| Literature DB >> 32369910 |
Svetlana Miklikova1, Gabriel Minarik2,3, Tatiana Sedlackova2,3, Jana Plava1, Marina Cihova1, Silvia Jurisova4, Katarina Kalavska4, Marian Karaba4, Juraj Benca4,5, Bozena Smolkova1, Michal Mego4.
Abstract
A correlation between circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and monocytes in metastatic breast cancer (BC), where CTCs and monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR) were predictors of overall survival (OS), was recently shown. Herein, we aimed to assess the association between CTCs and the complete blood count (CBC)-derived inflammation-based scores in 284 primary BC patients. CTCs were determined in CD45-depleted peripheral blood mononuclear cells by real time-PCR. This method allowed us to detect a subset of CTCs with an epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition phenotype (CTC EMT), previously associated with inferior outcomes in primary BC. In the present study, CTC EMT positivity (hazard ratio (HR) = 2.4; 95% CI 1.20-4.66, p = 0.013) and elevated neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) (HR = 2.20; 95% CI 1.07-4.55; p = 0.033) were associated with shorter progression-free survival (PFS) in primary BC patients. Multivariate analysis showed that CTC EMT-positive patients with NLR ≥ 3 had 8.6 times increased risk of disease recurrence (95% CI 2.35-31.48, p = 0.001) compared with CTC EMT-negative patients with NLR < 3. Similarly, disease recurrence was 13.14 times more likely in CTC EMT-positive patients with MLR ≥ 0.34 (95% CI 4.35-39.67, p < 0.001). Given its low methodological and financial demands, the CBC-derived inflammation-based score determination could, after broader validation, significantly improve the prognostication of BC patients.Entities:
Keywords: breast cancer; circulating tumor cells; monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio; neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio; platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio; systemic immune-inflammation index
Year: 2020 PMID: 32369910 PMCID: PMC7281016 DOI: 10.3390/cancers12051134
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancers (Basel) ISSN: 2072-6694 Impact factor: 6.639
Clinical characteristics of all CTC EMT-negative and -positive patients.
| Variables | Categories | All Patients | CTC EMT Negative | CTC EMT |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 59.1 | 58.8 | 59.5 | 0.323 | |
| Age (years) | ≤50 | 75 (26.4) | 67 (28.5) | 8 (16.3) | 0.078 |
| >50 | 209 (73.6) | 168 (71.5) | 41 (83.7) | ||
| T-stage | T1 | 200 (70.4) | 168 (71.5) | 32 (65.3) | 0.388 |
| T2 and more | 84 (29.6) | 67 (28.5) | 17 (34.7) | ||
| Histology | IDC | 242 (85.2) | 199 (84.7) | 43 (87.8) | 0.581 |
| Others | 42 (14.8) | 36 (15.3) | 6 (12.2) | ||
| Grade | Low and intermediate | 194 (69.8) | 164 (70.4) | 30 (66.7) | 0.619 |
| High | 84 (29.6) | 69 (29.6) | 15 (33.3) | ||
| N-stage | N0 | 180 (64.3) | 151 (64.8) | 29 (61.7) | 0.685 |
| N+ | 100 (35.7) | 82 (35.2) | 18 (38.3) | ||
| LVI | Absent | 234 (82.4) | 196 (83.4) | 38 (77.6) | 0.328 |
| Present | 50 (17.6) | 39 (16.6) | 11 (22.4) | ||
| HR status $ | Negative | 46 (16.2) | 37 (15.7) | 9 (18.4) | 0.650 |
| Positive | 238 (83.8) | 198 (84.3) | 40 (81.6) | ||
| HER2 status | Negative | 240 (84.5) | 200 (85.1) | 40 (81.6) | 0.541 |
| Amplified | 44 (15.5) | 35 (14.9) | 9 (18.4) | ||
| p53 | Negative | 178 (62.9) | 144 (61.5) | 34 (69.4) | 0.301 |
| Positive | 105 (37.1) | 90 (38.5) | 15 (30.6) | ||
| bcl2 | Negative | 82 (28.9) | 64 (27.2) | 18 (36.7) | 0.182 |
| Positive | 202 (71.1) | 171 (72.8) | 31 (63.3) | ||
| Ki-67 | <20% | 174 (61.5) | 148 (63.2) | 26 (53.1) | 0.183 |
| >20% | 109 (38.5) | 86 (36.8) | 23 (46.9) | ||
| Tumor subtypes | Luminal A | 150 (53.0) | 127 (54.3) | 23 (46.9) | 0.752 |
| Luminal B | 58 (20.5) | 46 (19.7) | 12 (24.5) | ||
| HER2-positive | 44 (15.5) | 35 (15.0) | 9 (18.4) | ||
| Triple-negative | 31 (11.0) | 26 (11.1) | 5 (10.2) | ||
| NLR | <3 | 231 (84.0) | 190 (84.1) | 41 (83.7) | 0.945 |
| ≥3 | 44 (16.0) | 36 (15.9) | 8 (16.3) | ||
| MLR | <0.34 | (210) 84.3 | 172 (84.7) | 38 (82.6) | 0.721 |
| ≥0.34 | (39) 15.7 | 31 (15.3) | 8 (17.4) | ||
| PLR | <210 | 223 (84.2) | 183 (84.3) | 40(83.3) | 0.846 |
| ≥210 | 42 (15.8) | 34 (15.7) | 8 (16.7) | ||
| SII | <836 | 221 (77.8) | 180 (82.9) | 41 (85.4) | 0.678 |
| ≥836 | 44 (15.5) | 37 (17.1) | 7 (14.6) |
The total number of samples analyzed in the study was n = 284; only cases with valid information on individual variables were included in the table; # difference between CTC EMT-positive and -negative patients; $ negative for both or positive for either. Abbreviations: IDC, invasive ductal carcinoma; LVI, lymphovascular invasion; HR, hormonal receptor, NLR, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio; PLR, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio; MLR, monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio; SII, systemic immune-inflammation index.
Figure 1Kaplan–Meier PFS estimates for CTC EMT. CTC EMT-positive patients had significantly shorter progression-free survival (PFS) than CTC EMT-negative patients (p = 0.010 by Log-rank test).
Figure 2Kaplan–Meier PFS estimates for NLR (a) and MLR (b) status. PFS was significantly reduced in patients with NLR ≥ 3 compared to those with NLR < 3 (p = 0.029 by Log-rank test), while the difference was not significant for MLR (p = 0.109 by Log-rank test).
Cox proportional hazard regression analysis for the association between NLR, clinical predictor variables, and PFS.
| Variables | HR | 95% CI |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| NLR ≥ 3 | 2.45 | 1.17–5.12 | 0.017 |
| Age > 50 | 3.15 | 1.11–8.96 | 0.031 |
| High grade | 2.36 | 1.12–4.96 | 0.024 |
| N+ | 2.18 | 1.11–4.28 | 0.023 |
| Ki-67 > 20% | 3.03 | 1.38–6.65 | 0.006 |
Figure 3Kaplan–Meier PFS estimates for combinations of CTC EMT and NLR index. CTC EMT-positive patients with NLR ≥ 3 had shorter PFS compared to patients with any other combination of CTC EMT and NLR (p = 0.003 by Log-rank test).
Cox proportional hazard regression analysis for the association between CTC EMT and NLR status, clinical predictor variables, and PFS.
| Variable | HR | 95% CI |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| CTC EMT-negative, NLR < 3 | 0.006 | ||
| CTC EMT-negative, NLR ≥ 3 | 2.30 | 0.95–5.57 | 0.065 |
| CTC EMT-positive, NLR < 3 | 2.06 | 0.87–4.85 | 0.099 |
| CTC EMT-positive, NLR ≥ 3 | 8.60 | 2.35–31.48 | 0.001 |
| Age > 50 | 2.90 | 1.01–8.36 | 0.049 |
| High grade | 2.58 | 1.20–5.53 | 0.015 |
| N+ | 2.46 | 1.24–4.87 | 0.010 |
| Ki67 > 20 | 2.79 | 1.27–6.11 | 0.010 |
Figure 4Kaplan–Meier PFS estimates for combinations of CTC EMT and MLR index. CTC EMT-positive patients with MLR ≥ 0.34 had shorter PFS compared to patients with all other combinations of CTC EMT and MLR (p < 0.001 by Log-rank test).
Cox proportional hazard regression analysis for the association between CTC EMT and MLR status, clinical predictor variables, and PFS.
| Variable | HR | 95% CI |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| CTC EMT-negative, MLR < 0.34 | <0.001 | ||
| CTC EMT-negative, MLR ≥ 0.34 | 1.00 | 0.33–2.98 | 0.997 |
| CTC EMT-positive, MLR < 0.34 | 1.12 | 0.33–3.84 | 0.852 |
| CTC EMT-positive, MLR ≥ 0.34 | 13.14 | 4.35–39.67 | <0.001 |
| Age > 50 | 3.35 | 1.00–11.22 | 0.050 |
| T2 and more | 0.41 | 0.17–0.97 | 0.043 |
| High grade | 3.93 | 1.85–8.34 | <0.001 |
| N+ | 3.36 | 1.56–7.22 | 0.002 |