Evidence Hub

Association between preoperative inflammatory status via CALLY index and postoperative pneumonia occurrence in resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients: a retrospective cohort study

Mengtao Fan, Yi-Hao Zhu, Long Qian, Chuanxian Hu, Hui Ding

Frontiers in Oncology, 2025

215 participants · 2 citations

Abstract

Background Postoperative pneumonia significantly affects recovery and prognosis in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. The CALLY index, derived from preoperative hematological parameters, may serve as a predictive marker for such complications. Objectives To assess the association between preoperative inflammatory status via the CALLY index and the occurrence of postoperative pneumonia in patients with resectable ESCC. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted from January 2020 to December 2022 at The Affiliated Huai’an No. 1 People’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University. A total of 215 patients who met inclusion criteria were analyzed. Clinical data, including CALLY indices calculated preoperatively, were collected. Propensity score matching was applied to minimize confounding biases. The predictive value of the CALLY index was assessed using receiver operating characteristic analysis, and logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with postoperative pneumonia. Results ROC curve analysis demonstrated the CALLY index had an area under the curve of 0.764 for predicting postoperative pneumonia, with a cutoff value of 1.97 achieving 67.69% sensitivity and 84.67% specificity. In multivariate analysis, a lower CALLY index was significantly associated with increased pneumonia risk, independent of other factors (adjusted OR = 0.66, p < 0.001). High CALLY index scores correlated with a decreased likelihood of postoperative pneumonia,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 215 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free