Literature DB >> 31194040

Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) fails to predict outcome of diffuse large B cell lymphoma.

Yoshiko Azuma1, Aya Nakaya1, Shinya Fujita1, Atsushi Satake1, Takahisa Nakanishi1, Yukie Tsubokura1, Ryo Saito1, Akiko Konishi1, Masaaki Hotta1, Hideaki Yoshimura1, Kazuyoshi Ishii1, Tomoki Ito1, Shosaku Nomura1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has been recognized as a poor prognostic indicator in various solid tumors.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 530 patients with de novo DLBCL who were diagnosed from April 2002 to November 2017.
RESULTS: The median age of patients was 69 (range, 20-95) years, and 59% were male. The optimal cutoff for NLR was 5.2. NLR (5.2) was not associated with overall and progression free survival.
CONCLUSION: Our study failed to reveal the predictive value of NLR and demonstrated that the NCCN-IPI might be the most powerful predictor in DLBCL.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Diffuse large B cell lymphoma; NCCN-IPI; Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio

Year:  2019        PMID: 31194040      PMCID: PMC6551461          DOI: 10.1016/j.lrr.2019.100173

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Leuk Res Rep        ISSN: 2213-0489


Introduction

Diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the most common subtype of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Approximately 60%–70% of newly diagnosed DLBCL patients are curable by rituximab [1]. Before the advent of rituximab, the international prognostic index (IPI) was the most powerful prognostic scale. However, its power has reduced [2] and it has been replaced with the National Comprehensive Cancer Network - International Prognostic Index (NCCN-IPI). Zhou et al. developed the NCCN-IPI to predict survival following rituximab treatment more accurately than the older IPI system [3]. However, some reports described results showing that the NCCN-IPI failed to accurately predict outcomes for elderly patients [4], [5]. Thus, the predictive value of this scale is not sufficient. Recently, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has been recognized as a poor prognostic indicator in various solid tumors. NLR, calculated as the absolute neutrophil count (ANC) divided by the absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) within peripheral blood, has been shown to be correlated with prognosis in various malignancies [6], [7], [8], [9], [10]. NLR has been evaluated in DLBCL and appears prognostic in these patient populations [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20]. Although reports that used NLR have since been published from various geographic regions, whether these results can be extrapolated to different ethnic populations is unclear. To date, there has been no large-scale report to evaluate this scale in Japan. The purpose of the present study was to analyze whether NLR is associated with the outcome of patients with DLBCL.

Patients and methods

Patients

This retrospective analysis was conducted in two hematology centers, Kansai Medical University Hospital and Kansai Medical University Medical Center. A total of 530 patients diagnosed with DLBCL from April 2002 to November 2017 were enrolled in this study. Primary treatment included R-CHOP or R-CHOP-like regimens.

Statistics

Overall survival (OS) was calculated as the time from diagnosis until the time of death or the last clinical follow-up. Progression free survival (PFS) was defined as the time from diagnosis to the objective progression of disease. Survival curves were generated using the Kaplan–Meier method, and differences were evaluated using the log-rank test. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were used to determine whether baseline characteristics were associated with outcome. We categorized two groups with a cut-off value of 5.2 according to the interquartile range (IQR). All statistical tests were two-sided, statistical significance was defined as P < 0.05, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. All statistical analyses were performed using EZR (Saitama Medical Center, Jichi Medical University, Saitama, Japan), which is a graphical user interface for R version 2.13.0 (The R Foundation). Specifically, EZR is a modified version of R Commander (version 1.6–3) that adds statistical functions frequently used in biostatistics [21]. This study was conducted in accordance with the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the Institutional Review Boards of Kansai Medical University.

Results

Patient characteristics

The clinical characteristics of the 530 patients (median age, 69 years; range, 20–98 years; 59% male) included in this study are shown in Table 1. A performance status (PS) of >3 was observed in 2% of patients, elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels occurred in 54%, and B symptoms were detected in 15%. Bulky tumors were noted in 7% of patients, bone marrow involvement occurred in 10%, and extranodal sites≥2 were observed in 55%. Tumor stage I was seen in 23% of patients, stage II in 18%, stage III in 18%, and stage IV in 41%. The IPI classified 31% of patients as being at low risk, 24% as low-intermediate (LI), 22% as high-intermediate (HI), and 23% as high risk. In comparison, the NCCN-IPI classified 9% of patients as being at low risk, 48% as LI, 42% as HI, and 1% as high risk. The median follow-up period was 35.8 months (range, 0.2–158.5 months).
Table 1

Patients’ characteristics.

No. of patients(n)530
Median age, range(y/o)69(20–98)
Male sex(%)314(59%)
PS ≥ 312(2%)
elevated LDH287(54%)
B symptom(%)78(15%)
bulky mass35(7%)
BM involvement54(10%)
extranodal sites≥2290(55%)
stage(n)
 I126(23%)
 II93(18%)
 III93(18%)
 IV218(41%)
IPI(%)
 low162(31%)
 low-int128(24%)
 high-int117(22%)
 high123(23%)
NCCN-IPI(%)
 low49(9%)
 low-int250(48%)
 high-int224(42%)
 high7(1%)

PS: performance status.

LDH: lactate dehydrogenase.

BM: bone marrow.

Patients’ characteristics. PS: performance status. LDH: lactate dehydrogenase. BM: bone marrow. The median NLR was 3.3 (IQR, 2.0–5.2); based on the IQR, patients were divided in four categories (category 1, 0–1.9; category 2, 2.0–3.1; category 3, 3.2–5.1; category 4, 5.2 or higher). Patients with a NLR of 5.2 or higher were more likely to have a positive correlation with poor outcome (data not shown).

Survival according to NLR

The median OS of the patients with an NLR of ≤5.2 was 152.9 months, whereas, an NLR of >5.2 was not reached (P = 0.066) (Fig. 1a). The median PFS of the patients with an NLR of ≤5.2 was 75.2 months, whereas, an NLR of >5.2 was 59.4 months (P = 0.088) (Fig. 1b).
Fig. 1

Survival according to NLR. (a) Overall survival. (b) Progression free survival.

Survival according to NLR. (a) Overall survival. (b) Progression free survival.

Prognostic factors

Univariate analysis was performed to identify risk factors associated with survival. Age over 70 years, male sex, PS ≥3, stage ≥3, elevated LDH, presence of B symptoms, extranodal sites ≥2, and NLR ≤5.2 were analyzed (Table 2). Age, PS ≥3, stage ≥3, and elevated LDH remained as significant factors affecting survival in multivariate analysis, whereas other factors were eliminated by backward stepwise selection.
Table 2

Univariate and multivariate analysis.

VariablesHazard ratio95%CIp
Univariate analysis
 Age ≥ 701.631.19−2.250.002
 Male1.150.83−1.590.405
 PS ≥ 312.97.01−23.742.22E−16
 stage ≥ 32.111.48−3.013.58E−05
 elevated LDH2.071.48−2.892.00E−05
 B symptoms1.981.35−2.915.21E−04
 extranodal sites ≥ 21.881.34−2.622.28E−04
 NLR ≤ 5.21.380.98–1.946.73E−02
Multivariate analysis
 Age ≥ 701.491.07–2.071.74E−02
 PS ≥ 38.224.36–15.476.90E−11
 stage ≥ 31.731.20–2.503.63E−03
 elevated LDH1.741.24–2.461.57E−03

PS: performance status.

LDH: lactate dehydrogenase.

NLR: neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio.

Univariate and multivariate analysis. PS: performance status. LDH: lactate dehydrogenase. NLR: neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio.

Discussion

Previous reports have suggested that NLR is associated with worse survival in DLBCL [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20]. A meta-analysis that combined nine studies including over 2000 patients was recently published [19]. The results showed that NLR was correlated with poor OS as well as worse PFS. In the study, seven studies were from Asian countries except Japan. Thus, the true value of NLR in Japanese DLBCL patients is not clear. Our study failed to reveal statistical differences in both OS and PFS. However, patients with an NLR of ≤5.2 tended to show a better prognosis for both OS and PFS. We assumed the cut-off value might affect the results. In previous studies, cut-offs were uniform and separated in each study, but the methods cut-off selection remained unclear. Thus, we needed to verify the adaptive cut-off value by prospective studies. NLR is an easy-to-measure tool but the precise mechanism that explains the poor prognosis of cancer patients who have high blood NLRs has not been clearly elucidated. Lymphocytes have a crucial role in innate cellular immunity and are important in destroying residual malignant cells [22]. It is widely believed that tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) are associated with better clinical outcomes in cancer [23]. On the contrary, neutrophils might reflect the presence of tumor-associated macrophages and circulating monocytes, which contribute to host antitumor immunity and promote tumor angiogenesis [24], [25]. From our hypothesis, NLR might be a good index that reflects the balance between inflammation and immunoreaction in cancer. However, lymphoma is a cancer of lymphocytes whereupon host innate immunity has been destroyed, and TIL number might be decreased in lymphoma patients. Thus, we assumed that it might be difficult for NLR to reflect the outcome of lymphoid malignancies. Although we tried to identify another predictive scale besides the NCCN-IPI, our study revealed that the NCCN-IPI has the most powerful predictive value. In multivariate analysis, age, PS ≥3, stage ≥3, and elevated LDH, which are included in the NCCN-IPI, remained as significant factors affecting survival. This study had some limitations, including its retrospective design and the inclusion of only two study sites. Furthermore, no genetic analysis using techniques such as fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and immunostaining was performed. Genetic analysis is carried out in clinical settings, and its relevance to prognosis has been established. However, FISH is not covered by insurance in Japan, and there are disparities in the immunostaining results between facilities. Thus, these evaluations are not routinely performed in clinical practice in Japan. As we described above, the cut-off value of NLR is unknown. In this study, we use the IQR obtained in a prior cohort study [20]. However, the methods of selecting NLR cutoffs remain unclear. In conclusion, we failed to demonstrate the predictive value of NLR and revealed that the NCCN-IPI might be the most powerful predictor of DLBCL following rituximab treatment. A prospective study is required to evaluate NLR in lymphoid malignancies.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Yoshiko Azuma: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing. Aya Nakaya: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing. Shinya Fujita: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis. Atsushi Satake: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis. Takahisa Nakanishi: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis. Yukie Tsubokura: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis. Ryo Saito: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis. Akiko Konishi: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis. Masaaki Hotta: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis. Hideaki Yoshimura: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis. Kazuyoshi Ishii: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis. Tomoki Ito: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis. Shosaku Nomura: Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare no competing financial interest in relation to the work.
  25 in total

1.  [Evaluation of the enhanced International Prognostic Index (NCCN-IPI) for cases with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma].

Authors:  Akiko Yamada; Hideto Tamura; Toshio Asayama; Keiichi Moriya; Namiko Okuyama; Asaka Kondo-Onodera; Yasuko Hamada; Mariko Ishibashi; Norio Yokose; Sakae Tanosaki; Koiti Inokuchi
Journal:  Rinsho Ketsueki       Date:  2015-07

2.  Validation of pretreatment neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio as a prognostic factor in a European cohort of patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma.

Authors:  Orietta Dalpiaz; Georg C Ehrlich; Sebastian Mannweiler; Jessica M Martín Hernández; Armin Gerger; Tatjana Stojakovic; Karl Pummer; Richard Zigeuner; Martin Pichler; Georg C Hutterer
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2013-11-27       Impact factor: 5.588

3.  Predicting survival for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients using baseline neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio.

Authors:  Luis F Porrata; Kay Ristow; Thomas Habermann; David J Inwards; Ivana N Micallef; Svetomir N Markovic
Journal:  Am J Hematol       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 10.047

4.  Independent Prognostic Value of Serum Markers in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma in the Era of the NCCN-IPI.

Authors:  Thomas Melchardt; Katharina Troppan; Lukas Weiss; Clemens Hufnagl; Daniel Neureiter; Wolfgang Tränkenschuh; Konstantin Schlick; Florian Huemer; Alexander Deutsch; Peter Neumeister; Richard Greil; Martin Pichler; Alexander Egle
Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 11.908

Review 5.  Prognostic role of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in solid tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Arnoud J Templeton; Mairéad G McNamara; Boštjan Šeruga; Francisco E Vera-Badillo; Priya Aneja; Alberto Ocaña; Raya Leibowitz-Amit; Guru Sonpavde; Jennifer J Knox; Ben Tran; Ian F Tannock; Eitan Amir
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2014-05-29       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  An enhanced International Prognostic Index (NCCN-IPI) for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated in the rituximab era.

Authors:  Zheng Zhou; Laurie H Sehn; Alfred W Rademaker; Leo I Gordon; Ann S Lacasce; Allison Crosby-Thompson; Ann Vanderplas; Andrew D Zelenetz; Gregory A Abel; Maria A Rodriguez; Auayporn Nademanee; Mark S Kaminski; Myron S Czuczman; Michael Millenson; Joyce Niland; Randy D Gascoyne; Joseph M Connors; Jonathan W Friedberg; Jane N Winter
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2013-11-21       Impact factor: 22.113

7.  Intratumoral T cells, recurrence, and survival in epithelial ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Lin Zhang; Jose R Conejo-Garcia; Dionyssios Katsaros; Phyllis A Gimotty; Marco Massobrio; Giorgia Regnani; Antonis Makrigiannakis; Heidi Gray; Katia Schlienger; Michael N Liebman; Stephen C Rubin; George Coukos
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2003-01-16       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Neutrophil/Lymphocyte Ratio, Lymphocyte/Monocyte Ratio, and Absolute Lymphocyte Count/Absolute Monocyte Count Prognostic Score in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: Useful Prognostic Tools in the Rituximab Era.

Authors:  Ching-Liang Ho; Chieh-Sheng Lu; Jia-Hong Chen; Yu-Guang Chen; Tzu-Chuan Huang; Yi-Ying Wu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 1.889

9.  Prognostic significance of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jin Wang; Xu Zhou; Yu Liu; Zheng Li; Xiang Li
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-04-25       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Prognostic role of pretreatment neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with RCHOP.

Authors:  Jing Wang; Min Zhou; Jing-Yan Xu; Yong-Gong Yang; Qi-Guo Zhang; Rong-Fu Zhou; Bing Chen; Jian Ouyang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 1.889

View more
  6 in total

1.  Prognostic impact of nutritional and inflammation-based risk scores in follicular lymphoma in the era of anti-CD20 targeted treatment strategies.

Authors:  Niklas Gebauer; Britta Mengler; Svenja Kopelke; Alex Frydrychowicz; Alexander Fürschke; Carsten Hackenbroch; Arthur Bauer; Armin Riecke; Nikolaus von Bubnoff; Sebastian Fetscher; Hanno M Witte
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2021-08-20       Impact factor: 4.322

2.  Immune activation and inflammatory biomarkers as predictors of venous thromboembolism in lymphoma patients.

Authors:  Vladimir Otasevic; Biljana Mihaljevic; Natasa Milic; Dejana Stanisavljevic; Vojin Vukovic; Kristina Tomic; Jawed Fareed; Darko Antic
Journal:  Thromb J       Date:  2022-04-19

3.  Correlation between immune-related adverse events and prognosis in patients with various cancers treated with anti PD-1 antibody.

Authors:  Hiroshi Matsuoka; Takahiro Hayashi; Karen Takigami; Kazuyoshi Imaizumi; Ryoichi Shiroki; Naoki Ohmiya; Kazumitsu Sugiura; Kenji Kawada; Akira Sawaki; Koutaro Maeda; Yousuke Ando; Ichiro Uyama
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2020-07-14       Impact factor: 4.430

Review 4.  The Neutrophil to Lymphocyte and Lymphocyte to Monocyte Ratios as New Prognostic Factors in Hematological Malignancies - A Narrative Review.

Authors:  Paulina Stefaniuk; Agnieszka Szymczyk; Monika Podhorecka
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2020-04-29       Impact factor: 3.989

5.  A Prognostic Model Using Post-Steroid Neutrophil-Lymphocyte Ratio Predicts Overall Survival in Primary Central Nervous System Lymphoma.

Authors:  Yu Tung Lo; Vivian Yujing Lim; Melissa Ng; Ya Hwee Tan; Jianbang Chiang; Esther Wei Yin Chang; Jason Yongsheng Chan; Eileen Yi Ling Poon; Nagavalli Somasundaram; Mohamad Farid Bin Harunal Rashid; Miriam Tao; Soon Thye Lim; Valerie Shiwen Yang
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-03       Impact factor: 6.639

6.  The Glasgow Prognostic Score at Diagnosis Is a Predictor of Clinical Outcome in Patients with Multiple Myeloma Undergoing Autologous Haematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation.

Authors:  Hanno M Witte; Bastian Bonorden; Armin Riecke; Harald Biersack; Konrad Steinestel; Hartmut Merz; Alfred C Feller; Veronica Bernard; Sebastian Fetscher; Nikolas von Bubnoff; Niklas Gebauer
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2020-04-09       Impact factor: 6.639

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.