Literature DB >> 26544968

The Neutrophil-Platelet Score (NPS) Predicts Survival in Primary Operable Colorectal Cancer and a Variety of Common Cancers.

David G Watt1, Michael J Proctor1, James H Park1, Paul G Horgan1, Donald C McMillan1.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Recent in-vitro studies have suggested that a critical checkpoint early in the inflammatory process involves the interaction between neutrophils and platelets. This confirms the importance of the innate immune system in the elaboration of the systemic inflammatory response. The aim of the present study was to examine whether a combination of the neutrophil and platelet counts were predictive of survival in patients with cancer.
METHODS: Patients with histologically proven colorectal cancer who underwent potentially curative resection at a single centre between March 1999 and May 2013 (n = 796) and patients with cancer from the Glasgow Inflammation Outcome Study, who had a blood sample taken between January 2000 and December 2007 (n = 9649) were included in the analysis.
RESULTS: In the colorectal cancer cohort, there were 173 cancer and 135 non-cancer deaths. In patients undergoing elective surgery, cancer-specific survival (CSS) at 5 years ranged from 97% in patients with TNM I disease and NPS = 0 to 57% in patients with TNM III disease and NPS = 2 (p = 0.019) and in patients undergoing elective surgery for node-negative colon cancer from 98% (TNM I, NPS = 0) to 65% (TNM II, NPS = 2) (p = 0.004). In those with a variety of common cancers there were 5218 cancer and 929 non-cancer deaths. On multivariate analysis, adjusting for age and sex and stratified by tumour site, incremental increase in the NPS was significantly associated with poorer CSS (p<0.001).
CONCLUSION: The neutrophil-platelet score predicted survival in a variety of common cancers and highlights the importance of the innate immune system in patients with cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26544968      PMCID: PMC4636235          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0142159

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


Introduction

Colorectal cancer is the second most common cause of cancer death in the UK [1]. In recent decades, mortality rates have been falling and the introduction of bowel screening in many parts of the UK is likely to reduce this further. Despite this, approximately 40% of patients will ultimately die from their disease [2]. In patients with colorectal cancer, surgery remains the main method of cure. It is now established that the presence of a pre-operative systemic inflammatory response is predictive of disease progression and poorer outcome, regardless of tumour stage, in patients with colorectal cancer [3]. Indeed, systemic inflammation based scoring systems such as the modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS) and the Neutrophil-Lymphocyte ratio (NLR) have prognostic value in a range of common solid tumours [4-9]. However, with reference to the NLR, multiple thresholds have been used to define high and low NLR values and some have suggested that its prognostic value is mainly derived from the neutrophil count and that the lymphocyte count makes little contribution [10]. Therefore, it is of interest that recent in-vitro studies have suggested that a critical checkpoint early in the inflammatory process involves the interaction between neutrophils and platelets [11]. During this process, neutrophils that are recruited to injured tissues/vessels, scan for activated platelets and when detected neutrophils undergo intravascular migration, further elaborating the inflammatory process. This in-vitro research highlights the importance of the innate immune system, in particular neutrophils, in the elaboration of the systemic inflammatory response. If the interaction between neutrophils and platelets were of clinical relevance then it might be expected that an elevated neutrophil count in the presence of an elevated platelet count would result in an enhanced systemic inflammatory response. Indeed the combination of a platelet count and the NLR (COP-NLR) has recently been reported as a cumulative predictor of survival in patients with colorectal [12], gastric [13] and oesophageal cancer [14]. However, given that the lymphocyte count makes little contribution to the prognostic value of the NLR [10, 15], it could be hypothesised that a combination of the neutrophil and platelet counts could have considerable prognostic value in predicting survival in patients with cancer. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to examine whether a combination of the neutrophil count and the platelet count was predictive of survival in patients undergoing potentially curative surgery for colorectal cancer and in patients with a variety of common cancers.

Materials and Methods

For the colorectal cancer cohort, patients with histologically proven colorectal cancer who, on the basis of intra-operative findings and pre-operative computed tomography, were considered to have undergone potentially curative resection at a single centre between March 1999 and May 2013 (n = 813) were initially selected for analysis. Patients in whom a pre-operative neutrophil or platelet count were not available were excluded from analysis (n = 6) as were those patients with TNM stage 0 disease (n = 11). Patient characteristics were collected in a prospectively maintained database and all patient data was anonymised. All tumours were staged according to conventional tumour, node, metastasis classification and additional pathological data obtained from the pathology reports issued at the time of the resection. Pre-operatively, all patients received thromboembolism prophylaxis and antibiotic prophylaxis as per local protocols and blood samples were taken for routine laboratory analysis. Cut-off values for both neutrophil and platelet count were based on previously reported values [10, 16]. The neutrophil-platelet score (NPS) was calculated as follows Table 1: patients with a neutrophil count ≤7.5 x109/L and platelets ≤400 x109/L scored 0, patients with neutrophils >7.5 x109/L or platelets >400 x109/L scored 1 and patients with both neutrophils >7.5 x109/L and platelets >400 x109/L scored 2.
Table 1

The neutrophil platelet score (NPS).

ScoreThresholds
NPS 0Neutrophils ≤ 7.5 x109/L and Platelets ≤400 x109/L
NPS 1Neutrophils >7.5 x109/L or Platelets >400 x109/L
NPS 2Neutrophils >7.5 x109/L and Platelets >400 x109/L
Patients were routinely followed up for 5 years following resection as per national guidelines. Date and cause of death were crosschecked with the cancer registration system and Registrar General (Scotland). Cancer specific survival was measured from date of surgery until date of death. This was an observational study involving patients who underwent surgery for colorectal cancer and their clinical data. As such no specific consent, either written or verbal was obtained to use this data. This was approved by the West of Scotland Research Ethics Committee, Glasgow. For the larger, common cancer cohort, data was taken from the Glasgow Inflammation Outcome Study [17]. Patients with routine laboratory measurements of C-reactive protein, albumin and a differential white cell count sampled between January 2000 and December 2007, including neutrophil and platelet counts were obtained by systematically searching the North Glasgow biochemical and haematological database systems. Of the 160,481 patients identified, through linkage with the Scottish Cancer Registry using exact matches of the patient’s forename, surname and date of birth, 27 465 were found to have an associated diagnosis of cancer. Of those that had common cancers previously studied in the GIOS cohort, 9649 had been sampled within two years of their cancer diagnosis and were included in the analysis. Cancers were coded according to the International Classification of Disease 10 (ICD-10) and broadly grouped according to the tumour site. Tumours were listed in order of the magnitude of their inflammatory status as previously demonstrated [18]. Patient mortality was established through linkage with the Information Service Division for Scotland (ISD). Patients were excluded if they did not have a blood sample within 2 years of their cancer diagnosis, had incomplete cancer registry follow up, under 16 years old, did not have a complete set of blood results available, had multiple tumours or metastatic disease or had a primary tumour of unknown origin.

Statistical analysis

The comparison of clinicopathological variables across different NPS scores was performed using a Chi square test. The relationship between the NPS and 5-year survival was examined using log-rank survival analysis. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to examine the relationship between patients characteristics, NPS, tumour site and cancer-specific and overall survival. Cox proportional hazards multivariate regression models (stratified by tumour site) were used to correct for age and sex and examine the relationship between patient characteristics, NPS and survival. A two-sided p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Analyses were performed using SPSS 22.0 (IBM, SPSS, IL, USA).

Results

A total of 796 patients were included in the analysis of patients undergoing potentially curative surgery for colorectal cancer. The majority were over the age of 65 (66%), male (55%), underwent elective surgery (90%), had an open procedure (87%) and had node negative disease (61%). Median follow up of survivors was 49 (10–180) months with 173 cancer deaths and 135 non-cancer deaths. Table 2 shows the distribution of the clinicopathological characteristics based on the NPS score. Mode of presentation, tumour site, T-stage, TNM stage, margin involvement, peritoneal involvement, tumour perforation and mGPS were significantly different between the 3 NPS groups. On multivariate analysis, adjusting for age and sex and stratified by TNM stage, incremental increase in the NPS was associated with poorer cancer-specific (NPS 1 –HR 1.37, p = 0.091; NPS 2 –HR 1.61, p 0.082) and overall survival (NPS 1 –HR 1.48, p = 0.005; NPS 2 –HR 1.51, p 0.056).
Table 2

The relationship between neutrophil platelet score (NPS) and clinicopathological characteristics in patients undergoing potentially curative resection of colorectal cancer.

AllNPS = 0NPS = 1NPS = 2 p-value
ClinicopathologicalCharacteristicn = 796(%)n = 621(%)n = 133(%)n = 42(%)
Age 0.318
<65 266 (34)210 (34)42 (32)14 (33)
65–74 272 (34)221 (36)39 (29)12 (29)
>75 258 (32)190 (30)52 (39)16 (38)
Sex 0.553
Female 361 (45)276 (44)66 (50)27 (64)
Male 435 (55)345 (56)67 (50)23 (55)
Presentation <0.001
Elective 718 (90)582 (94)109 (82)27 (64)
Emergency 78 (10)39 (6)24 (18)15 (36)
Adjuvant Therapy 0.241
No 585 (74)464 (75)94 (71)27 (64)
Yes 211 (26)157 (25)39 (29)15 (36)
Tumour Site <0.001
Colon 525 (66)385 (62)103 (77)37 (88)
Rectum 271 (34)236 (38)30 (23)5 (12)
T-stage <0.001
1 58 (7)54 (9)4 (3)0 (0)
2 102 (13)94 (15)7 (5)1 (2)
3 432 (54)338 (54)74 (56)20 (48)
4 204 (26)135 (22)48 (36)21 (50)
N-stage 0.068
0 486 (61)391 (63)71 (53)24 (57)
1 224 (28)172 (28)42 (32)10 (24)
2 86 (11)58 (9)20 (15)8 (19)
TNM Stage <0.001
1 132 (17)124 (20)7 (5)1 (2)
2 354 (44)267 (43)64 (48)23 (55)
3 310 (39)230 (37)62 (47)18 (43)
Differentiation 0.225
Mod/well 710 (90)560 (91)113 (86)37 (88)
Poor 78 (10)55 (9)18 (14)5 (12)
Venous invasion 0.309
No 354 (45)285 (46)53 (40)16 (38)
Yes 442 (55)336 (54)80 (60)26 (62)
Margin Involvement <0.001
No 738 (93)590 (95)110 (83)38 (91)
Yes 58 (7)31 (5)23 (17)4 (9)
Peritoneal Involvement 0.001
No 617 (78)499 (80)93 (70)25 (60)
Yes 179 (22)122 (20)40 (30)17 (40)
Tumour perforation <0.001
No 776 (98)612 (99)127 (96)37 (88)
Yes 20 (2)9 (1)6 (4)5 (12)
Modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS) <0.001
0 505 (63)450 (73)46 (35)9 (21)
1 164 (21)102 (16)45 (34)17 (41)
2 127 (16)69 (11)42 (31)16 (38)
Survival Status <0.001
Alive 488 (61)407 (66)64 (48)17 (40)
Cancer death 173 (22)120 (19)38 (29)15 (36)
Non-cancer death 135 (17)94 (15)31 (23)10 (24)
Survival (Months) $ 1031076957<0.001

$ median overall survival

$ median overall survival Tables 3 and 4 show the relationship between pre-operative NPS, TNM stage and 5 year cancer-specific (CSS) and overall survival (OS). CSS in the whole cohort at 5 years varied from 97% in patients with stage I colorectal cancer to 62% in those with stage III colorectal cancer (p < 0.001) and from 79% in patients with NPS = 0 to 65% in patients with NPS = 2 (p = 0.001). When combined, 5 year CSS varied from 97% in patients with stage I disease and NPS = 0, to 60% in patients with stage III disease and NPS = 2 (p = 0.026). OS at 5 years ranged from 86% in patients with stage I disease to 52% in patients with stage III disease (p < 0.001) and from 68% in patients with NPS = 0 to 48% in patients with NPS = 2 (p < 0.001). When combined, OS at 5 years ranged from 89% in patients with stage I disease and NPS = 0 to 49% in patients with stage III disease and NPS = 2 (p = 0.001).
Table 3

The relationship between neutrophil platelet score (NPS) and 5 year cancer-specific survival in patients undergoing curative resection of colorectal cancer.

CSS—cancer-specific survival. Survival not calculated if n<10.

NPS = 0(Neut ≤ 7.5 x109/L and Plat ≤400 x109/L)NPS = 1(Neut >7.5 x109/L or Plat >400 x109/L)NPS = 2(Neut >7.5 x109/L and Plat >400 x109/L)All(NPS 0–2)
All Patients n 5-yr CSS % (SE) n 5-yr CSS % (SE) n 5-yr CSS % (SE)n5-yr CSS % (SE)
Stage I12497 (2)7-1-13297 (2)
Stage II26785 (3)6479 (6)2368 (11)35482 (2)
Stage III23063 (4)6256 (7)1860 (12)31062 (3)
All (Stage 0-III)62179 (2)13369 (5)4265 (8)79676 (2)
Elective n 5-yr CSS % (SE) n 5-yr CSS % (SE) n 5-yr CSS % (SE) n 5-yr CSS % (SE)
Stage I12497 (2)7-1-13297 (2)
Stage II24885 (3)5379 (6)1468 (13)31583 (2)
Stage III21065 (4)4958 (8)1257 (15)27163 (3)
All (Stage 0-III)58280 (2)10970 (5)2762 (10)71878 (2)
Elective, Node Negative n 5-yr CSS % (SE) n 5-yr CSS % (SE) n 5-yr CSS % (SE) n 5-yr CSS % (SE)
Stage I12497 (2)7-1-13297 (2)
Stage II24885 (3)5379 (6)1468 (13)31583 (2)
All (Stage 0-II)37289 (2)6081 (6)1571 (12)44787 (2)
Elective, Node Negative Colon n 5-yr CSS % (SE) n 5-yr CSS % (SE) n 5-yr CSS % (SE) n 5-yr CSS % (SE)
Stage I7198 (2)6-0-7799 (1)
Stage II16189 (3)4082 (7)1265 (14)21377 (4)
All (Stage 0-II)23291 (2)4684 (6)1265 (14)29089 (2)
Table 4

The relationship between neutrophil platelet score (NPS) and 5 year overall survival in patients undergoing potentially curative resection of colorectal cancer.

OS—overall survival. Survival not calculated if n<10.

NPS = 0(Neut ≤ 7.5 x109/L and Plat ≤400 x109/L)NPS = 1(Neut >7.5 x109/L or Plat >400 x109/L)NPS = 2(Neut >7.5 x109/L and Plat >400 x109/L)All(NPS 0–2)
All Patients n 5-yr OS % (SE) n 5-yr OS % (SE) n 5-yr OS % (SE)n5-yr OS % (SE)
Stage I12489 (4)7-1-13286 (4)
Stage II26773 (3)6468 (6)2345 (11)35470 (3)
Stage III23054 (4)6245 (7)1849 (12)31052 (3)
All (Stage 0-III)62168 (2)13356 (5)4248 (8)79665 (2)
Elective n 5-yr OS % (SE) n 5-yr OS % (SE) n 5-yr OS % (SE) n 5-yr OS % (SE)
Stage I12489 (4)7-1-13286 (4)
Stage II24874 (3)5368 (7)1437 (14)31571 (3)
Stage III21055 (4)4945 (8)1242 (14)27152 (3)
All (Stage 0-III)58269 (2)10956 (5)2741 (10)71866 (2)
Elective, Node Negative n 5-yr OS % (SE) n 5-yr OS % (SE) n 5-yr OS % (SE) n 5-yr OS % (SE)
Stage I12489 (4)7-1-13286 (4)
Stage II24874 (3)5368 (7)1437 (14)31571 (3)
All (Stage 0-II)37278 (3)6065 (7)1542 (14)44775 (2)
Elective, Node Negative Colon n 5-yr OS % (SE) n 5-yr OS % (SE) n 5-yr OS % (SE) n 5-yr OS % (SE)
Stage I7156 (12)6-0-7783 (5)
Stage II16175 (4)4025 (10)1246 (15)21372 (4)
All (Stage 0-II)23278 (3)4624 (9)1246 (15)29075 (3)

The relationship between neutrophil platelet score (NPS) and 5 year cancer-specific survival in patients undergoing curative resection of colorectal cancer.

CSScancer-specific survival. Survival not calculated if n<10.

The relationship between neutrophil platelet score (NPS) and 5 year overall survival in patients undergoing potentially curative resection of colorectal cancer.

OS—overall survival. Survival not calculated if n<10. The combination of the platelet count and NLR (COP-NLR) was calculated (using an NLR threshold of 5) in order to determine its effect on survival in patients with operable colorectal cancer. CSS in the whole cohort at 5 years ranged from 78% in patients with COP-NLR = 0 to 67% in patients with COP-NLR = 2 (p = 0.010). Furthermore, on multivariate analysis, adjusting for age and sex and stratified by TNM stage, incremental increase in the COP-NLR was not independently associated with cancer-specific survival (COP-NLR 1 –HR 1.31, p = 0.112; COP-NLR 2 –HR 1.41, p 0.268). Therefore, in comparison to COP-NLR, the NPS was superior in predicting survival in patients with operable colorectal cancer. As emergency surgery, presence of a colonic tumour and nodal status were associated with the NPS, to control for confounding of these, 5 year survival (both CSS and OS) was examined in patients undergoing elective surgery and then in patients with node negative disease and node negative colonic disease Tables 3 and 4. In patients undergoing elective surgery, CSS at 5 years ranged from 97% in stage I disease to 63% in stage III disease (p < 0.001) and from 80% in patients with NPS = 0 to 62% in patients with NPS = 2 (p = 0.001). When combined, CSS at 5 years ranged from 97% in patients with stage I disease and NPS = 0 to 57% in patients with stage III disease and NPS = 2 (p = 0.019). A similar relationship was observed in OS at 5 years as survival ranged from 86% to 52% (p < 0.001) and from 69% to 41% (p < 0.001) with TNM stage and NPS alone, the combination of TMN stage and NPS stratified OS from 89% (TNM I, NPS = 0) to 42% (TNM III, NPS = 2) (p < 0.001). In patients undergoing elective surgery for node negative disease, CSS at 5 years ranged from 97% in stage I disease to 83% in stage II disease (p = 0.003) and from 89% in patients with NPS = 0 to 71% in patients with NPS = 2 (p = 0.002). When combined CSS ranged from 97% (TNM stage I, NPS = 0) to 68% (TNM stage II, NPS = 2) (p = 0.018). Similarly, OS at 5 years ranged from 86% to 71% (p = 0.012) and from 78% to 42% (p < 0.001) with TNM stage and NPS alone and the combination of TNM stage and NPS stratified OS from 89% (TNM I, NPS = 0) to 37% (TNM II, NPS = 0) (p < 0.001). In patients undergoing elective surgery for node negative colonic disease CSS at 5 years ranged from 99% in stage I disease to 77% in stage II disease (p = 0.003) and from 91% in patients with NPS = 0 to 65% in patients with NPS = 2 (p < 0.001). When combined, CSS ranged from 98% (TNM stage I, NPS = 0) to 65% (TNM stage II, NPS = 2) (p = 0.004). Similarly, OS at 5 years ranged from 83% to 72% (p = 0.039) and from 78% to 46% (p < 0.001) with TNM stage and NPS alone, the combination of TNM stage and NPS stratified OS from 56% (TNM stage I, NPS = 0) to 46% (TNM stage II, NPS = 2) (p = 0.002). The relationship between the clinicopathological characteristics and the NPS score in patients with a range of common cancers are in shown in Table 5. Age, sex, mode of presentation, tumour site, mGPS, survival status and survival length were significantly different between NPS groups. On multivariate analysis, adjusting for age and sex and stratified by tumour site, incremental increase in the NPS was significantly associated with poorer cancer-specific (NPS 1 –HR 1.60, p < 0.001; NPS 2 –HR 2.14, p < 0.001) and overall survival (NPS 1 –HR 1.61, p < 0.001; NPS 2 –HR 2.19, p < 0.001).
Table 5

The relationship between neutrophil platelet score (NPS) and patient demographics in an incidentally sampled cohort of patients with cancer.

AllNPS = 0NPS = 1NPS = 2 p-value
n = 9649(%)n = 5933(%)n = 2779(%)n = 937(%)
Age <0.001
<65 4631 (48)3032 (51)1170 (42)429 (46)
65–74 2885 (30)1696 (29)886 (32)303 (32)
>75 2133 (22)1205 (20)723 (26)205 (22)
Sex <0.001
Female 4584 (48)2646 (45)1468 (53)470 (50)
Male 5065 (52)3287 (55)1311 (47)467 (50)
Presentation <0001
Non-Emergency 6098 (63)4236 (71)1398 (50)464 (50)
Emergency 3551 (37)1697 (29)1381 (50)473 (50)
Tumour Site <0.001
Breast 1921 (20)1611 (27)268 (10)42 (5)
Bladder 437 (4)259 (4)128 (5)50 (5)
Gynaecological 507 (5)298 (5)142 (5)67 (7)
Prostatic 509 (5)322 (6)159 (6)28 (3)
Gastroesophageal 933 (10)548 (9)294 (10)91 (10)
Haematological 914 (9)678 (12)188 (7)48 (5)
Renal 459 (5)288 (5)134 (5)37 (4)
Colorectal 1086 (11)604 (10)356 (13)126 (13)
Head And Neck 633 (7)365 (6)204 (7)64 (7)
Hepaticopancreaticobiliary 556 (6)309 (5)183 (6)64 (7)
Pulmonary 1694 (18)651 (11)723 (26)320 (34)
mGPS <0.001
0 4013 (42)3305 (56)629 (23)79 (9)
1 2757 (28)1504 (25)931 (33)322 (34)
2 2879 (30)1124 (19)1219 (44)536 (57)
Survival Status <0.001
Alive 3502 (36)2757 (47)633 (23)112 (12)
Cancer death 5218 (54)2620 (44)1849 (66)749 (80)
Non-cancer death 929 (10)556 (9)297 (11)76 (8)
Survival (Months) $ 215573<0.001

$ median overall survival

$ median overall survival On Kaplan Meier survival analysis, a greater neutrophil-platelet score is associated with poorer cancer-specific survival in all patients (p < 0.001) Fig 1. On Kaplan Meier survival analysis, based on individual tumour types Fig 2, increasing NPS was significantly associated with poorer cancer-specific survival in patients with breast (p < 0.001), bladder (p < 0.001), colorectal (p < 0.001), gastroeosophageal (p < 0.001), gynaecological (p < 0.001), head and neck (p < 0.001), Hepaticopancreaticobiliary (HPB) (p = 0.009), prostatic (p < 0.001), pulmonary (p < 0.001) and renal cancers (p < 0.001).
Fig 1

The relationship between the NPS and cancer specific survival in all patients of the GIOS cohort.

NPS 0 (top, small dash line), NPS 1 (middle, large dash line) and NPS 2 (bottom, solid line) (p<0.001).

Fig 2

The relationship between the NPS and cancer specific survival in each tumour site.

NPS 0 (top, small dash line), NPS 1 (middle, large dash line) and NPS 2 (bottom, solid line).Breast p<0.001, bladder <0.001, gynaecological <0.001, prostatic <0.001, gastroesophageal <0.001, renal <0.001, colorectal <0.001, head and neck <0.001, HPB = 0.009 and pulmonary <0.001.

The relationship between the NPS and cancer specific survival in all patients of the GIOS cohort.

NPS 0 (top, small dash line), NPS 1 (middle, large dash line) and NPS 2 (bottom, solid line) (p<0.001).

The relationship between the NPS and cancer specific survival in each tumour site.

NPS 0 (top, small dash line), NPS 1 (middle, large dash line) and NPS 2 (bottom, solid line).Breast p<0.001, bladder <0.001, gynaecological <0.001, prostatic <0.001, gastroesophageal <0.001, renal <0.001, colorectal <0.001, head and neck <0.001, HPB = 0.009 and pulmonary <0.001.

Discussion

The results of the present study show that the combination of neutrophils and platelets in a clinical scoring system, the neutrophil-platelet score (NPS), can be used to predict survival, independent of TNM stage, in patients undergoing potentially curative surgery for colorectal cancer. Furthermore, the results of the present study provide evidence that this simple, novel, objective score has prognostic value in a variety of common cancers. These results confirm the importance of activation of the innate immune response in predicting outcome in patients with cancer. The results of the present study are consistent with those of Ishizuka and colleagues who reported that the combination of platelets and the NLR was a predictor of post-operative survival in both colorectal and gastric cancer [12, 13]. However, recent evidence would appear to suggest that when using the differential white cell count to predict outcomes, the neutrophil count is the dominant component and as a result the lymphocyte count adds little to its prognostic effect [10]. Furthermore, recent work [12, 13] has suggested that the combination of a platelet count to the NLR (COP-NLR) improves the prediction of outcome. In the present study when the prognostic value of the COP-NLR was examined, the NPS had superior prognostic value. Due to the differences in the formation of the COP-NLR and the NPS the basis of the difference in prognostic value is not clear. Nevertheless, taken together these results would suggest that neutrophils and platelets were the main factors determining the prognostic value of the COP-NLR. There are other systemic inflammation based scores that have prognostic value in patients with primary operable colorectal cancer and a variety of common solid tumours. The most validated of these is the GPS/mGPS [5, 8, 17]. Indeed, it was of interest in the present study that as the NPS increased from 0 to 2 the median concentration of CRP increased from 6 to 55 mg/L and median concentration of albumin decreased from 38 to 36 g/L (both p < 0.001). Therefore it would appear that both these scoring systems are related measures of the systemic inflammatory response. Nevertheless, the present results are of considerable interest since the GPS/mGPS requires the measurement of two acute phase proteins and in many centres they may not be routinely assessed. Together with previous results [19] the present results show the complementary prognostic value of the NPS. It is of interest that Kumar and colleagues recently reported that, in 1300 patients in phase I clinical cancer trials, the neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) was an independent prognostic factor for overall survival [15]. Furthermore, they reported that the neutrophil count but not the lymphocyte count had prognostic value. This finding is consistent with our work in patients with primary operable colorectal cancer [10, 16]. The results of the present study demonstrate that the combination of increased neutrophils and platelets (both components of the innate immune response) was associated with an elaboration of the systemic inflammatory response and significantly poorer survival in patient with a range of common cancers. Taken together, these findings suggest that activation of the innate immune response is a key step in disease progression and poor survival in patients with cancer. The elaboration of this systemic inflammatory response and the presence of high numbers of neutrophils and platelets may result in an enhancement of cellular breakdown and proliferation (tissue remodelling). Specifically, neutrophils contain multiple enzymes such as, myeloperoxidase, interleukin-6 (IL-6), defensins, lysozyme and collagenase which may directly promote cancer cell intravasation and extravasation [20, 21]. Moreover, activated platelets contain significant quantities of IL-6 and secrete factors such as vascular-endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and other factors that promote angiogenesis and may prevent recognition of cancer cells by the body’s own immune system [22-24]. Furthermore, both neutrophils and platelets are stimulated by IL-6. This may tip the tumour microenvironment towards disease dissemination and promotion of the growth of metastatic disease. The present study has a number of possible limitations. Detailed data on the use of pre-operative chemo/radiotherapy in the colorectal cancer cohort and its relation to the timing of the pre-operative blood samples was not available. In both cohorts, data relating to other factors that may have affected neutrophil or platelet levels such as drugs and other co-morbidities were not available. In conclusion, the neutrophil-platelet score can predict survival in patients undergoing potentially curative surgery for colorectal cancer and in a variety of common cancers. This confirms the importance of activation of the innate immune system in patients with cancer.
  23 in total

Review 1.  Platelets: linking hemostasis and cancer.

Authors:  Shashank Jain; John Harris; Jerry Ware
Journal:  Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol       Date:  2010-11-11       Impact factor: 8.311

2.  Neutrophil count is the most important prognostic component of the differential white cell count in patients undergoing elective surgery for colorectal cancer.

Authors:  David G Watt; John C Martin; James H Park; Paul G Horgan; Donald C McMillan
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2015-03-12       Impact factor: 2.565

Review 3.  The systemic inflammation-based Glasgow Prognostic Score: a decade of experience in patients with cancer.

Authors:  Donald C McMillan
Journal:  Cancer Treat Rev       Date:  2012-09-17       Impact factor: 12.111

4.  Optimization of the systemic inflammation-based Glasgow prognostic score: a Glasgow Inflammation Outcome Study.

Authors:  Michael J Proctor; Paul G Horgan; Dinesh Talwar; Colin D Fletcher; David S Morrison; Donald C McMillan
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2013-04-10       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 5.  How neutrophils kill microbes.

Authors:  Anthony W Segal
Journal:  Annu Rev Immunol       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 28.527

6.  Polymorphonuclear leukocytes increase the adhesion of circulating tumor cells to microvascular endothelium.

Authors:  Miranda Ten Kate; Arend G J Aalbers; Wim Sluiter; Leo J Hofland; Pieter Sonneveld; Johannes Jeekel; Casper H J Van Eijck
Journal:  Anticancer Res       Date:  2007 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.480

7.  Colorectal Cancer, Systemic Inflammation, and Outcome: Staging the Tumor and Staging the Host.

Authors:  James H Park; David G Watt; Campbell S D Roxburgh; Paul G Horgan; Donald C McMillan
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  The relationship between the presence and site of cancer, an inflammation-based prognostic score and biochemical parameters. Initial results of the Glasgow Inflammation Outcome Study.

Authors:  M J Proctor; D Talwar; S M Balmar; D S J O'Reilly; A K Foulis; P G Horgan; D S Morrison; D C McMillan
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2010-08-17       Impact factor: 7.640

9.  Human neutrophils uniquely release TIMP-free MMP-9 to provide a potent catalytic stimulator of angiogenesis.

Authors:  Veronica C Ardi; Tatyana A Kupriyanova; Elena I Deryugina; James P Quigley
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2007-12-11       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  The neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio and its utilisation for the management of cancer patients in early clinical trials.

Authors:  R Kumar; E Geuna; V Michalarea; M Guardascione; U Naumann; D Lorente; S B Kaye; J S de Bono
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2015-03-31       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  29 in total

1.  Modified neutrophil-platelet score as a promising marker for stratified surgical and oncological outcomes of patients with gastric cancer.

Authors:  Yoshinaga Okugawa; Yuji Toiyama; Akira Yamamoto; Yusuke Omura; Kurando Kusunoki; Chengzeng Yin; Shozo Ide; Takahito Kitajima; Yuki Koike; Hiroyuki Fujikawa; Hiromi Yasuda; Yoshiki Okita; Junichiro Hiro; Shigeyuki Yoshiyama; Masaki Ohi; Toshimitsu Araki; Masato Kusunoki
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2019-09-04       Impact factor: 2.549

2.  Prognostic value of the preoperative prognostic nutritional index in oldest-old patients with colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Tetsuro Tominaga; Takashi Nonaka; Makoto Hisanaga; Akiko Fukuda; Yukinori Tanoue; Takafumi Yoshimoto; Shigekazu Hidaka; Terumitsu Sawai; Takeshi Nagayasu
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2019-11-12       Impact factor: 2.549

3.  The relationship between members of the canonical NF-kB pathway, tumour microenvironment and cancer specific survival in colorectal cancer patients.

Authors:  Jean A Quinn; Lindsay Bennett; Meera Patel; Mikaela Frixou; James H Park; Antonia Roseweir; Paul G Horgan; Donald C McMillan; Joanne Edwards
Journal:  Histol Histopathol       Date:  2019-10-08       Impact factor: 2.303

4.  Platelet and Neutrophil Counts as Predictive Markers of Neoadjuvant Therapy Efficacy in Rectal Cancer.

Authors:  AnnaLee Policicchio; Joey Mercier; Antonia Digklia; Ioannis A Voutsadakis
Journal:  J Gastrointest Cancer       Date:  2019-12

5.  Prognostic value of the lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio and other inflammatory markers in malignant pleural mesothelioma.

Authors:  Abdullah Cetin Tanrikulu; Abdurrahman Abakay; Halil Komek; Ozlem Abakay
Journal:  Environ Health Prev Med       Date:  2016-04-11       Impact factor: 3.674

6.  Second-generation inflammation-related scores are more effective than systemic inflammation ratios in predicting prognosis of patients with unresectable or metastatic pancreatic cancer receiving cytotoxic chemotherapy.

Authors:  Giuseppe A Colloca; Antonella Venturino; Domenico Guarneri
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2018-10-29       Impact factor: 3.064

7.  Pre-operative serum inflammation-based scores in patients with pituitary adenomas.

Authors:  Pedro Marques; Friso de Vries; Olaf M Dekkers; Wouter R van Furth; Márta Korbonits; Nienke R Biermasz; Alberto M Pereira
Journal:  Pituitary       Date:  2020-11-24       Impact factor: 4.107

8.  Mismatch repair status in patients with primary operable colorectal cancer: associations with the local and systemic tumour environment.

Authors:  James H Park; Arfon G Powell; Campbell S D Roxburgh; Paul G Horgan; Donald C McMillan; Joanne Edwards
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2016-02-09       Impact factor: 7.640

9.  Prognostic value of inflammation-based scores in patients with osteosarcoma.

Authors:  Bangjian Liu; Yujing Huang; Yuanjue Sun; Jianjun Zhang; Yang Yao; Zan Shen; Dongxi Xiang; Aina He
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-12-23       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Correlation of peripheral blood biomarkers with clinical outcomes in NSCLC patients with high PD-L1 expression treated with pembrolizumab.

Authors:  Amparo Sánchez-Gastaldo; Miguel A Muñoz-Fuentes; Sonia Molina-Pinelo; Miriam Alonso-García; Laura Boyero; Reyes Bernabé-Caro
Journal:  Transl Lung Cancer Res       Date:  2021-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.