4.3 Article

Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio as prognostic indicator in gastrointestinal cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal

ONCOTARGET
Volume 8, Issue 19, Pages 32171-32189

Publisher

IMPACT JOURNALS LLC
DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.16291

Keywords

neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio; gastrointestinal cancers; prognostic indicator; overall survival; biomarkers

Ask authors/readers for more resources

An accurate, time efficient, and inexpensive prognostic indicator is needed to reduce cost and assist with clinical decision making for cancer management. The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), which is derived from common serum testing, has been explored in a variety of cancers. We sought to determine its prognostic value in gastrointestinal cancers and performed a meta-analysis of published studies using the Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. Included were randomized control trials and observational studies that analyzed humans with gastrointestinal cancers that included NLR and hazard ratios (HR) with overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and/or cancerspecific survival (CSS). We analyzed 144 studies comprising 45,905 patients, two-thirds of which were published after 2014. The mean, median, and mode cutoffs for NLR reporting OS from multivariate models were 3.4, 3.0, 5.0 (+/- IQR 2.5-5.0), respectively. Overall, NLR greater than the cutoff was associated with a HR for OS of 1.63 (95% CI, 1.53-1.73; P < 0.001). This association was observed in all subgroups based on tumor site, stage, and geographic region. HR for elevated NLR for DFS, PFS, and CSS were 1.70 (95% CI, 1.52-1.91, P < 0.001), 1.64 (95% CI, 1.36-1.97, P < 0.001), and 1.83 (95% CI, 1.50-2.23, P < 0.001), respectively. Available evidence suggests that NLR greater than the cutoff reduces OS, independent of geographic location, gastrointestinal cancer type, or stage of cancer. Furthermore, DFS, PFS, and CSS also have worse outcomes with elevated NLR.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available