| Literature DB >> 34258022 |
Matteo Ferro1, Dragoş-Florin Babă2,3, Ottavio de Cobelli1,4, Gennaro Musi1,4, Giuseppe Lucarelli5, Daniela Terracciano6, Angelo Porreca7, Gian Maria Busetto8, Francesco Del Giudice8, Francesco Soria9, Paolo Gontero9, Francesco Cantiello10, Rocco Damiano10, Papalia Rocco11, Roberto Mario Scarpa11, Abdal Rahman Abu Farhan10, Riccardo Autorino12, Antonio Brescia1, Michele Marchioni13, Andrea Mari14, Andrea Minervini14, Nicola Longo15, Francesco Chiancone16, Sisto Perdona'17, Biagio Barone15, Pietro De Placido18, Michele Catellani1, Danilo Bottero1, Pasquale Ditonno5, Michele Battaglia5, Stefania Zamboni19, Alessandro Antonelli19,20, Francesco Greco21, Giorgio Ivan Russo22, Salvatore Smelzo23, Rodolfo Hurle24, Nicolae Crisan25, Matteo Manfredi26, Francesco Porpiglia26, Felice Crocetto15, Carlo Buonerba27,28, Alina Danilesco2, Mihai Dorin Vartolomei1,2,29.
Abstract
AIM: To investigate the prognostic role of neutrophil percentage-to-albumin ratio (NPAR) in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and radical cystectomy (RC). PATIENTS &Entities:
Keywords: bladder cancer; neoadjuvant chemotherapy; neutrophil percentage-to-albumin ratio; neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio; survival
Year: 2021 PMID: 34258022 PMCID: PMC8256323 DOI: 10.2144/fsoa-2021-0008
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Future Sci OA ISSN: 2056-5623
Association of clinical and pathological features with neutrophil percentage-to-albumin ratio in 213 patients treated with radical cystectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer.
| All cohort | NPAR <18 | NPAR ≥18 | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total, n (%) | 213 | 152 (71.4) | 61 (28.6) | |
| Mean age, years (SD) | 65.86 (10) | 64.55 (8.9) | 69.13 (12) | |
| Gender, n (%) | ||||
| Males | 176 (82.6) | 126 (82.9) | 50 (82) | 0.87 |
| Females | 37 (17.4) | 26 (17.1) | 11 (18) | |
| ASA score, n (%) | ||||
| 1 | 6 (2.8) | 4 (2.6) | 2 (3.3) | 0.69 |
| 2 | 99 (46.5) | 67 (44.1) | 32 (52.4) | |
| 3 | 101 (47.4) | 76 (50) | 25 (41) | |
| 4 | 7 (3.3) | 5 (3.3) | 2 (3.3) | |
| ECOG score, n (%) | ||||
| 0 | 121 (56.8) | 88 (57.9) | 33 (54.1) | 0.14 |
| 1 | 69 (32.3) | 52 (34.2) | 17 (27.9) | |
| 2 | 13 (6.1) | 8 (5.2) | 5 (8.2) | |
| 3 | 4 (2) | 1 (0.7) | 3 (4.9) | |
| 4 | 6 (2.8) | 3 (2) | 3 (4.9) | |
| Preoperative hydronephrosis, n (%) | ||||
| No | 165 (77.5) | 121 (79.6) | 44 (72.1) | 0.23 |
| Yes | 48 (22.5) | 31 (20.4) | 17 (27.9) | |
| Hemoglobin mean (SD) | 12.61 (1.96) | 12.54 (2) | 12.78 (1.8) | 0.19 |
| Creatinine mean (SD) | 1.17 (0.64) | 1.24 (0.72) | 1.01 (0.29) | |
| BMI mean (SD) | 25.92 (3.68) | 26.57 (3.67) | 24.29 (3.18) | |
| Cholesterol mean (SD) | 202 (38.17) | 198.2 (36.96) | 211.5 (39.79) | |
| Fibrinogen mean (SD) | 3.1 (1.2) | 2.93 (1.19) | 3.53 (1.17) | |
| NLR mean (SD) | 2.77 (1.68) | 2.1 (1.03) | 4.43 (1.83) | |
| NAC cycles, n (%) | ||||
| =3 | 148 (69.5) | 112 (73.7) | 36 (59) | 0.051 |
| >3 | 65 (30.5) | 40 (26.3) | 25 (41) | |
| Clinical stage at RC, n (%) | ||||
| CIS | 4 (1.9) | 4 (2.6) | 0 (0) | |
| T1 | 27 (12.7) | 21 (13.8) | 6 (9.8) | |
| T2 | 99 (46.4) | 63 (41.5) | 36 (59) | |
| T3 | 56 (26.3) | 47 (30.9) | 7 (14.8) | |
| T4 | 27 (12.7) | 17 (11.2) | 10 (16.4) | |
| Histology, n (%) | ||||
| Pure UC | 184 (86.4) | 129 (84.9) | 55 (90.2) | 0.3 |
| Nonpure UC | 29 (13.6) | 23 (15.1) | 6 (9.8) | |
| Node status at RC, n (%) | ||||
| N0 | 193 (90.6) | 142 (93.4) | 51 (83.6) | 0.07 |
| N1 | 13 (6.3) | 6 (4) | 7 (11.5) | |
| N2 | 7 (3.3) | 4 (2.6) | 3 (4.9) | |
| Metastasis status at RC, n (%) | 0.79 | |||
| No | 207 (97.2) | 148 (97.4) | 59 (96.7) | |
| Yes | 6 (2.8) | 4 (2.6) | 2 (3.3) | |
| Lymphadenectomy extension | ||||
| Standard | 171 (80.3) | 122 (80.3) | 49 (80.3) | 0.99 |
| Extended | 42 (19.7) | 30 (19.7) | 12 (19.7) | |
| Nodes removed | 18.21 (9.35) | 19.6 (9.1) | 14.77 (9.14) | |
| Positive nodes | 1.2 (3.34) | 1.32 (3.86) | 0.91 (1.34) | 0.25 |
| Pathological stage, n (%) | ||||
| T0 | 47 (22.1) | 38 (25) | 9 (14.8) | 0.33 |
| Tis | 13 (6.1) | 9 (5.9) | 4 (6.5) | |
| Ta | 9 (4.2) | 4 (2.6) | 5 (8.2) | |
| T1 | 18 (8.5) | 13 (8.5) | 5 (8.2) | |
| T2 | 42 (19.7) | 32 (21.1) | 10 (16.4) | |
| T3 | 58 (27.2) | 38 (25) | 20 (32.8) | |
| T4 | 26 (12.2) | 18 (11.9) | 8 (13.1) | |
| Node status after RC, n (%) | ||||
| N0 | 183 (85.9) | 132 (86.8) | 51 (83.6) | 0.11 |
| N1 | 9 (4.2) | 8 (5.3) | 1 (1.7) | |
| N2 | 17 (7.9) | 11 (7.3) | 6 (9.8) | |
| N3 | 4 (2) | 1 (0.6) | 3 (4.9) | |
| Adjuvant treatment, n (%) | ||||
| No | 191 (89.7) | 135 (88.8) | 56 (91.8) | 0.64 |
| Chemotherapy | 12 (5.6) | 10 (6.6) | 2 (3.3) | |
| Radiotherapy | 10 (4.7) | 7 (4.6) | 3 (4.9) |
Boldface values represent statistically significant p < 0.05.
ASA: American society of Anesthesiologists; CIS: Carcinoma in situ; ECOG: Eastern cooperative oncology group; NAC: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy; NLR: Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio; NPAR: Neutrophil percentage-to-albumin ratio; RC: Radical cystectomy; SD: Standard deviation; UC: Urothelial cancer.
Figure 1.Comparison of overall survival in 213 patients with bladder cancert treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical cystectomy.
(A) Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio. (B) Neutrophil percentage-to-albumin ratio.
Preoperative multivariable Cox regression analyses predicting overall survival.
| Variables | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95% CI | p-value | HR | 95% CI | p-value | HR | 95% CI | p-value | |
| Age cont. | 0.98 | 0.96–1.01 | 0.29 | 0.98 | 0.96–1.01 | 0.26 | 0.98 | 0.95–1.00 | 0.11 |
| Gender (males vs females) | 1.92 | 1.07–3.43 | 1.88 | 1.05–3.36 | 1.92 | 1.07–3.44 | |||
| BMI cont. | 0.88 | 0.81–0.95 | 0.89 | 0.82–0.96 | 0.9 | 0.83–0.98 | |||
| Hydronephrosis (no vs yes) | 1.91 | 1.1–3.29 | 1.62 | 0.92–2.84 | 0.09 | 1.7 | 0.97–2.96 | 0.06 | |
| Hystology (pure vs nonpure UC) | 0.95 | 0.43–2.06 | 0.89 | 0.92 | 0.42–1.99 | 0.83 | 1.08 | 0.5–2.36 | 0.83 |
| NAC (3 cycles vs >3 cycles) | 1.32 | 0.78–2.23 | 0.29 | 1.3 | 0.77–2.19 | 0.31 | 1.32 | 0.78–2.22 | 0.29 |
| Stage, Tis/T1 | |||||||||
| T2 | 1.78 | 0.7–4.52 | 0.22 | 1.44 | 0.55–3.72 | 0.45 | 1.53 | 0.6–3.9 | 0.36 |
| T3 | 1.98 | 0.73–5.37 | 0.17 | 1.85 | 0.68–5 | 0.22 | 1.98 | 0.74–5.32 | 0.17 |
| T4 | 5.44 | 2.02–14.66 | 4.9 | 1.8–13.32 | 4.83 | 1.79–13.06 | |||
| Nodes + (no vs yes) | 1.43 | 0.65–3.1 | 0.36 | 1.46 | 0.67–3.17 | 0.32 | 1.26 | 0.58–2.73 | 0.54 |
| Metastasis + (no vs yes) | 1.12 | 0.14–8.56 | 0.9 | 1.02 | 0.13–7.83 | 0.98 | 1.16 | 0.15–8.77 | 0.88 |
| NLR (<3 vs >3) | - | - | - | 1.81 | 1.06–3.09 | - | - | - | |
| NPAR (<18 vs >18) | - | - | - | - | - | - | 2.28 | 1.31–3.99 | |
| Harrell’s C index | |||||||||
Boldface values represent statistical significance.
C index: Concordance index; Cont.: Continued; HR: Hazard ratio; NAC: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy; NLR: Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio; NPAR: Neutrophil percentage-to-albumin ratio; UC: Urothelial cancer.
Figure 2.Comparison of cancer-specific survival according to (A) neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and to (B) neutrophil percentage-to-albumin ratio in 213 patients with bladder cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical cystectomy.
Preoperative multivariable Cox regression analyses predicting cancer-specific survival.
| Variables | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95% CI | p-value | HR | 95% CI | p-value | HR | 95% CI | p-value | |
| Age cont. | 0.98 | 0.95–1.01 | 0.41 | 0.98 | 0.95–1.01 | 0.37 | 0.98 | 0.95–1.00 | 0.18 |
| Gender (males vs females) | 1.48 | 0.72–3.03 | 0.27 | 1.44 | 0.7–2.95 | 0.31 | 1.45 | 0.7–2.98 | 0.31 |
| BMI cont. | 0.91 | 0.83–0.99 | 0.92 | 0.84–1.01 | 0.09 | 0.94 | 0.86–1.03 | 0.2 | |
| Hydronephrosis (no vs yes) | 2.02 | 1.08–3.76 | 1.6 | 0.85–3.02 | 0.14 | 1.75 | 0.93–3.31 | 0.08 | |
| Hystology (pure vs nonpure UC) | 0.76 | 0.29–1.99 | 0.58 | 0.72 | 0.27–1.89 | 0.5 | 0.88 | 0.33–2.31 | 0.8 |
| NAC (3 cycles vs >3 cycles) | 1.13 | 0.6–2.12 | 0.68 | 1.12 | 0.6–2.09 | 0.7 | 1.13 | 0.6–2.11 | 0.69 |
| Stage, Tis/T1 | Ref. | Ref. | Ref. | ||||||
| T2 | 1.35 | 0.48–3.82 | 0.56 | 1 | 0.34–2.88 | 0.99 | 1.18 | 0.41–3.36 | 0.74 |
| T3 | 1.77 | 0.6–5.24 | 0.29 | 1.58 | 0.54–4.7 | 0.39 | 1.84 | 0.62–5.42 | 0.26 |
| T4 | 4.62 | 1.56–13.65 | 3.84 | 1.27–11.59 | 3.89 | 1.3–11.67 | |||
| Nodes + (no vs yes) | 0.99 | 0.34–2.87 | 0.99 | 1.03 | 0.35–2.97 | 0.95 | 0.85 | 0.29–2.45 | 0.76 |
| Metastasis + (no vs yes) | 1.44 | 0.18–11.21 | 0.72 | 1.29 | 0.16–10.12 | 0.8 | 1.44 | 0.18–11.19 | 0.72 |
| NLR (<3 vs >3) | - | - | - | 2.62 | 1.43–4.79 | - | - | - | |
| NPAR (<18 vs >18) | - | - | - | - | - | - | 2.82 | 1.48–5.36 | |
| Harrell’s C index | |||||||||
Boldface values represent statistical significance.
C index: Concordance index; HR: Hazard ratio; NAC: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy; NLR: Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio; NPAR: Neutrophil percentage-to-albumin ratio; Ref.: Reference; UC: Urothelial cancer.