4.3 Article

Prognostic value of preoperative neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio is superior to platelet-lymphocyte ratio for survival in patients who underwent complete resection of thymic carcinoma

期刊

JOURNAL OF THORACIC DISEASE
卷 8, 期 7, 页码 1487-1496

出版社

AME PUBL CO
DOI: 10.21037/jtd.2016.05.05

关键词

Thymic carcinoma; neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR); platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR); prognosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Preoperative neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) have prognostic value in patients with various operable tumors. The aim of our study was to determine whether NLR and PLR are predictive of survival in thymic carcinoma patients after complete resection. Methods: A total of seventy-nine patients who underwent complete resection of thymic carcinoma at our hospital between January 2005 and December 2015 were retrospectively enrolled. Differential leukocyte counts were collected before surgery, and the relationships of NLR, PLR, and other patient clinical variables with survival were estimated by Cox regression analysis and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Results: Univariate analysis found that a high level of NLR was associated with lower disease-free survival (DFS) (HR: 3.385, 95% CI: 1.073-10.678, P=0.037) and lower overall survival (OS) (HR: 12.836, 95% CI: 1.615-101.990, P=0.016). The optimal NLR threshold of 4.1 could stratify the patients with high risk of recurrence or metastasis (P=0.026) and death (P=0.006). Meanwhile, the NLR value of >4.1 in those patients was associated with bigger tumor size (P=0.035) and more advanced Masaoka stages (P=0.040) compared with NLR <= 4.1. However, the PLR and other variables were not significantly associated with survival in thymic carcinoma patients. Conclusions: The preoperative NLR of >4.1 was significantly associated with larger tumor size, more advanced Masaoka stages and reduced DFS and OS, but was not an independent predictor of survival in thymic carcinoma patients after complete resection.

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

4.3
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