Literature DB >> 34435973

Prognostic and clinicopathological significance of systemic immune-inflammation index in pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis of 2,365 patients.

Yifang Shui1,2,3,4,5, Mengquan Li5, Jing Su5, Mingxun Chen6, Xiaobin Gu7, Wenzhi Guo1,2,3,4.   

Abstract

The prognostic value of the systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) in patients with pancreatic cancer is conflicting according to previous investigations. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to explore the association between SII and pancreatic cancer prognosis. Electronic databases were searched for studies exploring the association of SII with prognostic outcomes in pancreatic cancer. The endpoints were overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), progression-free survival (PFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and clinicopathological parameters. The prognostic value of SII was estimated by hazard ratio (HR) or odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Nine studies containing 11 cohorts with 2,365 subjects in total were included in this meta-analysis. Elevated SII was associated with poor OS (HR=1.50, 95% CI=1.15-1.96, p=0.002), RFS/PFS/DFS (HR=1.52, 95% CI=1.01-2.28, p=0.045), and CSS (HR=2.60, 95% CI=1.65-4.09, p < 0.001) in patients with pancreatic cancer. Additionally, there was no significant association between SII and other parameters in pancreatic cancer such as sex, tumor location, lymph node metastasis, tumor-node-metastasis stage, vascular invasion, and grade. This meta-analysis suggested that elevated SII was a significant prognostic marker for short-term and long-term survival outcomes in patients with pancreatic cancer.

Entities:  

Keywords:  biomarker; meta-analysis; pancreatic cancer; prognosis; systemic immune-inflammation index

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34435973      PMCID: PMC8436945          DOI: 10.18632/aging.203449

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Aging (Albany NY)        ISSN: 1945-4589            Impact factor:   5.682


INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic cancer is a highly aggressive malignant tumor and the seventh leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide [1, 2]. In 2018, 458,918 new cases and 432,242 deaths due to pancreatic cancer occurred globally [1]. A lack of reliable early biomarkers causes 85% of patients to be diagnosed with metastatic or locally advanced disease [3]. The prognosis of pancreatic cancer is poor with a 5-year survival rate of less than 5% [4]. Surgical resection is the only curative approach for pancreatic cancer and is feasible in 15% of the cases [4]. However, even for patients with operable pancreatic cancer, the 5-year survival rate is only 18%–24% [5]. One of the major reasons for the poor prognosis is the lack of effective biomarkers [4]; therefore, identification of novel prognostic markers is pivotal for better management of patients with pancreatic cancer. Various studies have shown that systemic inflammation plays an important role in cancer progression [6]. Systemic inflammatory responses are involved in the initiation, promotion, and metastasis of cancer cells [7]. In the recent years, the systemic immune-inflammation index (SII), which is calculated as platelet count × neutrophils/lymphocytes, has been reported as a noninvasive prognostic marker for various solid tumors [8, 9]. The prognostic value of SII in patients with pancreatic cancer has also been explored by many researchers [10-15]; however, the results are conflicting. For example, elevated SII in patients with pancreatic cancer was found to be associated with poor survival outcomes in some studies [14, 15] and favorable prognosis in other studies [11]. Therefore, in this study, we collected the literature published in this area of study and conducted a meta-analysis. We hypothesized that elevated SII could be a significant prognostic factor for patients with pancreatic cancer. We aimed to clarify the prognostic impact of SII on pancreatic cancer and analyze the correlation between SII and the clinicopathological features of pancreatic cancer.

RESULTS

Literature search and study characteristics

The initial literature search identified 64 studies, out of which, 23 studies were selected after eliminating the duplicate records. Following the examination of titles and abstracts, 11 studies were excluded, and the entire text of the remaining 12 studies was examined. Subsequently, six studies were excluded for the following reasons: two studies did not provide survival outcomes, two studies did not identify the cut-off value of SII, one study did not provide usable data for analysis, and one study was a meeting abstract. Following an updated literature search, three additional studies [16-18] were included in the meta-analysis. At the end of the selection process, nine studies [10-18] were included in this meta-analysis (Figure 1). In the studies by Aziz et al. [10] and Zhang et al. [14] studies, two independent cohorts were recruited in each study, which were labeled as cohorts Aziz, M. H. (B) [10], Aziz, M. H. (B) [10], Zhang, K. (A) [14], and Zhang, K. (B) [14]. Therefore, nine studies containing 11 cohorts were included in the meta-analysis. The basic characteristics of the included studies are listed in Supplementary Table 1; these studies were published from 2019 to 2021. The 11 cohort studies were conducted in China (n=4) [12, 14, 15, 17, 18], the Netherlands (n=2) [10], Austria (n=1) [11], Italy (n=1) [16], and the United States of America (USA) (n=1) [13]. The sample size ranged from 27 to 420, and the total sample size was 2,365. Nine cohort studies [10–14, 16, 17] were published in English and two [15, 18] were published in Chinese. Regarding the study design, nine cohorts [10, 12–18] were retrospective studies and two [11, 12] were prospective studies. The cut-off value of SII ranged from 440 to 1200. Nine cohorts [11-18] reported the prognostic role of SII in OS, six cohorts [10–12, 16, 17] reported an association between SII and RFS/PFS/DFS, and two cohorts reported CSS [10]. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) scores ranged from 6 to 8, indicating that all the studies included were of high quality.
Figure 1

Flow diagram showing the selection of literature for the meta-analysis.

Flow diagram showing the selection of literature for the meta-analysis.

SII and OS in pancreatic cancer

A total of nine cohorts with 1,775 subjects [11-18] reported an association between SII and OS in pancreatic cancer. A random-effects model (REM) was used because of significant heterogeneity (I2 = 76.4%, P < 0.001). The pooled results were as follows: HR=1.50, 95% CI =1.15–1.96, p=0.002 (Figure 2; Table 1), suggesting that SII was not a significant prognostic marker for OS. In the subgroup analysis of these patients with pancreatic cancer, the results demonstrated that SII was a significant prognostic factor for OS in patients of Asian ethnicity, in stage III-IV/recurrent disease, in retrospective studies, and with an SII cut-off value ≥ 900 (Table 1).
Figure 2

Forest plot reflecting the association between SII and OS in pancreatic cancer. A random-effects model (REM) was used because of significant heterogeneity (I2 = 76.4%, P < 0.001). The pooled HR and 95%CI are: HR=1.50, 95%CI=1.15-1.96, p=0.002. SII= systemic immune-inflammation index, OS=overall survival.

Table 1

Subgroup analysis of the prognostic role of SII for OS, RFS/PFS/DFS, and CSS for patients with pancreatic cancer.

Subgroups Studies (n) Patients (n) HR (95%CI) p Effects model Heterogeneity
I2(%) Ph
OS
Total91,7751.50(1.15-1.96)0.002REM76.4<0.001
Ethnicity
Caucasian39771.24(0.69-2.24)0.477REM89.1<0.001
Asian67981.55(1.33-1.80)<0.001FEM25.60.243
Sample size
<20055761.59(1.33-1.91)<0.001FEM37.80.169
≥20041,1991.28(0.84-1.97)0.251REM86.0<0.001
TNM stage
I-III49731.22(0.83-1.81)0.311REM83.5<0.001
III-IV/recurrent58021.63(1.36-1.95)<0.001FEM47.40.107
SII cut-off value
<90069871.47(1.00-2.14)0.048REM82.6<0.001
≥90037881.57(1.26-1.95)<0.001FEM12.80.318
Study design
Retrospective71,4241.52(1.34-1.74)<0.001FEM14.60.319
Prospective23511.32(0.36-4.89)0.680REM89.10.002
Cut-off determination
ROC analysis58021.74(0.96-3.14)0.068REM86.6<0.001
X-tile/other49731.47(1.26-1.72)<0.001FEM00.895
RFS/PFS/DFS
Total61,2971.52(1.01-2.28)0.045REM72.50.003
Ethnicity
Caucasian41,1481.27(0.83-1.93)0.267REM73.90.009
Asian21492.76(1.45-5.25)0.002FEM00.944
Sample size
<20031701.96(1.26-3.05)0.003FEM2.10.360
≥20039781.23(0.73-2.07)0.429REM81.50.005
TNM stage
I-III39141.19(0.69-2.04)0.527REM72.80.025
III-IV/recurrent32341.73(1.28-2.35)<0.001FEM22.60.275
SII cut-off value
<90034731.68(0.62-4.55)0.303REM83.50.002
≥90038241.55(1.19-2.02)0.001FEM00.908
Study design
Retrospective49461.61(1.24-2.08)<0.001FEM00.685
Prospective23511.37(0.41-4.57)0.609REM86.70.006
CSS
Total25902.60(1.65-4.09)<0.001FEM00.721

HR, hazards ratio; CI, confidence interval; ROC, receiver operating characteristic; OS, overall survival; RFS, recurrence-free survival; DFS, disease-free survival; PFS, progression-free survival; CSS, cancer-specific survival; TNM, Tumor- Node- Metastasis; REM, random-effects model; FEM, fixed-effects model.

Forest plot reflecting the association between SII and OS in pancreatic cancer. A random-effects model (REM) was used because of significant heterogeneity (I2 = 76.4%, P < 0.001). The pooled HR and 95%CI are: HR=1.50, 95%CI=1.15-1.96, p=0.002. SII= systemic immune-inflammation index, OS=overall survival. HR, hazards ratio; CI, confidence interval; ROC, receiver operating characteristic; OS, overall survival; RFS, recurrence-free survival; DFS, disease-free survival; PFS, progression-free survival; CSS, cancer-specific survival; TNM, Tumor- Node- Metastasis; REM, random-effects model; FEM, fixed-effects model.

SII and RFS/PFS/DFS in pancreatic cancer

Six cohorts, with 1,297 subjects [10–12, 16, 17], reported the prognostic value of SII for RFS/PFS/DFS. As shown in Figure 3 and Table 1, the pooled results were as follows: HR=1.52, 95% CI=1.01–2.28, p=0.045. The combined data indicated that SII was significantly associated with RFS/PFS/DFS in pancreatic cancer. Similar to the results of OS, the subgroup analysis of these patients with pancreatic cancer showed that a high SII was an indicator of poor RFS/PFS/DFS in patients of Asian ethnicity, in stage III-IV/recurrent disease, in retrospective studies, and with a SII cut-off value ≥ 900 (Table 1).
Figure 3

Forest plot reflecting the association between SII and RFS/PFS/DFS in pancreatic cancer. (HR=1.52, 95%CI=1.01-2.28, p=0.045). SII= systemic immune-inflammation index, RFS=recurrence-free survival, DFS= disease-free survival, PFS = progression-free survival.

Forest plot reflecting the association between SII and RFS/PFS/DFS in pancreatic cancer. (HR=1.52, 95%CI=1.01-2.28, p=0.045). SII= systemic immune-inflammation index, RFS=recurrence-free survival, DFS= disease-free survival, PFS = progression-free survival.

SII and CSS in pancreatic cancer

The association between SII and CSS was analyzed based on the data from two cohorts [10]. The pooled results were as follows: HR=2.60, 95% CI=1.65–4.09, p < 0.001 (Figure 4; Table 1), which indicated that elevated SII had significant correlation with a low CSS in pancreatic cancer. Subgroup analysis was not performed as only two cohorts were included in the analysis.
Figure 4

Forest plot reflecting the association between SII and CSS in pancreatic cancer. The combined results were: HR=2.60, 95%CI=1.65-4.09, p<0.001, which indicated that elevated SII was significantly correlated to inferior CSS in pancreatic cancer. SII= systemic immune-inflammation index, CSS= cancer-specific survival.

Forest plot reflecting the association between SII and CSS in pancreatic cancer. The combined results were: HR=2.60, 95%CI=1.65-4.09, p<0.001, which indicated that elevated SII was significantly correlated to inferior CSS in pancreatic cancer. SII= systemic immune-inflammation index, CSS= cancer-specific survival.

The association between SII and clinicopathological characteristics

The association between SII and clinicopathological factors was investigated based on the data from six cohorts [11, 13–15, 18]. As shown in Figure 5 and Table 2, there was no significant association between SII and sex (male vs. female) (OR=1.09, 95% CI=0.87–1.36, p=0.469), tumor location (head vs. body/tail) (OR=1.33, 95% CI=0.97–1.81, p=0.074), lymph node metastasis (yes vs. no) (OR=1.27, 95% CI=0.96–1.69, p=0.093), tumor-node-metastasis stage (III-IV vs. I-III) (OR=1.02, 95% CI=0.63–1.66, p=0.798), vascular invasion (yes vs. no) (OR=1.33, 95% CI=0.89–1.97, p=0.160), or grade (3–4 vs 1–2) (OR=1.07, 95% CI=0.77–1.50, p=0.671).
Figure 5

Forest plots showing the association between SII and clinicopathological factors in pancreatic cancer. (A) sex (male vs female); (B) tumor location (head vs body/tail); (C) lymph node metastasis; (D) Tumor-Node-Metastasis (TNM) stage (III-IV vs I-III); (E) grade (3-4 vs 1-2), and (F) vascular invasion (yes vs no).

Table 2

Correlation between SII and clinicopathological features in patients with pancreatic cancer.

Factors Studies (n) Patients (n) OR (95%CI) p Effects model Heterogeneity I2(%) Ph
Sex (male vs female)61,3921.09(0.87-1.36)0.469FEM00.874
Tumor location (Head vs body/tail)48781.33(0.97-1.81)0.074FEM15.60.314
Lymph node metastasis (Yes vs no)49731.27(0.96-1.69)0.093FEM45.60.138
TNM stage (III-IV vs I-III)49731.02(0.63-1.66)0.798REM56.00.103
Grade (3-4 vs 1-2)38781.07(0.77-1.50)0.671FEM00.394
Vascular invasion (Yes vs no)25141.33(0.89-1.97)0.160FEM00.610

OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; TNM, Tumor- Node- Metastasis; REM, random-effects model; FEM, fixed-effects model.

Forest plots showing the association between SII and clinicopathological factors in pancreatic cancer. (A) sex (male vs female); (B) tumor location (head vs body/tail); (C) lymph node metastasis; (D) Tumor-Node-Metastasis (TNM) stage (III-IV vs I-III); (E) grade (3-4 vs 1-2), and (F) vascular invasion (yes vs no). OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; TNM, Tumor- Node- Metastasis; REM, random-effects model; FEM, fixed-effects model.

Publication bias

Publication bias was analyzed using Begg’s funnel plots and Egger's regression test. As shown in Figure 6, the results indicated that there was no significant publication bias in this meta-analysis.
Figure 6

Begg’s funnel plot and Egger’s linear regression test for publication bias in this meta-analysis. (A) Begg’s funnel plot for OS (p=0.089); (B) Egger’s linear regression test for OS (p=0.057); (C) Begg’s funnel plot for RFS/PFS/DFS (p=0.260); (D) Egger’s linear regression test for RFS/PFS/DFS (p=0.160); (E) Begg’s funnel plot for CSS (p=1), and (F) Egger’s linear regression test for CSS (p=1).

Begg’s funnel plot and Egger’s linear regression test for publication bias in this meta-analysis. (A) Begg’s funnel plot for OS (p=0.089); (B) Egger’s linear regression test for OS (p=0.057); (C) Begg’s funnel plot for RFS/PFS/DFS (p=0.260); (D) Egger’s linear regression test for RFS/PFS/DFS (p=0.160); (E) Begg’s funnel plot for CSS (p=1), and (F) Egger’s linear regression test for CSS (p=1).

DISCUSSION

The previous studies published contradictory reports on the prognostic value of SII in patients with pancreatic cancer [10-15]. In this meta-analysis of data gathered from 11 cohorts, with 2,365 subjects, we demonstrated that elevated SII was a significant prognostic factor for OS, RFS/PFS/DFS, and CSS in pancreatic cancer. The subgroup analysis indicated that elevated SII was predictive of low OS and RFS/PFS/DFS in patients of Asian ethnicity, in stage III-IV/recurrent disease, and with a SII cut-off value ≥ 900. In addition, we found that there was no significant correlation between SII and several clinicopathological features in patients with pancreatic cancer. The null association between SII and clinicopathological characteristics could have resulted because of the limited sample size in each group. In conclusion, this meta-analysis demonstrated that elevated SII was associated with poor short-term and long-term survival outcomes. Elevated SII correlated with poor long-term survival outcomes in patients of Asian ethnicity. We opine that SII is an easily available and effective biomarker which can be utilized for the prognostication of patients with pancreatic cancer in clinical practice. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first meta-analysis to explore the prognostic value of SII in pancreatic cancer. In the recent years, there has been accumulating evidence on the relationship between cancer progression and inflammatory response [19, 20]. A series of inflammatory biomarkers, including neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio [21, 22], platelet to lymphocyte ratio [23, 24], and SII have been proven effective for prognosis prediction in patients with cancer. SII is defined as platelet count × neutrophil count/lymphocyte count, which considers the combined effect of platelet, neutrophil, and lymphocyte counts. Elevated SII represents an increase in platelet and neutrophil counts and/or a decrease in lymphocyte count. Platelets can directly promote the growth of tumor cells by secreting various cytokines that facilitate angiogenesis and tumor progression [25]. In addition, tumor-infiltrating neutrophils have been shown to play an important role in tumor progression [26]. In contrast, lymphocytes play a major role in suppressing cancer cell proliferation and migration [27]. Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) can exert anti-tumor activity by inducing cytotoxic cell death and cytokine production [28]. Therefore, elevated SII being an indicator of poor prognosis is based on the diverse roles of platelets, neutrophils, and TILs in tumor biology. Recently, many meta-analyses have explored the prognostic effect of SII in various solid tumors [29-33]. In a study on patients with breast cancer, Zhang et al. showed that an elevated SII predicted poor survival outcomes and was associated with clinicopathological features that indicated tumor progression [33]. In another recent meta-analysis, which included 3,074 patients, the researchers indicated that SII might be a promising noninvasive predictor in patients with urologic cancers [30]. Wang’s meta-analysis of 2,796 patients demonstrated that elevated SII was a poor prognostic factor for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma [32]. Our previous meta-analysis showed that elevated SII levels predicted poor prognosis in patients with colorectal cancer. In addition, elevated SII levels were also associated with clinical factors, implying higher malignancy of the disease [29]. In compliance with the results of the previous meta-analysis, the present meta-analysis showed that an elevated SII was associated with poor CSS in pancreatic cancer. Furthermore, the results also indicated that the SII is an effective marker for OS and DFS in Asian patients, which suggests that SII may be more applicable in patients of Asian ethnicity. However, the data indicated a non-significant association between SII and the clinicopathological factors of pancreatic cancer. This may be due to the relatively small sample size. Notably, the meta-analysis did not include unpublished studies and conference abstracts for the following reasons: Firstly, the unpublished literature and conference abstracts did not present full text including the results and the process of data analysis. Secondly, the full-text articles published in peer-reviewed journals were preferred because of their high quality and reliable results. Thirdly, publication bias tests did not detect publication bias or selection bias in this meta-analysis. Nevertheless, our study has several limitations. Firstly, the sample size was relatively small. Although 11 cohorts were included, the total sample size was 2,365. The relatively small sample size might have resulted in a null association between SII and clinicopathological factors of pancreatic cancer. Secondly, this meta-analysis was limited to studies published in English and Chinese as the publications in other languages were unavailable. This could have led to a possible selection bias in this meta-analysis. Thirdly, the cut-off values of SII vary among the studies included, which may significantly contribute to substantial heterogeneity in this meta-analysis. Therefore, a uniform cut-off value for SII is needed in further studies. In summary, this meta-analysis suggests that an elevated SII is a significant prognostic marker for short-term and long-term survival outcomes. The SII has a significant prognostic role in Asian patients with pancreatic cancer. Therefore, we suggest that SII be employed as an effective biomarker for the prognosis of patients with pancreatic cancer in clinical practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Literature search strategy

This meta-analysis was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement [34]. The electronic databases PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and China Wanfang databases were searched systematically. The search strategy was as follows: (“systemic immune-inflammation index” or “SII”) and (“pancreatic cancer” or “pancreatic neoplasms” or “pancreatic adenocarcinoma” or “pancreatic tumor”). The search duration was from inception to March 25, 2021. There were no language restrictions. In addition, the references of the included publications and reviews were manually checked for potentially eligible studies.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Two investigators (Y.S. and M.L.) independently performed the literature search, and any disagreements were resolved by consensus. The selection criteria were established based on previous meta-analyses of the SII [29, 32, 33]. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (a) diagnosis of pancreatic cancer was pathologically confirmed; (b) SII was defined as the neutrophil count × platelet count/lymphocyte count; (c) patients who did not have active infections, inflammatory conditions, or comorbid diseases before blood examination; (d) studies exploring the association between SII and survival outcomes in pancreatic cancer with hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs); (e) the cut-off value of SII was provided; and (f) articles published in English or Chinese. The exclusion criteria were as follows: (a) meeting abstracts, reviews, letters, case reports, and comments; (b) animal studies; and (c) insufficient information available for data analysis. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), progression-free survival (PFS), disease-free survival (DFS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS). The primary endpoint was the OS, and the secondary endpoints were the RFS/PFS/DFS and CSS.

Data extraction and quality assessment

Two investigators (Y.S. and M.C.) independently extracted data from the included studies, and discrepancies were resolved by discussion with a third investigator (X.G.). The following information was extracted: name of the first author, year of publication, country, sample size, age, histological type, tumor stage, treatment, study period, cut-off value of SII, cut-off determination method, study design, follow-up, survival endpoints, survival analysis, and the HRs and 95% CIs of survival outcomes. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the NOS [35], which evaluates the quality of the study in three aspects: selection, comparability, and exposure. The NOS scores range from 0 to 9. Studies with NOS score of 6 or more were regarded as high-quality studies.

Statistical analysis

The HRs and 95% CIs were used to evaluate the prognostic role of the SII for OS, RFS/PFS/DFS, and CSS in pancreatic cancer. The heterogeneity among studies was assessed using the Cochran’s Q test and I2 statistics. In the presence of significant heterogeneity (I2 > 50% and/or P < 0.10), REM was used to combine the HRs and 95% CIs. Otherwise, a fixed-effects model (FEM) was adopted. Subgroup analysis was conducted to explore the sources of heterogeneity. The association between SII and clinicopathological factors was evaluated using odds ratios and 95% CIs. Publication bias was estimated using the Begg’s test and Egger’s test. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. All the statistical analyses were performed using Stata version 12.0 (Stata Corporation, College Station, TX, USA).
  33 in total

1.  Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses.

Authors:  Andreas Stang
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2010-07-22       Impact factor: 8.082

2.  Prognostic role of platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio in oral cancer: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yonggang Zhang; Linli Zheng; Liuliu Quan; Liang Du
Journal:  J Oral Pathol Med       Date:  2019-02-26       Impact factor: 4.253

3.  Prognostic and clinicopathological significance of systemic immune-inflammation index in colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Meilian Dong; Yonggang Shi; Jing Yang; Quanbo Zhou; Yugui Lian; Dan Wang; Taoran Ma; Yue Zhang; Yin Mi; Xiaobin Gu; Ruitai Fan
Journal:  Ther Adv Med Oncol       Date:  2020-07-11       Impact factor: 8.168

4.  Systemic immune inflammation index is a promising non-invasive marker for the prognosis of the patients with localized renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Emin Ozbek; Huseyin Besiroglu; Kutan Ozer; Mustafa Ozan Horsanali; Sacit Nuri Gorgel
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2020-03-14       Impact factor: 2.370

5.  Systemic immune-inflammation index predicts prognosis of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Ke Zhang; Yong-Qiang Hua; Dan Wang; Lian-Yu Chen; Cai-Jun Wu; Zhen Chen; Lu-Ming Liu; Hao Chen
Journal:  J Transl Med       Date:  2019-01-18       Impact factor: 5.531

6.  Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index (SII) Predicts Poor Survival in Pancreatic Cancer Patients Undergoing Resection.

Authors:  Gerd Jomrich; Elisabeth S Gruber; Daniel Winkler; Marlene Hollenstein; Michael Gnant; Klaus Sahora; Martin Schindl
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2019-03-28       Impact factor: 3.452

7.  Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index and Changes of Neutrophil-Lymphocyte Ratio as Prognostic Biomarkers for Patients With Pancreatic Cancer Treated With Immune Checkpoint Blockade.

Authors:  Jin Shang; Xiao Han; Haoran Zha; Haitao Tao; Xiaoyan Li; Fang Yuan; Guangying Chen; Lijie Wang; Junxun Ma; Yi Hu
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-02-24       Impact factor: 6.244

8.  Systemic immune-inflammation index: a prognostic tiebreaker among all in advanced pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Alessandro Bittoni; Federica Pecci; Giulia Mentrasti; Sonia Crocetti; Alessio Lupi; Andrea Lanese; Chiara Pellei; Chiara Ciotti; Luca Cantini; Riccardo Giampieri; Edoardo Lenci; Enrica Giglio; Federica Bini; Cecilia Copparoni; Tania Meletani; Maria Giuditta Baleani; Rossana Berardi
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2021-02

9.  Prognostic value of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in triple-negative breast cancers from two phase III randomized adjuvant breast cancer trials: ECOG 2197 and ECOG 1199.

Authors:  Sylvia Adams; Robert J Gray; Sandra Demaria; Lori Goldstein; Edith A Perez; Lawrence N Shulman; Silvana Martino; Molin Wang; Vicky E Jones; Thomas J Saphner; Antonio C Wolff; William C Wood; Nancy E Davidson; George W Sledge; Joseph A Sparano; Sunil S Badve
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-09-20       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Global, Regional, and National Cancer Incidence, Mortality, Years of Life Lost, Years Lived With Disability, and Disability-Adjusted Life-Years for 29 Cancer Groups, 1990 to 2017: A Systematic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study.

Authors:  Christina Fitzmaurice; Degu Abate; Naghmeh Abbasi; Hedayat Abbastabar; Foad Abd-Allah; Omar Abdel-Rahman; Ahmed Abdelalim; Amir Abdoli; Ibrahim Abdollahpour; Abdishakur S M Abdulle; Nebiyu Dereje Abebe; Haftom Niguse Abraha; Laith Jamal Abu-Raddad; Ahmed Abualhasan; Isaac Akinkunmi Adedeji; Shailesh M Advani; Mohsen Afarideh; Mahdi Afshari; Mohammad Aghaali; Dominic Agius; Sutapa Agrawal; Ayat Ahmadi; Elham Ahmadian; Ehsan Ahmadpour; Muktar Beshir Ahmed; Mohammad Esmaeil Akbari; Tomi Akinyemiju; Ziyad Al-Aly; Assim M AlAbdulKader; Fares Alahdab; Tahiya Alam; Genet Melak Alamene; Birhan Tamene T Alemnew; Kefyalew Addis Alene; Cyrus Alinia; Vahid Alipour; Syed Mohamed Aljunid; Fatemeh Allah Bakeshei; Majid Abdulrahman Hamad Almadi; Amir Almasi-Hashiani; Ubai Alsharif; Shirina Alsowaidi; Nelson Alvis-Guzman; Erfan Amini; Saeed Amini; Yaw Ampem Amoako; Zohreh Anbari; Nahla Hamed Anber; Catalina Liliana Andrei; Mina Anjomshoa; Fereshteh Ansari; Ansariadi Ansariadi; Seth Christopher Yaw Appiah; Morteza Arab-Zozani; Jalal Arabloo; Zohreh Arefi; Olatunde Aremu; Habtamu Abera Areri; Al Artaman; Hamid Asayesh; Ephrem Tsegay Asfaw; Alebachew Fasil Ashagre; Reza Assadi; Bahar Ataeinia; Hagos Tasew Atalay; Zerihun Ataro; Suleman Atique; Marcel Ausloos; Leticia Avila-Burgos; Euripide F G A Avokpaho; Ashish Awasthi; Nefsu Awoke; Beatriz Paulina Ayala Quintanilla; Martin Amogre Ayanore; Henok Tadesse Ayele; Ebrahim Babaee; Umar Bacha; Alaa Badawi; Mojtaba Bagherzadeh; Eleni Bagli; Senthilkumar Balakrishnan; Abbas Balouchi; Till Winfried Bärnighausen; Robert J Battista; Masoud Behzadifar; Meysam Behzadifar; Bayu Begashaw Bekele; Yared Belete Belay; Yaschilal Muche Belayneh; Kathleen Kim Sachiko Berfield; Adugnaw Berhane; Eduardo Bernabe; Mircea Beuran; Nickhill Bhakta; Krittika Bhattacharyya; Belete Biadgo; Ali Bijani; Muhammad Shahdaat Bin Sayeed; Charles Birungi; Catherine Bisignano; Helen Bitew; Tone Bjørge; Archie Bleyer; Kassawmar Angaw Bogale; Hunduma Amensisa Bojia; Antonio M Borzì; Cristina Bosetti; Ibrahim R Bou-Orm; Hermann Brenner; Jerry D Brewer; Andrey Nikolaevich Briko; Nikolay Ivanovich Briko; Maria Teresa Bustamante-Teixeira; Zahid A Butt; Giulia Carreras; Juan J Carrero; Félix Carvalho; Clara Castro; Franz Castro; Ferrán Catalá-López; Ester Cerin; Yazan Chaiah; Wagaye Fentahun Chanie; Vijay Kumar Chattu; Pankaj Chaturvedi; Neelima Singh Chauhan; Mohammad Chehrazi; Peggy Pei-Chia Chiang; Tesfaye Yitna Chichiabellu; Onyema Greg Chido-Amajuoyi; Odgerel Chimed-Ochir; Jee-Young J Choi; Devasahayam J Christopher; Dinh-Toi Chu; Maria-Magdalena Constantin; Vera M Costa; Emanuele Crocetti; Christopher Stephen Crowe; Maria Paula Curado; Saad M A Dahlawi; Giovanni Damiani; Amira Hamed Darwish; Ahmad Daryani; José das Neves; Feleke Mekonnen Demeke; Asmamaw Bizuneh Demis; Birhanu Wondimeneh Demissie; Gebre Teklemariam Demoz; Edgar Denova-Gutiérrez; Afshin Derakhshani; Kalkidan Solomon Deribe; Rupak Desai; Beruk Berhanu Desalegn; Melaku Desta; Subhojit Dey; Samath Dhamminda Dharmaratne; Meghnath Dhimal; Daniel Diaz; Mesfin Tadese Tadese Dinberu; Shirin Djalalinia; David Teye Doku; Thomas M Drake; Manisha Dubey; Eleonora Dubljanin; Eyasu Ejeta Duken; Hedyeh Ebrahimi; Andem Effiong; Aziz Eftekhari; Iman El Sayed; Maysaa El Sayed Zaki; Shaimaa I El-Jaafary; Ziad El-Khatib; Demelash Abewa Elemineh; Hajer Elkout; Richard G Ellenbogen; Aisha Elsharkawy; Mohammad Hassan Emamian; Daniel Adane Endalew; Aman Yesuf Endries; Babak Eshrati; Ibtihal Fadhil; Vahid Fallah Omrani; Mahbobeh Faramarzi; Mahdieh Abbasalizad Farhangi; Andrea Farioli; Farshad Farzadfar; Netsanet Fentahun; Eduarda Fernandes; Garumma Tolu Feyissa; Irina Filip; Florian Fischer; James L Fisher; Lisa M Force; Masoud Foroutan; Marisa Freitas; Takeshi Fukumoto; Neal D Futran; Silvano Gallus; Fortune Gbetoho Gankpe; Reta Tsegaye Gayesa; Tsegaye Tewelde Gebrehiwot; Gebreamlak Gebremedhn Gebremeskel; Getnet Azeze Gedefaw; Belayneh K Gelaw; Birhanu Geta; Sefonias Getachew; Kebede Embaye Gezae; Mansour Ghafourifard; Alireza Ghajar; Ahmad Ghashghaee; Asadollah Gholamian; Paramjit Singh Gill; Themba T G Ginindza; Alem Girmay; Muluken Gizaw; Ricardo Santiago Gomez; Sameer Vali Gopalani; Giuseppe Gorini; Bárbara Niegia Garcia Goulart; Ayman Grada; Maximiliano Ribeiro Guerra; Andre Luiz Sena Guimaraes; Prakash C Gupta; Rahul Gupta; Kishor Hadkhale; Arvin Haj-Mirzaian; Arya Haj-Mirzaian; Randah R Hamadeh; Samer Hamidi; Lolemo Kelbiso Hanfore; Josep Maria Haro; Milad Hasankhani; Amir Hasanzadeh; Hamid Yimam Hassen; Roderick J Hay; Simon I Hay; Andualem Henok; Nathaniel J Henry; Claudiu Herteliu; Hagos D Hidru; Chi Linh Hoang; Michael K Hole; Praveen Hoogar; Nobuyuki Horita; H Dean Hosgood; Mostafa Hosseini; Mehdi Hosseinzadeh; Mihaela Hostiuc; Sorin Hostiuc; Mowafa Househ; Mohammedaman Mama Hussen; Bogdan Ileanu; Milena D Ilic; Kaire Innos; Seyed Sina Naghibi Irvani; Kufre Robert Iseh; Sheikh Mohammed Shariful Islam; Farhad Islami; Nader Jafari Balalami; Morteza Jafarinia; Leila Jahangiry; Mohammad Ali Jahani; Nader Jahanmehr; Mihajlo Jakovljevic; Spencer L James; Mehdi Javanbakht; Sudha Jayaraman; Sun Ha Jee; Ensiyeh Jenabi; Ravi Prakash Jha; Jost B Jonas; Jitendra Jonnagaddala; Tamas Joo; Suresh Banayya Jungari; Mikk Jürisson; Ali Kabir; Farin Kamangar; André Karch; Narges Karimi; Ansar Karimian; Amir Kasaeian; Gebremicheal Gebreslassie Kasahun; Belete Kassa; Tesfaye Dessale Kassa; Mesfin Wudu Kassaw; Anil Kaul; Peter Njenga Keiyoro; Abraham Getachew Kelbore; Amene Abebe Kerbo; Yousef Saleh Khader; Maryam Khalilarjmandi; Ejaz Ahmad Khan; Gulfaraz Khan; Young-Ho Khang; Khaled Khatab; Amir Khater; Maryam Khayamzadeh; Maryam Khazaee-Pool; Salman Khazaei; Abdullah T Khoja; Mohammad Hossein Khosravi; Jagdish Khubchandani; Neda Kianipour; Daniel Kim; Yun Jin Kim; Adnan Kisa; Sezer Kisa; Katarzyna Kissimova-Skarbek; Hamidreza Komaki; Ai Koyanagi; Kristopher J Krohn; Burcu Kucuk Bicer; Nuworza Kugbey; Vivek Kumar; Desmond Kuupiel; Carlo La Vecchia; Deepesh P Lad; Eyasu Alem Lake; Ayenew Molla Lakew; Dharmesh Kumar Lal; Faris Hasan Lami; Qing Lan; Savita Lasrado; Paolo Lauriola; Jeffrey V Lazarus; James Leigh; Cheru Tesema Leshargie; Yu Liao; Miteku Andualem Limenih; Stefan Listl; Alan D Lopez; Platon D Lopukhov; Raimundas Lunevicius; Mohammed Madadin; Sameh Magdeldin; Hassan Magdy Abd El Razek; Azeem Majeed; Afshin Maleki; Reza Malekzadeh; Ali Manafi; Navid Manafi; Wondimu Ayele Manamo; Morteza Mansourian; Mohammad Ali Mansournia; Lorenzo Giovanni Mantovani; Saman Maroufizadeh; Santi Martini S Martini; Tivani Phosa Mashamba-Thompson; Benjamin Ballard Massenburg; Motswadi Titus Maswabi; Manu Raj Mathur; Colm McAlinden; Martin McKee; Hailemariam Abiy Alemu Meheretu; Ravi Mehrotra; Varshil Mehta; Toni Meier; Yohannes A Melaku; Gebrekiros Gebremichael Meles; Hagazi Gebre Meles; Addisu Melese; Mulugeta Melku; Peter T N Memiah; Walter Mendoza; Ritesh G Menezes; Shahin Merat; Tuomo J Meretoja; Tomislav Mestrovic; Bartosz Miazgowski; Tomasz Miazgowski; Kebadnew Mulatu M Mihretie; Ted R Miller; Edward J Mills; Seyed Mostafa Mir; Hamed Mirzaei; Hamid Reza Mirzaei; Rashmi Mishra; Babak Moazen; Dara K Mohammad; Karzan Abdulmuhsin Mohammad; Yousef Mohammad; Aso Mohammad Darwesh; Abolfazl Mohammadbeigi; Hiwa Mohammadi; Moslem Mohammadi; Mahdi Mohammadian; Abdollah Mohammadian-Hafshejani; Milad Mohammadoo-Khorasani; Reza Mohammadpourhodki; Ammas Siraj Mohammed; Jemal Abdu Mohammed; Shafiu Mohammed; Farnam Mohebi; Ali H Mokdad; Lorenzo Monasta; Yoshan Moodley; Mahmood Moosazadeh; Maryam Moossavi; Ghobad Moradi; Mohammad Moradi-Joo; Maziar Moradi-Lakeh; Farhad Moradpour; Lidia Morawska; Joana Morgado-da-Costa; Naho Morisaki; Shane Douglas Morrison; Abbas Mosapour; Seyyed Meysam Mousavi; Achenef Asmamaw Muche; Oumer Sada S Muhammed; Jonah Musa; Ashraf F Nabhan; Mehdi Naderi; Ahamarshan Jayaraman Nagarajan; Gabriele Nagel; Azin Nahvijou; Gurudatta Naik; Farid Najafi; Luigi Naldi; Hae Sung Nam; Naser Nasiri; Javad Nazari; Ionut Negoi; Subas Neupane; Polly A Newcomb; Haruna Asura Nggada; Josephine W Ngunjiri; Cuong Tat Nguyen; Leila Nikniaz; Dina Nur Anggraini Ningrum; Yirga Legesse Nirayo; Molly R Nixon; Chukwudi A Nnaji; Marzieh Nojomi; Shirin Nosratnejad; Malihe Nourollahpour Shiadeh; Mohammed Suleiman Obsa; Richard Ofori-Asenso; Felix Akpojene Ogbo; In-Hwan Oh; Andrew T Olagunju; Tinuke O Olagunju; Mojisola Morenike Oluwasanu; Abidemi E Omonisi; Obinna E Onwujekwe; Anu Mary Oommen; Eyal Oren; Doris D V Ortega-Altamirano; Erika Ota; Stanislav S Otstavnov; Mayowa Ojo Owolabi; Mahesh P A; Jagadish Rao Padubidri; Smita Pakhale; Amir H Pakpour; Adrian Pana; Eun-Kee Park; Hadi Parsian; Tahereh Pashaei; Shanti Patel; Snehal T Patil; Alyssa Pennini; David M Pereira; Cristiano Piccinelli; Julian David Pillay; Majid Pirestani; Farhad Pishgar; Maarten J Postma; Hadi Pourjafar; Farshad Pourmalek; Akram Pourshams; Swayam Prakash; Narayan Prasad; Mostafa Qorbani; Mohammad Rabiee; Navid Rabiee; Amir Radfar; Alireza Rafiei; Fakher Rahim; Mahdi Rahimi; Muhammad Aziz Rahman; Fatemeh Rajati; Saleem M Rana; Samira Raoofi; Goura Kishor Rath; David Laith Rawaf; Salman Rawaf; Robert C Reiner; Andre M N Renzaho; Nima Rezaei; Aziz Rezapour; Ana Isabel Ribeiro; Daniela Ribeiro; Luca Ronfani; Elias Merdassa Roro; Gholamreza Roshandel; Ali Rostami; Ragy Safwat Saad; Parisa Sabbagh; Siamak Sabour; Basema Saddik; Saeid Safiri; Amirhossein Sahebkar; Mohammad Reza Salahshoor; Farkhonde Salehi; Hosni Salem; Marwa Rashad Salem; Hamideh Salimzadeh; Joshua A Salomon; Abdallah M Samy; Juan Sanabria; Milena M Santric Milicevic; Benn Sartorius; Arash Sarveazad; Brijesh Sathian; Maheswar Satpathy; Miloje Savic; Monika Sawhney; Mehdi Sayyah; Ione J C Schneider; Ben Schöttker; Mario Sekerija; Sadaf G Sepanlou; Masood Sepehrimanesh; Seyedmojtaba Seyedmousavi; Faramarz Shaahmadi; Hosein Shabaninejad; Mohammad Shahbaz; Masood Ali Shaikh; Amir Shamshirian; Morteza Shamsizadeh; Heidar Sharafi; Zeinab Sharafi; Mehdi Sharif; Ali Sharifi; Hamid Sharifi; Rajesh Sharma; Aziz Sheikh; Reza Shirkoohi; Sharvari Rahul Shukla; Si Si; Soraya Siabani; Diego Augusto Santos Silva; Dayane Gabriele Alves Silveira; Ambrish Singh; Jasvinder A Singh; Solomon Sisay; Freddy Sitas; Eugène Sobngwi; Moslem Soofi; Joan B Soriano; Vasiliki Stathopoulou; Mu'awiyyah Babale Sufiyan; Rafael Tabarés-Seisdedos; Takahiro Tabuchi; Ken Takahashi; Omid Reza Tamtaji; Mohammed Rasoul Tarawneh; Segen Gebremeskel Tassew; Parvaneh Taymoori; Arash Tehrani-Banihashemi; Mohamad-Hani Temsah; Omar Temsah; Berhe Etsay Tesfay; Fisaha Haile Tesfay; Manaye Yihune Teshale; Gizachew Assefa Tessema; Subash Thapa; Kenean Getaneh Tlaye; Roman Topor-Madry; Marcos Roberto Tovani-Palone; Eugenio Traini; Bach Xuan Tran; Khanh Bao Tran; Afewerki Gebremeskel Tsadik; Irfan Ullah; Olalekan A Uthman; Marco Vacante; Maryam Vaezi; Patricia Varona Pérez; Yousef Veisani; Simone Vidale; Francesco S Violante; Vasily Vlassov; Stein Emil Vollset; Theo Vos; Kia Vosoughi; Giang Thu Vu; Isidora S Vujcic; Henry Wabinga; Tesfahun Mulatu Wachamo; Fasil Shiferaw Wagnew; Yasir Waheed; Fitsum Weldegebreal; Girmay Teklay Weldesamuel; Tissa Wijeratne; Dawit Zewdu Wondafrash; Tewodros Eshete Wonde; Adam Belay Wondmieneh; Hailemariam Mekonnen Workie; Rajaram Yadav; Abbas Yadegar; Ali Yadollahpour; Mehdi Yaseri; Vahid Yazdi-Feyzabadi; Alex Yeshaneh; Mohammed Ahmed Yimam; Ebrahim M Yimer; Engida Yisma; Naohiro Yonemoto; Mustafa Z Younis; Bahman Yousefi; Mahmoud Yousefifard; Chuanhua Yu; Erfan Zabeh; Vesna Zadnik; Telma Zahirian Moghadam; Zoubida Zaidi; Mohammad Zamani; Hamed Zandian; Alireza Zangeneh; Leila Zaki; Kazem Zendehdel; Zerihun Menlkalew Zenebe; Taye Abuhay Zewale; Arash Ziapour; Sanjay Zodpey; Christopher J L Murray
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2019-12-01       Impact factor: 31.777

View more
  8 in total

1.  Prognostic significance of systemic immune-inflammation index and platelet-albumin-bilirubin grade in patients with pancreatic cancer undergoing radical surgery.

Authors:  Rongshuang Han; Zibin Tian; Yueping Jiang; Ge Guan; Xueguo Sun; Yanan Yu; Lingyun Zhang; Jianrui Zhou; Xue Jing
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2022-03

2.  Systemic Immune-Inflammatory Index as a Predictor of Lymph Node Metastasis in Endometrial Cancer.

Authors:  HuiFang Lei; ShuXia Xu; XiaoDan Mao; XiaoYing Chen; YaoJia Chen; XiaoQi Sun; PengMing Sun
Journal:  J Inflamm Res       Date:  2021-12-21

3.  Association between Sarcopenia and Immediate Complications and Mortality in Patients with Oral Cavity Squamous Cell Carcinoma Undergoing Surgery.

Authors:  Chun-Hou Huang; Kun-Han Lue; Peir-Rorg Chen; Tsung-Cheng Hsieh; Yu-Fu Chou
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-02-03       Impact factor: 6.639

4.  Prognostic Significance of the Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index (SII) in Patients With Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Yuting Zhou; Menglu Dai; Zongxin Zhang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-02-04       Impact factor: 6.244

5.  Prognostic Significance of the Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index in Patients With Cholangiocarcinoma: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Xue-Chun Liu; Yue-Ping Jiang; Xue-Guo Sun; Jian-Jian Zhao; Ling-Yun Zhang; Xue Jing
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-07-07       Impact factor: 5.738

6.  Prognostic significance of the systemic immune inflammation index in patients with metastatic and unresectable pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Rongshuang Han; Zibin Tian; Yueping Jiang; Ge Guan; Xiaowei Wang; Xueguo Sun; Yanan Yu; Xue Jing
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-08-30

7.  Blood immune indexes can predict lateral lymph node metastasis of thyroid papillary carcinoma.

Authors:  Lingqian Zhao; Tianhan Zhou; Wenhao Zhang; Fan Wu; Kecheng Jiang; Bei Lin; Siqi Zhan; Tao Hu; Tian Tang; Yu Zhang; Dingcun Luo
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-08-31       Impact factor: 6.055

8.  Low Pre-ChemoradiotherapyPan-Immune-Inflammation Value (PIV) Measures Predict Better Survival Outcomes in Locally Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinomas.

Authors:  Erkan Topkan; Ugur Selek; Ahmet Kucuk; Berrin Pehlivan
Journal:  J Inflamm Res       Date:  2022-09-18
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.