| Literature DB >> 30305803 |
Qiu-Fang Gao1, Jia-Cong Qiu1, Xiao-Hong Huang1, Yan-Mei Xu1, Shu-Qi Li1, Fan Sun1, Jing Zhang1, Wei-Ming Yang1, Qing-Hua Min1, Yu-Huan Jiang1, Qing-Gen Chen1, Lei Zhang1, Xiao-Zhong Wang1, Hou-Qun Ying1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronic inflammation is deemed to play a significant effect on initiation and progression of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). In current study, we investigated the prognostic and predictive role of albumin (Alb) to fibrinogen (Fib) ratio (AFR) and a novel AFR-Alb-derived neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (dNLR) score (ADS) in ESCC patients undergoing esophagectomy and compared them with Fib, Alb, neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR), dNLR, platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and lymphocyte to monocyte ratio (LMR).Entities:
Keywords: ADS; Esophageal squamous cell cancer; Inflammation; Prognosis
Year: 2018 PMID: 30305803 PMCID: PMC6171189 DOI: 10.1186/s12935-018-0648-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancer Cell Int ISSN: 1475-2867 Impact factor: 5.722
Fig. 1The detail definition of ADS score in present study
Clinical characteristics in 153 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients
| Variables | Categories | No. of patients (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 128 (83.66) |
| Female | 25 (16.34) | |
| Age | Year | 61.93 ± 6.72 |
| Tobacco | Yes | 66 (43.14) |
| No | 87 (56.86) | |
| Alcohol | Yes | 57 (37.25) |
| No | 96 (62.75) | |
| Hypertension | Yes | 13 (8.50) |
| No | 140 (91.50) | |
| Diabetes | Yes | 2 (1.31) |
| No | 151 (98.69) | |
| Tumor stage | 0–II | 79 (51.63) |
| III | 74 (48.37) | |
| Depth of invasion | T1–T2 | 38 (24.84) |
| T3 | 115 (75.16) | |
| Lymph node | N0 | 79 (51.63) |
| N1–N3 | 74 (48.37) | |
| Differentiation | Well-moderate | 123 (80.39) |
| Poor | 30 (19.61) | |
| Tumor size (cm) | ≤ 4 | 109 (71.24) |
| > 4 | 44 (28.76) | |
| Radio-chemotherapy | Yes | 92 (60.13) |
| No | 61 (39.87) | |
| NLR | 2.88 (0.16–14.40) | |
| dNLR | 3.52 (0.01–24.07) | |
| PLR | 137.47 (8.38–673.68) | |
| LMR | 5.17 (1.03–65.40) | |
| Fib | mg/dL | 3.29 (1.8–5.42) |
| Alb | g/L | 40.4 (22.8–49.8) |
| AFR | 12.13 (5.74–22.15) | |
| ADS | Low | 87 (56.86) |
| High | 66 (43.14) |
NLR neutrophil to lymphocytes ratio, dNLR derived neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio, PLR platelet to lymphocyte ratio, LMR lymphocyte to monocyte ratio, Fib fibrinogen, Alb albumin, AFR albumin to fibrinogen ratio, ADS AFR–Alb–dNLR score
Fig. 2Association of preoperative AFR, Fib and Alb with progression and survival of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. a 3Pop X-tile plot of AFR using X-tile software; b histogram of AFR using X-title software; c Kaplan–Meier curve of AFR using X-tile software. d Kaplan–Meier curve of Fib; e Kaplan–Meier curve of Alb; f Kaplan–Meier curve of AFR
Fig. 3Association between AFR and TNM stage and tumor size in 153 eligible patients. a AFR in TNM 0–I, II and III stage subgroups; b AFR in different tumor size subgroups. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, ns not significant
Univariate and multivariate Cox regression of clinical characteristics and inflammatory biomarkers in 153 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients
| Variables | Three years’ OS | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | |||
| HR (95% CI) | Adjusted HR (95% CI)a | |||
| Gender (male) | 1.787 (0.927–3.445) | 0.083 | – | – |
| Age (≥ 60 years) | 1.017 (0.663–1.559) | 0.940 | – | – |
| Tobacoo (yes) | 1.093 (0.727–1.643) | 0.670 | – | – |
| Alcohol (yes) | 1.065 (0.703–1.614) | 0.767 | – | – |
| Hypertension (yes) | 1.102 (0.482–2.522) | 0.818 | – | – |
| Diabetes (yes) | 20.837 (0.042–10283.099) | 0.337 | – | – |
| Tumor stage (III) | 1.460 (0.945–2.256) | 0.088 | – | – |
| Depth of invasion (T3) | 2.523 (1.366–4.661) | 0.003 | 3.622 (1.591–8.242) | 0.002 |
| Lympth node (yes) | 1.086 (0.717–1.645) | 0.098 | – | – |
| Differentiation (poor) | 2.041 (1.008–4.131) | 0.047 | 1.579 (0.641–3.889) | 0.321 |
| Tumor size (≥ 4 cm) | 1.413 (0.910–2.193) | 0.124 | – | – |
| Radio-chemotherapy (yes) | 1.444 (0.812–2.566) | 0.211 | – | – |
| NLR (≥ 2.1) | 1.495 (0.967–2.311) | 0.070 | – | – |
| PLR (≥ 145.9) | 1.640 (1.085–2.479) | 0.019 | 1.964 (1.129–3.415) | 0.017 |
| LMR (< 2.3) | 2.066 (1.166–3.663) | 0.013 | 1.445 (0.669–3.115) | 0.349 |
| dNLR (≥ 4.3) | 2.387 (1.515–3.761) | < 0.001 | 2.338 (1.626–5.308) | < 0.001 |
| Fib (≥ 3.2 mg/dL) | 1.886 (1.242–2.866) | 0.003 | 2.148 (1.229–3.753) | 0.007 |
| Alb (< 38.2 g/L) | 1.969 (1.266–3.058) | 0.003 | 2.398 (1.342–4.273) | 0.003 |
| AFR (< 9.3) | 1.953 (1.175–3.247) | 0.010 | 2.381 (1.152–4.926) | 0.019 |
OS overall survival, HR hazard ratio, CI confidence interval, NLR neutrophil to lymphocytes ratio, dNLR derived neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio, PLR platelet to lymphocyte ratio, LMR lymphocyte to monocyte ratio, Fib fibrinogen, Alb albumin, AFR albumin to fibrinogen ratio
aAdjusted by sex, age, alcohol, tobacco, hypertension, diabetes, radio-chemotherapy, tumor size, tumor grade and tumor stage
Fig. 4The prognostic role of preoperative AFR, Fib, Alb, dNLR, PLR and ADS in 153 patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and Kaplan–Meier curve of radio-chemotherapy in subgroup stratified by ADS (high and low ADS score). a Time-dependent receiver operative characteristics curve of preoperative Fib, Alb, dNLR, AFR and PLR; b Kaplan–Meier curve of ADS; c Kaplan–Meier curve of radio-chemotherapy in low ADS subgroup; d Kaplan–Meier curve of radio-chemotherapy in high ADS subgroup
Univariate and multivariate Cox regression of ADS in 153 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients
| Variable | Score | Number of patient | Three years’ OS | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | |||||
| HR (95% CI) | Adjusted HR (95% CI)a | |||||
| ADS score | Low | 87 | 1 (–) | – | 1 (–) | – |
| High | 66 | 2.59 (1.71–3.92) | < 0.001 | 2.94 (1.70–5.08) | < 0.001 | |
OS overall survival, HR hazard ratio, CI confidence interval, ADS AFR–Alb–dNLR score
aAdjusted by sex, age, alcohol, tobacco, hypertension, diabetes, radio-chemotherapy, tumor size, tumor grade and tumor stage
Fig. 5Predicted nomogram established by significant factors. a Without ADS score; b with ADS score