunni OP, Bettick D, Chen SY, Sateri S, Magnuson T, et al. Compliance to an enhanced recovery pathway among patients with a high frailty index after major gastrointestinal surgery results in improved 30-day outcomes. Surgery. 2019;166(1):75–81.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Michaud Maturana M, English WJ, Nandakumar M, Li Chen J, Dvorkin L. The impact of frailty on clinical outcomes in colorectal cancer surgery: a systematic literature review. ANZ J Surg. 2021;91(11):2322–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kojima G, Iliffe S, Walters K. Frailty index as a predictor of mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Age Ageing. 2018;47(2):193–200.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ko FC. Preoperative frailty evaluation: a promising risk-stratification tool in older adults undergoing general surgery. Clin Ther. 2019;41(3):387–99.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J, Newman AB, Hirsch C, Gottdiener J, et al. Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2001;56(3):M146–56.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Mitnitski AB, Mogilner AJ, Rockwood K. Accumulation of deficits as a proxy measure of aging. Sci World J. 2001;8(1):323–36.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Velanovich V, Antoine H, Swartz A, Peters D, Rubinfeld I. Accumulating deficits model of frailty and postoperative mortality and morbidity: its application to a national database. J Surg Res. 2013;183(1):104–10.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Rockwood K, Howlett SE, MacKnight C, Beattie BL, Bergman H, Hébert R, et al. Prevalence, attributes, and outcomes of fitness and frailty in community-dwelling older adults: report from the Canadian study of health and aging. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2004;59(12):1310–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Gani F, Canner JK, Pawlik TM. Use of the Modified Frailty Index in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Improvement Program Database: Highlighting the Problem of Missing Data. JAMA Surg. 2017;152(2):205–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Vermillion SA, Hsu FC, Dorrell RD, Shen P, Clark CJ. Modified frailty index predicts postoperative outcomes in older gastrointestinal cancer patients. J Surg Oncol. 2017;115(8):997–1003.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Panayi AC, Orkaby AR, Sakthivel D, Endo Y, Varon D, Roh D, et al. Impact of frailty on outcomes in surgical patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Surg. 2019;218(2):393–400.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Mosquera C, Bermudez JM, Evans JL, Spaniolas K, MacGillivary DC, Fitzgerald TL. Frailty predicts failure to rescue after thoracoabdominal operation. J Am Coll Surg. 2018;226(6):978–86.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Subramaniam S, Aalberg JJ, Soriano RP, Divino CM. The 5-factor modified frailty index in the geriatric surgical population. Am Surg. 2021;87(9):1420–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Chimukangara M, Helm MC, Frelich MJ, Bosler ME, Rein LE, Szabo A, et al. A five-item frailty index based on NSQIP data correlates with outcomes following paraesophageal hernia repair. Surg Endosc. 2017;31(6):2509–19.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Al-Khamis A, Warner C, Park J, Marecik S, Davis N, Mellgren A, et al. Modified frailty index predicts early outcomes after colorectal surgery: an ACS-NSQIP study. Colorectal Dis. 2019;21(10):1192–205.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Chen SY, Stem M, Cerullo M, Gearhart SL, Safar B, Fang SH, et al. The effect of frailty index on early outcomes after combined colorectal and liver resections. J Gastrointest Surg. 2018;22(4):640–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Goldwag J, Harris A, Bettis AD. Five-item modified frailty index as a preoperative predictor of morbidity following minimally invasive partial nephrectomy. Urology. 2021;157:138–42.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hermiz SJR, Lauzon S, Brown G, Herrera FA. Use of a five-item modified frailty index for risk stratification in patients undergoing breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2021;86:S615–21.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Yamashita S, Mashima N, Higuchi M, Matsumura N, Hagino K, Kikkawa K, et al. Modified five-item frailty index score as prognostic marker after radical cystectomy in bladder cancer. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2022;20(3):e210–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Pierce KE, Naessig S, Kummer N, Larsen K, Ahmad W, Passfall L, et al. The five-item modified frailty index is predictive of 30-day postoperative complications in patients undergoing spine surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2021;46(14):939–43.

  23. Goshtasbi K, Birkenbeuel JL, Lehrich BM, Abiri A, Haidar YM, Tjoa T, et al. Association between five-item modified frailty index and short-term outcomes in complex head and neck surgery. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2022;166(3):482–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Colorectal Cancer Collaborative Group. Surgery for colorectal cancer in elderly patients: a systematic review. Lancet. 2000;356:968–74.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Ogata T, Yoshida N, Sadakari Y, Iwanaga A, Nakane H, Okawara K, et al. Colorectal cancer surgery in elderly patients 80 years and older: a comparison with younger age groups. J Gastrointest Oncol. 2022;13(1):137–48.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Tominaga T, Nagasaki T, Akiyoshi T, Fukunaga Y, Honma S, Nagaoka T, et al. Prognostic nutritional index and postoperative outcomes in patients with colon cancer after laparoscopic surgery. Surg Today. 2020;50:1633–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Song YX, Gao P, Wang ZN, Liang JW, Sun Z, Wang MX, et al. Can the tumor deposits be counted as metastatic lymph nodes in the UICC TNM staging system for colorectal cancer? PLoS ONE. 2012;7: e34087.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, Vauthey JN, Dindo D, Schulick RD, et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009;250:187–96.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Chan AO, Jim MH, Lam KF, Morris JS, Siu DC, Tong T, et al. Prevalence of colorectal neoplasm among patients with newly diagnosed coronary artery disease. JAMA. 2007;298(12):1412–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hoogendijk EO, Afilalo J, Ensrud KE, Kowal P, Onder G, Fried LP. Frailty: implications for clinical practice and public health. Lancet. 2019;394:1365–75.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Nishijima TF, Shimokawa M, Esaki T, Morita M, Toh Y, Muss HB. A 10-item frailty index based on a comprehensive geriatric assessment (FI-CGA-10) in older adults with cancer: development and construct validation. Oncologist. 2021;26(10):e1751–60.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Nishijima TF, Deal AM, Williams GR, Guerard EJ, Nyrop KA, Muss HB. Frailty and inflammatory markers in older adults with cancer. Aging. 2017;9(3):650–64.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Dauch J, Hamidi M, Arrington AK, O’Grady CL, Hsu CH, Joseph B, et al. The impact of frailty on patients undergoing liver resection for colorectal liver metastasis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2022;26(3):608–14.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Artiles-Armas M, Roque-Castellano C, Fariña-Castro R, Conde-Martel A, Acosta-Mérida MA, Marchena-Gómez J. Impact of frailty on 5-year survival in patients older than 70 years undergoing colorectal surgery for cancer. World J Surg Oncol. 2021;19(1):106.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Ommundsen N, Wyller TB, Nesbakken A, Jordhøy MS, Bakka A, Skovlund E, et al. Frailty is an independent predictor of survival in older patients with colorectal cancer. Oncologist. 2014;19(12):1268–75.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Dasgupta M, Rolfson DB, Stolee P, Borrie MJ, Speechley M. Frailty is associated with postoperative complications in older adults with medical problems. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2009;48(1):78–83.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Fagard K, Leonard S, Deschodt M, Devriendt E, Wolthuis A, Prenen H, et al. The impact of frailty on postoperative outcomes in individuals aged 65 and over undergoing elective surgery for colorectal cancer: a systematic review. J Geriatr Oncol. 2016;7(6):479–91.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Boakye D, Rillmann B, Walter V, Jansen L, Hoffmeister M, Brenner H. Impact of comorbidity and frailty on prognosis in colorectal cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Treat Rev. 2018;64:30–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. McGovern J, Grayston A, Coates D, Leadbitter S, Hounat A, Horgan PG, et al. The relationship between the modified frailty index score (mFI-5), malnutrition, body composition, systemic inflammation and short-term clinical outcomes in patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer. BMC Geriatr. 2023;23(1):9.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. de Buck van Overstraeten A, Stijns J, Laenen A, Fieuws S, Wolthuis AM, D'Hoore A. Is colorectal surgery beyond the age of 80 still feasible with acceptable mortality? An analysis of the predictive value of CR-POSSUM and life expectancy after hospital discharge. Colorectal Dis. 2017;19(1):58–64.

  41. Houry S, Amenabar J, Rezvani A, Huguier M. Should patients over 80 years old be operated on for colorectal or gastric cancer? Hepatogastroenterology. 1994;41(6):521–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Bojer AS, Roikjær O. Elderly patients with colorectal cancer are oncologically undertreated. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2015;41(3):421–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Zhou S, Wang X, Zhao C, Liu Q, Zhou H, Zheng Z, et al. Laparoscopic vs open colorectal cancer surgery in elderly patients: short- and long-term outcomes and predictors for overall and disease-free survival. BMC Surg. 2019;19:137.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Huang SH, Tsai WS, You JF, Hung HY, Yeh CY, Hsieh PS, et al. Preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen as a poor prognostic factor in stage I-III colorectal cancer after curative-intent resection: a propensity score matching analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26:1685–94.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Maeda H, Okabayashi T, Ichikawa K, Miyazaki J, Hanazaki K, Kobayashi M. Colorectal cancer surgery in patients older than 80 years of age: experience at one nonteaching hospital in Japan. Am Surg. 2011;77:1454–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Formica V, Sera F, Cremolini C, Riondino S, Morelli C, Arkenau HT, et al. KRAS and BRAF mutations in stage II and III colon cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2022;114(4):517–27.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Tracy BM, Wilson JM, Smith RN, Schenker ML, Gelbard RB. The five-item modified frailty index predicts adverse outcomes in trauma. J Surg Res. 2020;253:167–72.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Carli F, Bousquet-Dion G, Awasthi R, Elsherbini N, Liberman S, Boutros M, et al. Effect of multimodal prehabilitation vs postoperative rehabilitation on 30-day postoperative complications for frail patients undergoing resection of colorectal cancer: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Surg. 2020;155:233–42.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Hijazi Y, Gondal U, Aziz O. A systematic review of prehabilitation programs in abdominal cancer surgery. Int J Surg. 2017;39:156–62.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Mrs. Takiko Miyakawa, Cancer Registry, St. Mary’s Hospital, for her efforts in data collection. We thank Jane Charbonneau, DVM, from Edanz (https://jp.edanz.com/ac) for editing a draft of this manuscript.

Funding

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, St. Mary’s Hospital, Tsubukuhonmachi, Kurume, Fukuoka, 830-8543, Japan

    Toshiro Ogata, Yoshihiko Sadakari, Hiroyuki Nakane, Kazuhiro Koikawa, Hiroki Kanno, Ryo Kohata, Kayoko Endo, Takao Tsukahara, Koichiro Shimonaga, Kazuhisa Kaneshiro, Gentaro Hirokata, Takeshi Aoyagi & Masahiko Taniguchi

  2. Department of Medical Biostatistics, St. Mary’s Hospital, 422 Tsubukuhonmachi, Kurume, Fukuoka, 830-8543, Japan

    Chiyo Tsutsumi

Authors
  1. Toshiro Ogata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yoshihiko Sadakari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hiroyuki Nakane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kazuhiro Koikawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hiroki Kanno
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ryo Kohata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Kayoko Endo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Takao Tsukahara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Koichiro Shimonaga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Kazuhisa Kaneshiro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Gentaro Hirokata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Takeshi Aoyagi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Chiyo Tsutsumi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Masahiko Taniguchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors were involved in performing the research. TO was involved in writing the manuscript, performing the data analysis, and study conception and design. YS and HN were involved in data collection and manuscript editing. KK, HK, RK, KE, TT, and KS were involved in data collection. KK, GH, TA, and MT were involved in data analysis and interpretation. CT performed the statistical analysis. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Toshiro Ogata.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was approved by the Hospital Ethics Committee (approval number: 22–0612). Informed consent was obtained from all patients.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ogata, T., Sadakari, Y., Nakane, H. et al. The five-item modified frailty index predicts long-term outcomes in elderly patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery. World J Surg Onc 21, 268 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-023-03150-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-023-03150-2

Keywords

World Journal of Surgical Oncology

ISSN: 1477-7819

Contact us