| Literature DB >> 32232963 |
A G M T Powell1,2, C Chin2, A H Coxon2, A Chalishazar2, A Christian3, S A Roberts4, W G Lewis2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Inflammation has an important role in cancer survival, yet whether serum markers of inflammation predict response to potentially curative neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) is controversial. This study aimed to determine whether the systemic inflammatory response (SIR) is associated with response to NAC and survival.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32232963 PMCID: PMC7260416 DOI: 10.1002/bjs5.50277
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BJS Open ISSN: 2474-9842
Clinicopathological patient factors
| No. of patients ( | |
|---|---|
|
| |
| < 65 | 46 (33·8) |
| 66–75 | 68 (50·0) |
| > 75 | 22 (16·2) |
|
| 30 : 106 |
|
|
|
| TTO | 71 (62·8) |
| THO | 42 (37·2) |
|
| |
| < 2·25 | 36 (26·5) |
| ≥ 2·25 | 100 (73·5) |
|
| |
| pT0 | 11 (8·1) |
| pT1 | 10 (7·4) |
| pT2 | 10 (7·4) |
| pT3 | 69 (50·7) |
| pT4 | 13 (9·6) |
| No resection | 23 (16·9) |
|
| |
| pN0 | 35 (25·7) |
| pN1 | 34 (25·0) |
| pN2 | 26 (19·1) |
| pN3 | 18 (13·2) |
| No resection | 23 (16·9) |
|
| |
| Good | 23 (16·9) |
| Poor | 113 (83·1) |
|
| |
| Well or moderate | 64 (47·1) |
| Poor | 72 (52·9) |
|
| |
| Negative | 58 (42·6) |
| Positive | 55 (40·4) |
| No resection | 23 (16·9) |
|
|
|
| < 15 | 43 (38·1) |
| ≥ 15 | 70 (61·9) |
Values in parentheses are percentages. TTO, transthoracic oesophagectomy; THO, transhiatal oesophagectomy; TRG, tumour regression grade; CRM, circumferential resection margin.
Association between pretreatment markers of systemic inflammatory response and poor Mandard tumour regression grade
| No. of patients with marker level | ROC analysis | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concentration | Low | Normal | High | AUC |
| |
| Haemoglobin (g/l) | 138 (128–148) | 33 | 103 | 0 | 0·47 (0·33, 0·62) | 0·699 |
| White cell count (× 109/l) | 7·6 (6·2–8·1) | 2 | 124 | 10 | 0·59 (0·46, 0·72) | 0·158 |
| Neutrophil count (× 109/l) | 5·0 (3·9–6·1) | 2 | 118 | 16 | 0·68 (0·56, 0·80) | 0·008 |
| Lymphocyte count (× 109/l) | 1·7 (1·3–2·1) | 8 | 123 | 5 | 0·40 (0·25, 0·54) | 0·115 |
| Platelet count (× 109/l) | 281 (233–330) | 3 | 123 | 10 | 0·52 (0·40, 0·65) | 0·691 |
| Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio | 3·00 (2·15–3·89) | 0·71 (0·58, 0·83) | 0·002 | |||
| Platelet to lymphocyte ratio | 160 (122–198) | 0·66 (0·52, 0·79) | 0·019 | |||
Values in parentheses are 95 per cent confidence intervals unless indicated otherwise;
values are median (i.q.r.).
Based on local thresholds.
AUC, area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.
Figure 1Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio and Mandard tumour response grade
Area under the ROC curve (AUC) = 0·71 (95 per cent c.i. 0·58 to 0·83;
Logistic regression analysis of preoperative factors associated with poor Mandard tumour regression grade
| Univariable analysis | Multivariable analysis | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Odds ratio |
| Odds ratio |
| |
| Age (< 65 | 1·11 (0·58, 2·15) | 0·753 | ||
| Sex (F | 1·31 (0·47, 3·68) | 0·610 | ||
| Differentiation (well/moderate | 17·09 (3·82, 76·55) | < 0·001 | 15·92 (3·42, 74·02) | < 0·001 |
| cTNM (1 | 1·38 (0·76, 2·48) | 0·289 | ||
| Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (< 2·25 | 6·43 (2·47, 16·77) | < 0·001 | 5·86 (2·03, 16·92) | 0·001 |
Values in parentheses are 95 per cent confidence intervals.
Cox proportional hazards analysis of factors associated with overall survival
| Univariable analysis | Multivariable analysis | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hazard ratio |
| Hazard ratio |
| |
| Age (< 65 | 0·87 (0·58, 1·30) | 0·494 | ||
| Sex (F | 1·13 (0·57, 2·21) | 0·731 | ||
| Operative approach (TTO | 1·25 (0·69, 2·24) | 0·462 | ||
| Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (< 2·25 | 2·33 (1·16, 4·68) | 0·017 | 2·26 (1·03, 4·93) | 0·042 |
| pT category (0 | 2·14 (1·43, 3·21) | < 0·001 | 1·81 (1·06, 3·08) | 0·029 |
| pN category (0 | 1·70 (1·34, 2·15) | < 0·001 | 1·57 (1·14, 2·17) | 0·006 |
| Mandard TRG (good | 2·67 (1·22, 5·86) | 0·014 | 4·28 (1·37, 13·34) | 0·012 |
| Differentiation (well/moderate | 2·26 (1·27, 4·02) | 0·006 | 2·71 (1·39, 5·29) | 0·004 |
| CRM (negative | 2·46 (1·43, 4·22) | 0·001 | 0·171 | |
| Lymph node yield (< 15 | 0·75 (0·43, 1·31) | 0·306 | ||
Values in parentheses are 95 per cent confidence intervals. TTO, transthoracic oesophagectomy; THO, transhiatal oesophagectomy; TRG, tumour regression grade; CRM, circumferential resection margin.
Cox proportional hazards analysis of factors associated with disease‐free survival
| Univariable analysis | Multivariable analysis | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hazard ratio |
| Hazard ratio |
| |
| Age (< 65 | 0·95 (0·59, 1·53) | 0·823 | ||
| Sex (F | 1·08 (0·49, 2·38) | 0·847 | ||
| Operative approach (TTO | 2·64 (1·36, 5·11) | 0·004 | 3·10 (1·58, 6·12) | 0·001 |
| Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (< 2·25 | 2·48 (1·08, 5·67) | 0·032 | 0·288 | |
| pT category (0 | 1·54 (1·09, 2·17) | 0·014 | 1·72 (1·01, 2·93) | 0·047 |
| pN category (0 | 1·17 (0·98, 1·40) | 0·081 | 0·091 | |
| Mandard TRG (good | 3·68 (1·12, 12·08) | 0·032 | 0·936 | |
| Differentiation (well/moderate | 1·82 (0·94, 3·53) | 0·078 | 0·372 | |
| CRM (negative | 1·38 (0·69, 2·74) | 0·361 | ||
| Lymph node yield (< 15 | 0·71 (0·37, 1·36) | 0·302 | ||
Values in parentheses are 95 per cent confidence intervals. TTO, transthoracic oesophagectomy; THO, transhiatal oesophagectomy; TRG, tumour regression grade; CRM, circumferential resection margin.