| Literature DB >> 33088701 |
Shoulei Liang1, Yong Li1, Hongtao Liu1, Baocang Wang1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Giant cell tumors of bone (GCT) are benign with a local recurrence rate of approximately 20-50%. Growing evidence suggests that inflammation plays an important role in tumor formation and progression. Inflammatory biomarkers, including prognostic nutritional index (PNI), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), have little data in predicting postoperative recurrence of GCT.Entities:
Keywords: Giant cell tumor of bone; Prognostic nutritional index; Recurrence-free survival
Year: 2020 PMID: 33088701 PMCID: PMC7567957 DOI: 10.1016/j.jbo.2020.100324
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Bone Oncol ISSN: 2212-1366 Impact factor: 4.072
Baseline patient characteristics based on PNI, NLR, and PLR.
| Variables | Cases | PNI | NLR | PLR | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low | High | p | Low | High | p | Low | High | p | ||
| Age (years) | 35.06 + 14.42 | 34.40 + 16.28 | 35.59 + 12.84 | 0.678 | 32.85 + 12.32 | 38.00 + 16.51 | 0.070 | 36.06 + 14.37 | 34.18 + 14.54 | 0.507 |
| Gender | ||||||||||
| Male | 40 | 18 | 22 | 0.969 | 27 | 13 | 0.093 | 18 | 22 | 0.788 |
| Female | 65 | 29 | 36 | 33 | 32 | 31 | 34 | |||
| Tumor size | ||||||||||
| <5 | 63 | 23 | 48 | 0.037 | 42 | 21 | 0.016 | 32 | 31 | 0.299 |
| ≥5 | 42 | 24 | 18 | 18 | 24 | 17 | 25 | |||
| Campanacci stage | ||||||||||
| I–II stage | 71 | 27 | 44 | 0.045 | 49 | 22 | <0.001 | 39 | 32 | 0.014 |
| III stage | 34 | 20 | 14 | 11 | 23 | 10 | 24 | |||
| Surgical method | ||||||||||
| Intralesional curettage | 56 | 23 | 33 | 0.416 | 37 | 19 | 0.048 | 25 | 31 | 0.657 |
| Wide resection | 49 | 24 | 25 | 23 | 26 | 24 | 25 | |||
| Local recurrence | ||||||||||
| NO | 83 | 32 | 51 | 0.013 | 52 | 31 | 0.027 | 43 | 40 | 0.040 |
| YES | 22 | 15 | 7 | 8 | 14 | 6 | 16 | |||
PNI: prognostic nutritional index; NLR: neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio; PLR: platelet–lymphocyte ratio.
Fig. 1Receiver operating characteristic curves for pretreatment (a) PNI, (b) NLR and (c) PLR based on RFS. The optimal cut‐off values of PNI, NLR, and PLR were 46.5, 2.2 and 121.6, respectively. PNI: prognostic nutritional index; NLR: neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio; PLR: platelet–lymphocyte ratio; RFS: recurrence-free survival.
Analysis of the factors influencing the postoperative prognosis of patients with giant cell tumor.
| Variables | Cases | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (95% CI) | HR (95% CI) | ||||
| Age (years) | 35.06 + 14.42 | 1(0.955–1.036) | 0.136 | – | – |
| Gender | |||||
| Male | 40 | 1 | 0.892 | – | – |
| Female | 65 | 0.892(0.507–1.572) | – | ||
| Tumor size | |||||
| <5 | 63 | 1 | 0.040 | 1 | 0.227 |
| ≥5 | 42 | 1.807(1.028–3.175) | 1.477(0.785–2.779) | ||
| Campanacci stage | |||||
| I–II stage | 71 | 1 | <0.001 | 1 | 0.001 |
| III stage | 34 | 3.541(2.005–6.253) | 2.996(1.582–5.672) | ||
| Surgical method | |||||
| Intralesional curettage | 56 | 1 | 0.182 | – | – |
| Wide resection | 49 | 1.465(0.836–2.570) | – | ||
| PNI | |||||
| Low-PNI | 47 | 1 | 0.001 | 1 | 0.003 |
| High-PNI | 58 | 0.357(0.200–0.640) | 0.406(0.222–0.743) | ||
| NLR | |||||
| Low-NLR | 60 | 1 | 0.028 | 1 | 0.806 |
| High-NLR | 45 | 1.888(1.073–3.323) | 1.089(0.552–2.148) | ||
| PLR | |||||
| Low-PLR | 49 | 1 | 0.041 | 1 | 0.248 |
| High-PLR | 56 | 1.846(1.024–3.329) | 1.430(0.780–2.622) | ||
HR: hazard ratios; CI: confidence interval; PNI: prognostic nutritional index; NLR: neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio; PLR: platelet–lymphocyte ratio.
Fig. 2Impact of (a) PNI, (b) NLR and (c) PLR based on RFS. a. The RFS rate in high PNI group significantly higher than in low PNI group (p = 0.001). b. The RFS rate in high NLR group significantly lower than in low NLR group (p = 0.028). c. The RFS rate in high PLR group significantly lower than in low PLR group (p = 0.041). PNI: prognostic nutritional index; NLR: neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio; PLR: platelet–lymphocyte ratio; RFS: recurrence-free survival.