Clinical implications of pretreatment inflammatory biomarkers as independent prognostic indicators in prostate cancer. Issue 3 (12th June 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Sun, Zhaohui; Ju, Ying; Han, Fuyan; Sun, Xiya; Wang, Fang
• Is Part Of: Journal of clinical laboratory analysis. Volume 32:Issue 3(2018)
• Page Start: n/a
• Page End: n/a
• Publication Date: 2017-06-12
• Subjects: inflammatory biomarkers -- neutrophil‐lymphocyte ratio -- platelet‐lymphocyte ratio -- prognostic indicators -- prostate cancer -- red blood cell distribution width; Diagnosis, Laboratory -- Periodicals; Medical laboratory technology -- Periodicals; 616
• DOI: 10.1002/jcla.22277
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0887-8013

Abstract

Abstract : Objectives: Research on the relationship between inflammatory biomarkers and malignant tumors has become a hotspot. Many studies have demonstrated that neutrophil‐lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet‐lymphocyte ratio (PLR), and red blood cell distribution width (RDW) could act as independent prognostic indicators for several solid tumors. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical implications of pretreatment inflammatory biomarkers, including NLR, PLR, and RDW as independent prognostic indicators in prostate cancer (PCa). Methods: A total of 226 PCa patients who were diagnosed at our institution from 2011 to 2016 were analyzed retrospectively. We compared the clinicopathological features, survival curves, and prognosis of the PCa patients between the high and low groups according to the cutoffs of NLR, PLR, and RDW. Results: The pretreatment NLR, PLR, and RDW values were significantly higher in the patients with PCa than those in the controls ( P <.05). Increased NLR and PLR values were significantly associated with high risk of progression, including higher Gleason scores, cell proliferation antigen 67 (Ki‐67) indexes, and prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) levels ( P <.05), whereas an elevated RDW was only associated with an older age. An increased NLR was correlated with both overall survival (OS) ( P =.025) and disease‐free survival (DFS) ( P =.017). In addition, a higher PLR only showed a significantly worse DFS ( P =.040). Pretreatment NLR was an independent prognostic indicator of DFS. Conclusions: The pretreatment NLR and PLR might be beneficial to predict the progression and prognosis of PCa. Furthermore, NLR was more effective than PLR acting as an independent prognostic indicator for PCa.