D Viñal1, L Gutierrez-Sainz2, D Martinez2, J A Garcia-Cuesta2, J Pedregosa2, J Villamayor2, L Ostios2, D Sanchez-Cabrero2, O Higuera2, A Pinto2,3,4, N Rodriguez-Salas2,3,4,5, E Espinosa2,3,4,5,6, J de Castro2,4,7, J Feliu2,3,4,5,6. 1. Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario La Paz, Madrid, Spain. dvinallozano@gmail.com. 2. Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario La Paz, Madrid, Spain. 3. Translational Oncology Group, IdiPAZ, Madrid, Spain. 4. Faculty of Medicine, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain. 5. CIBERONC, Madrid, Spain. 6. Cátedra UAM-AMGEN, Madrid, Spain. 7. Experimental Therapies and Novel Biomarkers in Cancer IdiPAZ, Madrid, Spain.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The prognostic value of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has been extensively studied in cancer patients. However, the performance of NLR as an early marker of efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) is still understudied. We studied the utility of NLR at baseline (bNLR), before the second dose of immunotherapy (NLR2) and the NLR trend for predicting efficacy outcomes. METHODS: We included all patients with advanced cancer treated with ICI from June 2013 to April 2019 at La Paz University Hospital, Madrid (Spain). We examined bNLR, NLR2 and NLR trend and explored the association with progression-free survival (PFS) at 6 months, median PFS and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: We included 211 patients. PFS and OS were significantly longer in the low bNLR group than in the high bNLR group [HR 0.71 (95% CI 0.60-0.84) and HR: 0.66 (95% CI 0.55-0.79), respectively]. Regarding NLR2, patients with low NLR2 had significantly longer PFS and OS than patients with high NLR2 [HR 0.67 (95% CI 0.57-0.79) and HR: 0.60 (95% CI 0.50-0.72), respectively]. Finally, for NLR trend, PFS and OS for patients with NLR trend < 1 were significantly longer than those patients with NLR trend ≥ 1 [HR 0.59 (95% CI 0.43-0.82) and HR 0.63 (95% CI 0.44-0.90), respectively]. At the multivariate analysis for PFS and OS, bNLR, NLR2 and NLR trend were all independent prognostic factors for PFS and OS. CONCLUSIONS: bNLR, NLR2 and NLR trends are independent prognostic factors for survival in patients on immunotherapy. The dynamics of NLR in patients on immunotherapy is a promising marker that needs further investigation.
BACKGROUND: The prognostic value of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has been extensively studied in cancer patients. However, the performance of NLR as an early marker of efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) is still understudied. We studied the utility of NLR at baseline (bNLR), before the second dose of immunotherapy (NLR2) and the NLR trend for predicting efficacy outcomes. METHODS: We included all patients with advanced cancer treated with ICI from June 2013 to April 2019 at La Paz University Hospital, Madrid (Spain). We examined bNLR, NLR2 and NLR trend and explored the association with progression-free survival (PFS) at 6 months, median PFS and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: We included 211 patients. PFS and OS were significantly longer in the low bNLR group than in the high bNLR group [HR 0.71 (95% CI 0.60-0.84) and HR: 0.66 (95% CI 0.55-0.79), respectively]. Regarding NLR2, patients with low NLR2 had significantly longer PFS and OS than patients with high NLR2 [HR 0.67 (95% CI 0.57-0.79) and HR: 0.60 (95% CI 0.50-0.72), respectively]. Finally, for NLR trend, PFS and OS for patients with NLR trend < 1 were significantly longer than those patients with NLR trend ≥ 1 [HR 0.59 (95% CI 0.43-0.82) and HR 0.63 (95% CI 0.44-0.90), respectively]. At the multivariate analysis for PFS and OS, bNLR, NLR2 and NLR trend were all independent prognostic factors for PFS and OS. CONCLUSIONS: bNLR, NLR2 and NLR trends are independent prognostic factors for survival in patients on immunotherapy. The dynamics of NLR in patients on immunotherapy is a promising marker that needs further investigation.
Authors: Dung T Le; Jennifer N Durham; Kellie N Smith; Hao Wang; Bjarne R Bartlett; Laveet K Aulakh; Steve Lu; Holly Kemberling; Cara Wilt; Brandon S Luber; Fay Wong; Nilofer S Azad; Agnieszka A Rucki; Dan Laheru; Ross Donehower; Atif Zaheer; George A Fisher; Todd S Crocenzi; James J Lee; Tim F Greten; Austin G Duffy; Kristen K Ciombor; Aleksandra D Eyring; Bao H Lam; Andrew Joe; S Peter Kang; Matthias Holdhoff; Ludmila Danilova; Leslie Cope; Christian Meyer; Shibin Zhou; Richard M Goldberg; Deborah K Armstrong; Katherine M Bever; Amanda N Fader; Janis Taube; Franck Housseau; David Spetzler; Nianqing Xiao; Drew M Pardoll; Nickolas Papadopoulos; Kenneth W Kinzler; James R Eshleman; Bert Vogelstein; Robert A Anders; Luis A Diaz Journal: Science Date: 2017-06-08 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Martin Reck; Delvys Rodríguez-Abreu; Andrew G Robinson; Rina Hui; Tibor Csőszi; Andrea Fülöp; Maya Gottfried; Nir Peled; Ali Tafreshi; Sinead Cuffe; Mary O'Brien; Suman Rao; Katsuyuki Hotta; Melanie A Leiby; Gregory M Lubiniecki; Yue Shentu; Reshma Rangwala; Julie R Brahmer Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-10-08 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Aly-Khan A Lalani; Wanling Xie; Dylan J Martini; John A Steinharter; Craig K Norton; Katherine M Krajewski; Audrey Duquette; Dominick Bossé; Joaquim Bellmunt; Eliezer M Van Allen; Bradley A McGregor; Chad J Creighton; Lauren C Harshman; Toni K Choueiri Journal: J Immunother Cancer Date: 2018-01-22 Impact factor: 13.751
Authors: Brennan Olson; Mason A Norgard; Peter R Levasseur; Xinxia Zhu; Daniel L Marks Journal: J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle Date: 2021-07-06 Impact factor: 12.910