4.4 Article

Expression and prognostic value of ratios of platelet lymphocyte, neutrophil lymphocyte and lymphocyte monocyte in breast cancer patients

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH
卷 14, 期 5, 页码 3233-3239

出版社

E-CENTURY PUBLISHING CORP

关键词

Breast cancer; platelet/lymphocyte ratio; neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio; lymphocyte/monocyte ratio

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study explored the value of inflammatory markers, such as NLR, PLR, and LMR, in predicting the pathological features and prognosis of patients with BC. The findings suggest that these markers could become biological indicators for prognosis in invasive BC.
Background: The ratios of systemic inflammatory cells, neutrophil lymphocyte (NLR), platelet lymphocyte (PLR) and lymphocyte monocyte (LMR) can be used as prognostic indicators of breast cancer (BC). The purpose of this study was to explore the value of inflammatory markers in predicting the pathological reaction and prognosis of patients with BC after surgical treatment. Methods: A total of 144 BC patients who received standard neoadjuvant therapy in Shangqiu First People's Hospital from January 2016 to January 2018 were analyzed retrospectively. The clinical data of patients were collected and the effects of NLR, PLR and LMR on disease-free survival were evaluated by chi-square test and COX regression. The diagnostic value of NLR, PLR and LMR in BC recurrence was analyzed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Results: Of the 144 patients, 20 (13.89%) had local or distant metastasis. The areas under the ROC curve of NLR, PLR and LMR in peripheral blood for the diagnosis of BC recurrence were 0.713, 0.683 and 0.765, respectively. Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that T stage, lymph node metastasis, PLR, LMR and HER2 were independent risk factors for prognosis. Conclusion: Inflammatory markers based on NLR, PLR and LMR may become biological indicators to predict the pathological features and prognosis of invasive BC in the future.

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

4.4
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