4.6 Article

Elevated Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Is Associated With Poor Outcomes for Melanoma Patients Treated With PD-1 Inhibitor or Chemotherapy in a Chinese Population

期刊

FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY
卷 10, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.01752

关键词

neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio; PD-1 inhibitor; melanoma; biomarker; prognosis

类别

资金

  1. Henan Provincial Scientific and Technological Project [162300410095]
  2. Henan Medical Science and Technique Foundation [201701030]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background:Previous studies have suggested that an elevated pre-treatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is associated with worse outcomes in patients with a variety of cancers. The purpose of this retrospective analysis is to investigate the prognostic value of the NLR in a Chinese melanoma population. Methods:Melanoma patients were divided into two groups based on pre-treatment NLR values (>= 3 vs. <3). Cox proportional hazard regression analysis and the Kaplan-Meier method were employed to study the prognostic role of the NLR for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Results:A total of 159 melanoma patients were included in this study, including 40 patients treated with PD-1 inhibitor and 119 patients treated with chemotherapy. In the PD-1 inhibitor group, the median OS was 18.0 months in the low NLR subgroup and 5.6 months in the high NLR subgroup; the median PFS was 7.0 and 2.2 months, respectively. In chemotherapy group, the median OS was 23.0 months in the low NLR group and 8.0 months in the high NLR group, and the median PFS was 9.0 and 4.0 months, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that the NLR was significantly associated with OS and PFS in melanoma patients treated with either PD-1 inhibitor immunotherapy or chemotherapy. Conclusion:In the Chinese population, an elevated NLR was closely related to worse survival in patients with melanoma treated with either PD-1 inhibitor monotherapy or chemotherapy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据