4.4 Article

Neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio predicts response to chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer

Journal

CURRENT ONCOLOGY
Volume 25, Issue 2, Pages E113-E119

Publisher

MULTIMED INC
DOI: 10.3747/co.25.3888

Keywords

Triple-negative breast cancer; neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio; neoadjuvant chemotherapy; pathologic complete response; recurrence-free survival

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background The neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has been reported to correlate with patient outcome in several cancers, including breast cancer. We evaluated whether the NLR can be a predictive factor for pathologic complete response (PCR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Methods We analyzed the correlation between response to NAC and various factors, including the NLR, in 87 patients with TNBC who underwent NAC. In addition, we analyzed the association between the NLR and recurrence-free survival (RFS) in patients with TNBC. Results Of the 87 patients, 25 (28.7%) achieved a PCR. A high Ki-67 index and a low NLR were significantly associated with PCR. The PCR rate was higher in patients having a high Ki-67 index (>= 15%) than in those having a low Ki-67 index (35.7% vs. 0%, p = 0.002) and higher in patients having a low NLR (<= 1.7) than in those having a high NLR (42.1% vs. 18.4%, p = 0.018). In multiple logistic analysis, a low NLR remained the only predictive factor for PCR (odds ratio: 4.274; p = 0.008). In the survival analysis, the RFS was significantly higher in the low NLR group than in the high NLR group (5-year RFS rate: 83.7% vs. 66.9%; log-rank p = 0.016). Conclusions Our findings that the NLR is a predictor of PCR to NAC and also a prognosticator of recurrence suggest an association between response to chemotherapy and inflammation in patients with TNBC. The pretreatment NLR can be a useful predictive and prognostic marker in patients with TNBC scheduled for NAC.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available